[conanbatt]

No it doesn't. Otherwise, every single teacher, caretaker, would quit their jobs as soon as they had a child and would get the same economical benefit.

If it were a productive investment it would be common because those that do it would easily outclass the rest.

[milesrout]

They don't do that because they can't afford to do that. That's sad and unfortunate.

[conanbatt]

Or because its simply inefficient, and you must bear the price of doing it if you want it.

[inimino]

Not everything that matters in life is captured by our economic system. If you have kids I can only hope this will become clear to you.

[milesrout]

It's not inefficient. It's not efficient. It's got nothing to do with efficiency.

[conanbatt]

? Of course it is. If every man and woman spent 18 years without producing anything at all to take care of their children, we would probably go extinct. Having 1 person take care of 10 at a time increases productivity by 19 people!

Of craouse we would all like to have the option to take as much time as we want to take care of our own, its akin to wanting to amass enough wealth to never have to work again.