4 ms·

The broader issue is that having/raising children doesn't fit with the otherwise fairly materialistic value system our society has. Childless women earn just a

by tomp 7y ago

The broader issue is that having/raising children doesn't fit with the otherwise fairly materialistic value system our society has. Childless women earn just as much as men. Forcing fathers to take family leave does fix the asymmetry between parents (mothers vs fathers), but will exacerbate the difference between parents and non-parents by penalizing not just mothers, but also fathers for having children, vs. non-parents who don't (need to) have a career break. I think that no discussion/policy about parental leave is complete without some kind of incentive for people to have kids (or a discussion about whether we should encourage that at all or not - looks like it might be sensible in Western countries).

lone_haxx0r 7y ago
It also penalizes non-fathers because employers assume the possibility of you having children, and that has an effect on your pay, even if you never have children. As a non-father, you have no way to say "I don't want paternity leave" and negotiate a better salary instead.
- tomp 7y ago
  You can make implicit inferences... e.g. younger people (below 25) are less likely to be parents anytime soon. Also, there could be post-hiring pressures, motivating employees to not have kids in order to continue their stellar career trajectory (this probably already happens, and I think it's something that should be addressed by some kind of government-provided incentives... I was thinking something like tax-breaks or even tax-rewards for parents, or possibly public housing).
dcolkitt 7y ago
> I think that no discussion/policy about parental leave is complete without some kind of incentive for people to have kids The simplest way to incentive more kids is to make housing cheap. The biggest downside to most people considering children is the cost of family formation. And by far the biggest component of that is the cost of housing. Western governments are doing quite the opposite of promoting kids. They're actively pursuing policies that constrict the supply of housing. These favor older post-childrearing homeowners at the expense of young potential families. Abolish zoning and land-use restrictions in metros like San Francisco and New York, and watch fertility rates boom as property prices collapse.

by tomp 7y ago

lone_haxx0r 7y ago

It also penalizes non-fathers because employers assume the possibility of you having children, and that has an effect on your pay, even if you never have children. As a non-father, you have no way to say "I don't want paternity leave" and negotiate a better salary instead.

tomp 7y ago
You can make implicit inferences... e.g. younger people (below 25) are less likely to be parents anytime soon. Also, there could be post-hiring pressures, motivating employees to not have kids in order to continue their stellar career trajectory (this probably already happens, and I think it's something that should be addressed by some kind of government-provided incentives... I was thinking something like tax-breaks or even tax-rewards for parents, or possibly public housing).

dcolkitt 7y ago

> I think that no discussion/policy about parental leave is complete without some kind of incentive for people to have kids The simplest way to incentive more kids is to make housing cheap. The biggest downside to most people considering children is the cost of family formation. And by far the biggest component of that is the cost of housing. Western governments are doing quite the opposite of promoting kids. They're actively pursuing policies that constrict the supply of housing. These favor older post-childrearing homeowners at the expense of young potential families. Abolish zoning and land-use restrictions in metros like San Francisco and New York, and watch fertility rates boom as property prices collapse.