Here's a little puzzle about procreation that's bothering me. Maybe you'd like to let it bother you too.
Suppose it's the case that in Someland, people should have children, but not too many. Let's keep this simple--they should have children because otherwise the aging population won't have sufficient support, socially and financially. But not too many, because population growth will result in resource depletion. In fact, let's suppose, it would be ideal if the average couple had 2 children. But in reality, the average couple has 3 children.
OK--here's the puzzle. Though the Somelanders should have children (we are assuming), the only people who seem to be blameless are those without children. The over-two couples are having too many kids. The two-child couples are erring by not compensating for the over-two couples. Only the no-child couples are blameless, and yet hold on ... How can that be, if people in Someland should have children?
Somehow we are going wrong in our distribution of credit and blame here. What's the right thing to say about the three groups of Somelanders?