Is it better to have more money and less family members, or less money but more
Is it better to have more money and less family members, or less money but more "love" around you?
Try figuring these two scenarios:
- You have a lot of money and only one person in your family (or even zero people): you don't have economic problems.
- You have little money and a large family to maintain: you must work hard and do some waivers, but you have a lot of people who love you around you (I am talking about a family without problems, a "perfect" model of pure love)
What of those scenarios would you prefer to live? More money but less people, or less money & more work, but more human relationships?
Intelligent, educated, & logical people know that it's MUCH BETTER to have more money & less family members. In such families, there is a higher quality of life as there are no socioeconomic struggles.There are also opportunities for family members to develop their talents & to use their utmost human potential.There is also monies for these families to enjoy cultural & intellectual activities together. There is more individualized attention & time spend w/each family member. There is also less emotional, mental, & psychological strife because each family member has his/her space & there is more discretionary income.
In such families, children have the utmost care because there are monies for good food, clothing, schooling, & medical care which are expensive. Such children can attain the highest level of education as there are monies for such. There is more family harmony as there is less competition & infighting for familial resources. Parents in such families also have their individualized time to develop themselves. There is also more couple interaction. In such a family milieu, there is more love to go around as there is a small population of family members so each can have access to each other.
Uneducated, unaware, & unintelligent people would choose to have less money & more family members.In this familial milieu, there is constant struggle, even for the rudiments.Since monies are tight, they have to learn to consistently do without.There is more stress, even strife among family members because of constant worrying about making ends meet.In such households, there will be a higher incidence of abuse emotionally, verbally, & oftentimes physically because the familial socioeconomic situation is oftentimes precarious.
Children routinely have no proper food, clothing, & medical care. Some children in the family must forego their education in order to supplement the very meager familial income.This familial environment is a harsh one, which emphasizes brute & primitive survival & never the higher human needs. In this family milieu, talents, aspirations, & potentials won't be realized nor utilized because the money isn't there.There will be no couple nor parent time because the main emphasis will be on if they will socioeconomically another day. This will be a hard knock life equivalent to hell.Because of the crowded environment & little money, there will be MORE fierce & intense competition, even infighting for the familial crumbs. The 1st family type is heaven while the 2nd is......HELL....
Having a large number of people around you doesn't necessarily ensure one has more love. In fact the more people you have the higher the odds that some of them will be toxic, users, jealous, manipulators, gossipers, and bring more "drama" into your life.
Quality trumps quantity every day of the week.
People often think in terms of {either or} when it comes to love and money. Usually it's the people without money looking for ways to feel better about themselves. I suppose everyone has to find a way to count their blessings. In the end we all die! Might as well live rich!
The reality is we can have both love and money!
You only need a handful of genuine people to love you to be happy.
I'd rather have a tight circle of family/friends and more money!
The world may not owe you anything but you owe yourself the world!The question should be better rephrased to read why it is MUCH BETTER to have MORE MONEY and LESS FAMILY MEMBERS...
than it is to have LESS MONEY and MORE FAMILY MEMBERS.........
because it is SO MUCH BETTER to have a small family & more money so that there is less socioeconomic stress & that children will have myriad opportunities. More people in the household is equated to higher levels of poverty which leads to familial stress which includes neglect & abuse because monies are tight & there is an overwhelming number of children to "take care of". Children live in squalor & do without. More people in the household creates strife because there is lack of privacy & people live on top of each other like animals- constantly fighting for space which is at a premium in the large family environment.
Also, a combination of poverty & crowding dehumanize the large family, reducing them to less than human status. Many large families live like pack animals. In small families, there is a higher standard of living because there is more money for family member to leave a civilized, cultivated life. No person wants to have less money & more family members living in the household- that creates a DEHUMANIZED environment where people live & act like animals.
It is a myth that the MORE family members, the more "love"- it is oftentimes the opposite- the MORE family members, the less love because the concentration is on day to day survival. Everything is reduced to a brutish animal existence where there is survival of the fittest. When there is concentration on the lower human needs which is prevalent in large families, there is no room for love nor humanity. The main concern is staying socioeconomically afloat & not falling into further poverty.
There is FAR MORE love in affluent small families because there isn't concentration on the lowest human needs but on the higher needs. People live like human beings in small families, they have money for things beyond the basic rudiments. They don't have poverty & struggle mentality. They love & respect each other more because there is less people & therefore less competition. There is also far less stress in small families because there is no socioeconomic struggle. There is no worry in small families of staying socioeconomically afloat. Socioeconomic levels is highly correlated to stress levels- the poorer, the more stress& the richer, the less stress. In small families, the quality of love is so much BETTER than it is in large families where it is hard to give love & attention to a LARGE number of people.
Related Discussions
- 7
Is it better for a guy to have money and treat you bad or a guy with less money
Is it better for a guy to have money and treat you bad or a guy with less money and treats you good?
- 23
Should there be a limit to the amount of children one family should have in the
Should there be a limit to the amount of children one family should have in the US?We know in some countries like China the government tells people the amount of children to have. Should we look into that for America?
- 48
Correlation of Intelligence, Education, and Family Size
In the United States and in first world nations, with the increase of education. there has been an increase in the number of small families. There is a correlation between high intelligence, education, and small families. People who are highly intelligent and educated tend to believe in...
- 20
Does intelligence make you a better parent?
Every day I see some of the most stupidest people having children. Usually, at least it seems to me, those with less intelligence keep having child after child, often when they cannot afford them. I sometimes think it would be better for all if there was an IQ requirement for having children. I...
- 48
Have you ever noticed people with less money usually complain less than those w
Have you ever noticed people with less money usually complain less than those with more?
- 16
Who play a vital role in the up-bringing of the child,the Mother or Father?
Who play a vital role in the up-bringing of the child,the Mother or Father?