• snekerpimp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    8 months ago

    Isn’t it like ~$310,000 to raise a kid to 17? That’s, what, 2% of what is needed after the poor child is born? And some woman is going to decide to let a guy nut in her for $5000?

  • Fair Fairy@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    I mean I like the direction, but this is far cry from other countries.

    Give us UHC, improve working rights, guaranteed housing for parents, daycare.

    But Its good they at least bringing it up.

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    daycare costs $2k a month? are they training the kids to be astronauts?

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      To be honest, childcare is expensive. You can only have so many kids per worker, you need to pay rent for a big space, utilities, etc. In a big city it adds up fast. I’m sure some of it goes to some CEO’s Yacht, but even at cost it would be expensive.

      The reason it’s free/cheap in Europe is because it’s subsidized from taxes. Same as universities and Healthcare.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        wild. you’d think as a capitalist country that wants to maximize workforce for cheap labor people would be more incentivized to procreate. yet you have insane costs to childbirth alone, no parental leave for either parent (or a pathetic amount on state level), no child support… and this on top.

  • Kurious84@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Nobody can afford health care and they want us in the office no remote work making it even more difficult. It’s almost like they want to run us all into the ground while they sit on gold toilets and enrich themselves beyond all measure of reason. Oh and they’re building bunkers in New Zealand, the billionares pulling the strings so when they get us into a nuclear war you won’t hear from them again.

  • SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    Wages have not kept up with productivity and GDP increases since the 1970s.

    How about making single income middle class families possible again, so you can have one stay at home parent.

    • GhostedIC@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Ironically, thats the exact idea behind the whole trade war thing. It has lead to TSMC already accelerating their plans to expand the Arizona microchip fabrication lab, which means… Factory jobs, the thing we used to have in the 70’s.

  • ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    As an atheist baby-eater, sign me up. I could have a lovely dinner party for $5K on Hallowen every year and not have to find a main course.

  • thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    Based on data presented here: https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child

    It takes a minimum of $200K USD to raise a child from birth to 18; which works out to ~$1K/mo.

    If the Government were serious in wanting to address the aging population issue, the best way to tackle it would be to provide family funding at this level for a family’s first ~3 children.

    Would it be expensive? Absolutely it would be in the initial term - but the increase in economic activity would arguably more than cover it in the long run.

    Would it lead to inflation? Not if the costs were derived from taxes due to the government (which currently get dodged), rather than through national debt.

    Would it lead to a positive outcome for the nation? Arguably yes, but there may also be unintended consequences to the negative. Human greed knows no bounds, after all.

  • pappabosley@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    8 months ago

    We had this in Australia for a while, where there was no hospital costs for birth, and almost 20 years ago, so it was a considerable help. The conservatives started claiming people were having babies just to get the money and then spending it on big TV’s and other luxuries.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    181
    ·
    8 months ago

    They chose to use a stock photo of a million dollars.

    $5000 is only 2 and a half of those bundles of $20’s.

    These people are trying to run propaganda for Trump, they can’t even keep their fascist bullshit straight.

    • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      8 months ago

      I worked both Brinks type security and for Chase, so the inside and outside. That’s not a million. It’s probably somewhere between a quarter and a half, but the picture doesn’t make it super easy to tell.

      Your point is very valid however, they used a deceiving picture on purpose.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      74
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      but when you look through maga glasses, that’s what you see when a black single mom of 2 receives a wic voucher for a couple gallons of milk.

      • SavageCreation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        8 months ago

        You see, its not one black mom, its the millions of moms getting subsidies!

        Lets ignore the part where we somewhy have a million moms needing subsidies.

  • optional@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    5000$ is a lot. In Germany you get only 250€

    well, that's

    per month until they’re 27 (as long as they’re still in school/university)
    plus free healthcare for mother and child
    plus free daycare (depending on the state)
    plus free schools and universities

  • boreengreen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    8 months ago

    My personsl hypothesis is that when couples are living in times of prosperity or growth, they can see a future and can comfortably grow a pension, then they are likely to consider having kids. This also happens to be the time they are getting a share of the wealth society generates.

    In recession and uncertain times, couples tend to hold of on getting kids, and if they do get kids, they do it much later in life, when they have saved some money.

    Of course couples need free time as well. If both parents need to work full time, it’s gonna be a lot less palatable to have kids.

    I think the global low fertility is the problem of infinite growth self correcting.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      No matter the state of the economy, if you look at birthrate stats in various countries, it goes down with women rights and access to contraception. People just don’t want kids.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      You’re right, when they have the choice, which is also why the Reich Wing wants to limit abortion and contraception and LGBT+ (non-accidentally-reproductive) relationships.