3 ms·

In wealthy countries, I think it would make sense to raise taxes quite a bit but include huge tax deductions for kids. Like $20k/kid and keep AMT for very high

In wealthy countries, I think it would make sense to raise taxes quite a bit but include huge tax deductions for kids. Like $20k/kid and keep AMT for very high (over 400k) incomes. This would incentivize people to have kids and free up money to buy homes and keep a parent at home to raise the kids. Single people would pay very high taxes but I would imagine the rents in places they like to live would decrease.

flal_ 4y ago
French here ( also parent of 3). France has strong fiscal incentive for families ( esp. for 3+ kids ), but that won't solve the housing issue : more money will just increase prices... Prices are high mostly because of the low supply.
- andrekandre 4y ago
  > Prices are high mostly because of the low supply. what is causing the low supply?
- nemo44x 4y ago
  The French benefit is very good but I’m talking about a radically, massive benefit. For example in a family of 5 where they have $120k income, they would get like an $80k deduction leaving them with $40k of adjusted income. Taxes on that would be very small (a few thousand very likely, $5k-$10k) leaving them with the lions share to properly raise their kids. This is directed at middle and upper middle class people that are the ones we want having kids in the first place. Let’s pay them to spread their genes.
mnaei 4y ago
I've been considering the possibility of a "tragedy of the commons" in relation to child-rearing economics within countries with social security systems. It's unclear how many couples take into account the financial impact of having a child on their retirement plans. If they were to do so, the calculations would be rather discouraging. In fact, it could be economically beneficial for a couple to not have children while others continue to do so. In the past, children served as a safety net for their parents in old age, as parents devoted much of their lives to raising them. However, in a world with a significantly inverted population pyramid, adult children may be responsible for supporting numerous elderly citizens through their taxes. This could potentially leave them unable to provide additional assistance to their own parents. On the other hand, those who chose not to have children could enjoy the benefits of compound interest accrued over 18+ years. This situation creates a negative feedback loop. As the population declines more rapidly, the population pyramid becomes increasingly inverted, placing greater strain on younger generations to support the elderly. This further exacerbates the economic challenges of having children, as they will be required to work harder and longer hours to sustain the economy.

flal_ 4y ago

French here ( also parent of 3). France has strong fiscal incentive for families ( esp. for 3+ kids ), but that won't solve the housing issue : more money will just increase prices... Prices are high mostly because of the low supply.

andrekandre 4y ago
> Prices are high mostly because of the low supply. what is causing the low supply?
nemo44x 4y ago
The French benefit is very good but I’m talking about a radically, massive benefit. For example in a family of 5 where they have $120k income, they would get like an $80k deduction leaving them with $40k of adjusted income. Taxes on that would be very small (a few thousand very likely, $5k-$10k) leaving them with the lions share to properly raise their kids. This is directed at middle and upper middle class people that are the ones we want having kids in the first place. Let’s pay them to spread their genes.

mnaei 4y ago

I've been considering the possibility of a "tragedy of the commons" in relation to child-rearing economics within countries with social security systems. It's unclear how many couples take into account the financial impact of having a child on their retirement plans. If they were to do so, the calculations would be rather discouraging. In fact, it could be economically beneficial for a couple to not have children while others continue to do so. In the past, children served as a safety net for their parents in old age, as parents devoted much of their lives to raising them. However, in a world with a significantly inverted population pyramid, adult children may be responsible for supporting numerous elderly citizens through their taxes. This could potentially leave them unable to provide additional assistance to their own parents. On the other hand, those who chose not to have children could enjoy the benefits of compound interest accrued over 18+ years. This situation creates a negative feedback loop. As the population declines more rapidly, the population pyramid becomes increasingly inverted, placing greater strain on younger generations to support the elderly. This further exacerbates the economic challenges of having children, as they will be required to work harder and longer hours to sustain the economy.