Wanting to start a family and having a family to support are two different things. I imagine the goal of a ton of people without families is to generate the capital necessary to start a family.

I really thought this was a glaring hole in the article. It's not as if those without families will never be in the set of those with families. It was a bit odd for me as well.

Having started a family a year ago, I wonder what kind of capital is necessary to start a family is? For diapers? Or do people really want to save up for college when they have barely left college themselves?

Until age 3, a child doesn't even need a dedicated room, so basically any apt suitable for 2 people will do.

Disclaimer: I'm in Austria, maybe it's easier here.

Its almost certainly easier there, since you guys have, socialized medicine, cheaper education, affordable housing, etc. All of the things we're terrible at here in the US basically. Most people want to own a home, which in the SF area will be 500k or so just for a reasonable place. Then you have to pay a ton of money for health insurance, then you pay a ton to educate them, have a babysitter, etc.

Not sure about the affordable housing. From what I've read, in many parts of Europe (for example in Germany), life-long renting is very common. In many other places (where the rental market isn't as developed or where people believe that they "must" own the property they live in), for many it takes a 30-year mortgage to buy a flat. Having said that, I don't know how the situation looks in Austria in particular.

I think it is easier in Austria (my mother was born there). In Vienna, with a reasonable flat and public transportation, you probably don't have a lot of extra costs. I'm not sure what the Austrian parental leave policy is... one year? How much salary do they cover?

Sources of capital expense for US/Canada:

- Parental leave. Most social insurance systems do not pay full salary if you make over a certain amount of money (say, $40,000 annually). If your lifestyle is higher than that, you need to save the excess. In Canada, parental leave is usually up to 1 year. In the USA, it is often 2 to 3 months (though some insurance plans allow for longer).

- If you're both working, daycare can cost $600 to upwards of $1500 monthly, depending on quality & city.

- Depending on the child, if you want to actually sleep at night it helps for the child to have their own room by age 1 to 1.5 or so, which may entail a larger flat or house. Other children are not restless sleepers and can be tolerable in a shared room.

- Otherwise, the usual expenditure, depending on your desired lifestyle and travel needs: car seats ($500+), booster seats ($200+), clothes, toys, diapers, child-proof cupboard door clips, strollers (upwards of $1000 if you're getting a multi-purpose Chariot-type carrier)

So I'd say, a middle class family would often be advised to save at least $10,000 before having a child. An upper class / affluent family that wants some level of dual parental leave, or a nanny, likely $100,000 or more.

There's also the dark side of having a child, and that's the astronomical costs of separation, assuming you want shared custody (or are fighting for primary custody). In the US or Canada, legal costs are usually at least $10,000 to get to a custody agreement and divorce filing, and more likely $20,000 to 50,000 for minor contentions. Major custody battles can cost upwards of $500,000 (each). Legal aid can help, but only if you fall below a certain income threshold. Whereas I've seen couples split with no kids for under $5,000 each.

source: many friends with children, I have a 3 year old, also too many friends with bad divorces

It depends on how much time you want to spend with your family. For example, if both parents want to stay at home to take care of the kids (admittedly rare), it'd take quite a bit of capital for a middle-class or higher lifestyle.

Agreed. Even if only one of you wants to stay at home for some period, your household income is now halved, with an extra mouth to feed.

I don't know if that line makes much sense... just about everyone will have a family to support at some point. Why not plan ahead?

So think bigger: call the world your family. How can you support them? Might need some money to do it.

It might not be your goal, but you can't deny it would be a noble one.

But now you are getting so far flung away from either the point of the article or even any serious criticisms of it. No one would deny helping humanity is a noble goal but, and I don't intend this in a mean way, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

How many people, even among entrepreneurs, plan to never have a family?