Yes, children are expensive: the debate reopened by El Mundo

Yes, children are expensive: El Mundo's provocation that reopens the debate on birth rates

The El Mundo article titled "Yes, children are expensive... You shouldn't have had them" has sparked discussion about the cost of parenting and individual responsibility. The thesis is clear: no one forces you to have children, and if you do, you have to assume the expenses. But the reaction was immediate, and the debate goes far beyond back-to-school costs.

Provocation as a strategy

The original text criticizes the annual "hassle" of back-to-school costs and the tendency to present parents desperate over expenses. However, some point out that the article is not against children, but against those who magnify those costs while ignoring other superfluous ones. In other words, the provocative headline would hide a more nuanced analysis: the problem is not having children, but the irresponsible consumption that many justify with them.

The underlying problem: pensions and birth rates

The discussion quickly drifts toward demographics. It is argued that when there are no pensions, native birth rates will rebound, a cynical but widespread view: the current system does not incentivize having children, and only the collapse of the welfare state could force a change. In this sense, a model is proposed where the pension depends in part on the contributions of one's own children, which would create a direct incentive for birth rates. It is a proposal that clashes with the current pay-as-you-go system, but it hits a nerve: the sustainability of pensions is tied to the fertility rate.

The welfare state as a disincentive

Another angle is that of perverse incentives. It is argued that some people can live off aid and subsidies without needing to work, which not only fails to encourage responsible parenting but rewards irresponsibility. The criticism points out that the system allows people to quit their jobs, exhaust unemployment benefits, and start raising children without lifting a finger, with access to housing, food, and basic services. However, the risk is that if the system changes, those families will be left in misery. It is a debate about the sustainability of the model and about what kind of incentives should be created.

Individual responsibility versus social pressure

Finally, the question of the capacity to be a parent emerges. Some argue that many people should not have children due to a lack of maturity or emotional stability, and that they do so because of family pressure or by accident. This connects with the article's thesis: if you are not prepared, don't do it. But the reality is that society continues to push for reproduction, while economic and labor conditions make it difficult. It is a contradiction that the El Mundo article, with its provocative tone, has managed to expose.

The debate remains open: the cost of children is real, but the decision to have them is personal. However, when birth rates fall and pensions are at risk, the issue ceases to be individual and becomes a collective problem. The provocation of the headline, perhaps, is the only way to get people talking about it.