4 ms·
You're subsidizing the replenishing of the population of the country. You're subsidizing the creation of new people to be your friends, customers, colleagues.
by dudul 6y ago
You're subsidizing the replenishing of the population of the country. You're subsidizing the creation of new people to be your friends, customers, colleagues. You're subsidizing the people who will become cops to protect you, or nurses to take care of you, or engineers who will create new tech and maybe keep you alive a little longer.
It is really astonishing to see this comment again and again on this thread. New human beings are necessary.
- zanny 6y agoYet you would probably agree giving every mother $100,000 for every child they have is a poor use of tax revenue? Or that it might produce some undesirably perverse incentives? This isn't a black and white or moralistic "with or against me" topic. Every society basically independently has to evaluate how much it wants to divert capital to produce babies. Many nations - ie, China, India, etc - have or had programs in place to actively disincentivize reproduction. I'd just as easily argue that subsiding reproduction when your country has foreigners wanting to immigrate as being unethical. If there are people out there right now that want to come and fill the holes in your society left by a replacement deficit, how is it just to instead pay your own people to replace them? Its largely why Japan is in its replacement crisis - the nations staunch ethonostatist view against immigration.