isjcjsjcnjd

That’s not the point. The point is that the number is small. They are not making a judgment on the value of such relationships but rather that that number is and will always be small that in the grand scheme of things it’s insignificant, it only matters in a person’s immediate sphere.

People on this thread seriously need to stop reacting so emotionally to things. Damn. Grow up people.

> To think money is the only thing that is of highest value in our incredibly short lives is a mental sickness.

They didn’t say that? Nor was it even implied? What the hell?

All they said was that EVEN free time is a form of wealth that not all enjoy, and free time does often correlate to how well you can express your care for someone. And they are absolutely, without a single shadow of a doubt, correct.

> Oh and I still was nice too.

That is a judgment reserved exclusively to third parties, I’m afraid.

C’mon now, let’s not be intentionally obtuse to try and sound smart adding “yes, but” to a perfectly solid argument. Children are easily produced, that’s a fact. The process of child bearing is not in question, but rather the availability of willing partners (hell, even unwilling, if we’re getting that dark) and how little effort it generally takes to get the conception process going.

They were making a point that it’s much easier to generate a human being than it is actually generating economically meaningful value. One needs a few minutes of your time and gets you feeling really good at the end of the process, and the other can (and often does) require years of effort, toil and sweat (all of which can catastrophically fail rendering your efforts moot).

Generating a new human is, indeed, comparatively easy.