, 11 tweets, 2 min read Read on Twitter
I find this tweet v problematic

Firstly it equates "success" with doing well at the workplace

Secondly it condescendingly views babies as a handicap in a rat race

Disrespectful towards the v central familial role for which the fairer sex has been celebrated throughout history
How can the perpetuation of the human race take a backseat, and become an annoyance and a distraction from that all-important "career" is something that I can never understand
Any economist would agree that the value that a couple adds to Planet Earth by conceiving and giving birth to a kid is likely many times the value they add at the workplace in the course of their lives
This is true even for highly productive people like CEOs and rockstar academics

Esp if you peer far enough into future and take NPV of value added by all your descendants (ofc you will take a smaller fraction for distant descendants as your genetic contribution to them is less)
Just a simple thought experiment -

Let's suppose the present value of all my future earnings is $5MM

Now even if I suppose that my kid will terribly under-perform and the PV of his lifetime earnings will be $2.5MM in real terms, and the same is true for say next 20 generations
Even with a high enough discount rate, the present value of the next 20 generations' lifetime earnings will be greater than the PV of your own lifetime earnings...
This is almost a truism

Even if you scrupulously take fractions of the PV of future generations to account for your genetic contribution
If people do internalize this, they will invest much more time in having kids, and also be kinder to the idea of one spouse specializing in bringing the kid up, as opposed to both doing an indifferent job by taking turns
Most couples in our times never get anywhere close to internalizing this, as they cannot think beyond their kids at the most...Their horizon is not deep enough to peer into the next 20-30 generations which will potentially bear their genetic imprint
If they did, then they will have more kids, and not just one. Having one means you are greatly increasing the chances that your "vansh" will end in a leaf node within a handful of generations

Having 3 means it is likely you won't hit a leaf node for at least a few hundred years
Ofcourse these are just likelihoods...it is possible that even with one kid your line of descent may still be going strong in 3000 AD...But it is far more likely eventuality if you have 3 kids
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Shrikanth K
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!