U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-23-2020, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Niceville, FL
8,584 posts, read 17,142,751 times
Reputation: 9597

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by crusinsusan View Post
Interesting. Some posts approach ideas in the Handmaid's Tale. Yet too, it's clear that women have the power to save (depending upon your view...either way) the world's economy.

How's about $2000 a month for every mother? Universal income for mothers?...For life? (If that's the side you're on.)
Or, if you're on the other side:
How's about $2000 a month for every woman who doesn't have children?

I mean, since women are commodified.

Not a bad idea, actually.
I want to say that either Hungary or Poland is in the process of going there with the significant monthly subsidy to women who have a lot of kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2020, 08:46 PM
 
1,381 posts, read 737,946 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by beachmouse View Post
I want to say that either Hungary or Poland is in the process of going there with the significant monthly subsidy to women who have a lot of kids.
Quite a few, actually: https://money.com/government-pays-ha...ow-birth-rate/

"...Demographers study birth rates as a measure of stability. Essentially, people will have children if they feel they have job security, a stable economy, and feel supported in starting a family. Dwindling population growth, on the other hand, can spell economic doom. Financial incentives and bonuses are one way to support parents and boost birth rates...."

"...Financial incentives for having children are increasingly appearing as a response to low birth rate numbers in places like Finland, Estonia, Italy, Japan, and Australia. Other ways to bolster birth rates include increased access to childcare, longer and better paid maternity/paternity leave, plus deconstructing traditional gender dynamics by empowering women to have jobs while also having children...." (*AHEM!*)

"...If such a program was ever implemented in the U.S., it would have to pay out enormous sums in order to cover the real cost of having a child. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that the average cost of raising a child to the age of 17 costs about $233,610 or about $14,000 per year...."

They discuss more countries in the article.

And that's right on topic of the OP.

I'm just surprised it took this long to get to this obvious (to me) point.

But importing women? Sweet-talking?

Nah.

Pony up.

PS: I still prefer changing the world economy to save the Earth.

More sources: https://www.google.com/search?client...+have+children

Last edited by crusinsusan; 05-23-2020 at 08:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 05:53 AM
 
8,695 posts, read 2,418,954 times
Reputation: 5548
Quote:
Originally Posted by crusinsusan View Post
Interesting. Some posts approach ideas in the Handmaid's Tale. Yet too, it's clear that women have the power to save (depending upon your view...either way) the world's economy.

How's about $2000 a month for every mother? Universal income for mothers?...For life? (If that's the side you're on.)
Or, if you're on the other side:
How's about $2000 a month for every woman who doesn't have children?

I mean, since women are commodified.

Not a bad idea, actually.
How about going back to the orphanage system? I am not so sure that having kids raised in an environment where their only parental influence sits at home all day doing nothing or worse is addicted to drugs or alcohol is better than being raised by stable adults.

And those who truly do want to raise their kids might have the incentive to have the father in their life and try being a more traditional family.

I know its not 'PC" but I believe that people that do not have the means to take care of their kids should not be raising kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 06:13 AM
 
3,627 posts, read 1,487,361 times
Reputation: 9479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
How about going back to the orphanage system? I am not so sure that having kids raised in an environment where their only parental influence sits at home all day doing nothing or worse is addicted to drugs or alcohol is better than being raised by stable adults.

<snip>

I know its not 'PC" but I believe that people that do not have the means to take care of their kids should not be raising kids.
I wish we could. Unfortunately, it seems almost impossible to keep orphanages safe from predators and people who will deprive the kids at the expense of profit. Look what happened in Eastern Europe. I suppose that in theory the amount we spend per child in WIC, SNAP, Section 8 and other assistance programs would add up to a decent amount to support a child in an orphanage but I'm skeptical that it could be done well. I'd certainly be in favor of a system that doesn't automatically reward people on public assistance with more money if they have another baby.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 07:38 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
16,279 posts, read 5,612,964 times
Reputation: 13074
Quote:
Originally Posted by taggerung View Post
we don't need any more damn people in this country or the world. What we need is not more people or immigration, what we need is to abolish this deranged economic model of infinite gdp growth and infinite debt expansion
bang !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 07:42 AM
 
1,807 posts, read 536,806 times
Reputation: 3519
Quote:
Originally Posted by athena53 View Post
I wish we could. Unfortunately, it seems almost impossible to keep orphanages safe from predators and people who will deprive the kids at the expense of profit. Look what happened in Eastern Europe. I suppose that in theory the amount we spend per child in WIC, SNAP, Section 8 and other assistance programs would add up to a decent amount to support a child in an orphanage but I'm skeptical that it could be done well. I'd certainly be in favor of a system that doesn't automatically reward people on public assistance with more money if they have another baby.
This is why I would support a financial strategy that removes the financial disincentives for women who are working to have children. If the goal is to increase the birth rate and, at the same time, encourage women to remain in the work force so they can continue to pay payroll taxes, pay off student loans, contribute to their own retirement funding, etc., the following financial incentives should be provided.

Paid maternity/parental leave
Paid time off for caring for ill child
Subsidity for increased medical cost of pregnancy
Subsidity for insurance coverage of children
Subsidity for child care, after school activities and summer camps
Subsidity for housing based on number of children and income levels

This would also protect women in the event of divorce where there is very little child support from the father. The funding for the incentives could be from the government or private sector or combination.

Last edited by Maddie104; 05-24-2020 at 08:49 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 08:41 AM
 
13,248 posts, read 10,840,851 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
This is a very troubling economic trend:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-bir...ow-11589947260




The economic consequence 21 years from now in 2041 will be severe. Every credible econometric model of the US economy shows population growth as a principle driver of future economic growth.

In many senses, this decline is associated with the incredibly strong economy we've enjoyed over the past several years - economic opportunity for women has resulted in their personal decisions to work and defer/decline to procreated.

More and more, it is clear the USA needs a policy of encouraging immigration of fertile women who are of childbearing age.
I'd argue it isn't the "strong economy", it is the inequality.

[major political party name here] has aggressively dismantled or caused severe damage to just about every government aid program.

Section 8 program ----> Broken [extremely high wait times]

Universal Child Care ------> Non-existent

Health Care -------> Still tied to having a job, unaffordable for many

Schools -------> You have to spend big bucks on a HOUSE to get decent public schools, putting it out of reach for many. In effect, "public schools" are quasi-privatized, because they no longer serve the purpose of giving low-income kids an equal opportunity, if they ever did.

Public health -------> Not prepared for a pandemic

Infrastructure --------> Not maintained and not up-to-date in many cases.

Higher education --------> Unaffordable

Contract Law -------> Extremely skewed to give excess power to large corporations by failing to recognize a contract as unconscionable when when one only has 2 or 3 large companies to choose from when obtaining a service. So the little guy gets screwed over

Medical reimbursements --------> Broken [Doctors in many cases spend almost 50% of their time chasing insurance companies for money instead of actually treating patients]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 09:05 AM
 
861 posts, read 232,835 times
Reputation: 1752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltdumbear View Post
This Human 'Race' NEEDS to slow down, and STOP breeding like rabbits.

And the conspiracy is that's why the super elites created a super virus to reduce the population. It's been their plan for decades. Too many people on the planet. They dumb us down with fluoride in the water, hypnotize us with tv/movies, control the news, rules and regulations on everything, even a lemonade stand, protect big pharma with lawsuit exemptions, control school curriculum, etc I'm just saying I hear all this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 09:49 AM
 
1,963 posts, read 503,478 times
Reputation: 3155
/closethread ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2020, 11:37 AM
 
1,381 posts, read 737,946 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
/closethread ?

We already knew you didn't like the way the thread went: Right to the root of the problem. No need to keep telling us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top