First off I agree with you about the parent’s comment.
Second of all the cost of living thing makes no sense. People throughout all of time were poorer and had more kids, and people tend to have less kids during this time period when they have more advantages.
The notion that one “needs” a certain amount of wealth to have kids is actually an expression of values: some minimum material baseline that is arbitrary from an historical or global perspective, therefore has a culturally defined source that is in some sense subjective.
Well we shouldn't compare across all history to look at families that lived in abject squalor compared to today with atrocious infant mortality rates.
We should compare to recent history, such as the economic conditions experienced by the greatest/silent generation, baby boomers, and Gen X before reaching our current economic scenario where aging millenials and older gen-Z folks are putting off having children. Look at their level of debt, the expected value of their income relative to cost of education, cost of healthcare, cost of homes and percentage that rent/live together... it's not a pretty picture.
Just personally, I wouldn't be able to support a family on my Bay Area engineer's salary and that's why I don't. I want to provide a better life for my progeny, and that's not possible given the housing situation in California today and my own financial reality. Not for at least a decade.
I am just inviting you to see it is a value judgement you are making, not one someone is making for you.
What Boomers might have had in the past is not directly relevant to the quality of life you are or are not able to provide for yourself or your children, any more than a zillion other possible comparisons.
What you are expressing seems to be that you have a certain value about economic position and having kids relative to that.
This is absolutely fine. I just think it is important to recognize it is a statement of values with regard to your circumstances, and your expectations.
When the generations you mention had kids many things in the world were so catastrophically worse for those kids than anything we are likely to experience now ... it was a smoke and alcohol fueled world where muggings often involved hospitalization because someone would hit you in the skull with a roll of quarters from behind. It was a world that had every reason to believe the risk of total annihilation by war, and medical treatments were primitive by comparison to what we had now.
It’s pointless to compare to some other time in history. It’s just a personal decision about what you value.
Second of all the cost of living thing makes no sense. People throughout all of time were poorer and had more kids, and people tend to have less kids during this time period when they have more advantages.
The notion that one “needs” a certain amount of wealth to have kids is actually an expression of values: some minimum material baseline that is arbitrary from an historical or global perspective, therefore has a culturally defined source that is in some sense subjective.