59 ms·

Why does fertility rate matter? Subsidizing daycare seems beneficial in any circumstance.

willcipriano 3y ago
> Why does fertility rate matter? I don't want to post spoilers here, but the inverted population pyramid is going to result in some interesting times.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  So would a permanent, non-inverted pyramid. Gotta bite the bullet at some point.
- JeffSnazz 3y ago
  Only for people scared of degrowth. It's not that scary if you actually have some kind of consensus mechanism or conflict resolution, which is the thing we actually lack as a country that's scary as shit. Anyway, politicians could always loosen immigration. More people = bigger economy, higher wages for the rest of us, and generally immigrants have higher fertility rates. Somehow neither party wants to acknowledge this. (yes, the above would come with inflation too—this can be reclaimed pretty easily from the top of the wealth pyramid with taxes.)
  - astrange 3y ago
    > and generally immigrants have higher fertility rates Not by much, it's only higher in the origin country afaik. > yes, the above would come with inflation too Growing the economy isn't inflationary. > this can be reclaimed pretty easily from the top of the wealth pyramid with taxes Rich people don't contribute to inflation as much because they have lower marginal propensity to consume. You need to combat demand-side inflation by taking money away from everyone else, and supply-side inflation by increasing production.
    - JeffSnazz 3y ago
      > Growing the economy isn't inflationary. It is if you provide a route to citizenship for ~16M americans, many of which are not making minimum wage. > Rich people don't contribute to inflation as much because they have lower marginal propensity to consume. You need to combat demand-side inflation by taking money away from everyone else, and supply-side inflation by increasing production. The goal is to use the inflation to drive a reduction in wealth inequality. If the rich person finds it unfair, I'm sure they can find something to mop their tears with.
      - astrange 3y ago
        > It is if you provide a route to citizenship for ~16M americans, many of which are not making minimum wage. Hmmm, I think it more counters a deflationary trend of older local people retiring. It is true that people earning more is likely inflationary (but that's better than all alternatives). > The goal is to use the inflation to drive a reduction in wealth inequality. Causation would go the other way round. Wealth taxes are inflationary, insofar as taxes are paid in USD and so you have to sell your assets to get the USD, causing extra transactions. That's a problem since most other kinds of tax are deflationary.
- ChainOfFools 3y ago
  Idiocracy, the best accidental documentary of our generation, strikes again
loeg 3y ago
Consensus viewpoint is that population stability or (modest) growth is probably ideal from a long-term economics perspective. If fertility rates were sky high, you wouldn't need to incentivize parenting as much to achieve that outcome.
- shiroiuma 3y ago
  Yeah, but who cares about long-term economics? If you're a public corporation, the only thing that matters to you is short-term profits and stock price, and doing things in the society's long-term interest is usually against your short-term interest. Normally, we have governments and regulations to serve as a check here and worry about the long-term interests of society, but that requires a citizenry that votes for such policies. America's voters don't care much about this, as seen by their voting patterns, so it's wrong to worry about long-term economics there.

> Why does fertility rate matter? I don't want to post spoilers here, but the inverted population pyramid is going to result in some interesting times.

AlexandrB 3y ago
So would a permanent, non-inverted pyramid. Gotta bite the bullet at some point.
JeffSnazz 3y ago
Only for people scared of degrowth. It's not that scary if you actually have some kind of consensus mechanism or conflict resolution, which is the thing we actually lack as a country that's scary as shit. Anyway, politicians could always loosen immigration. More people = bigger economy, higher wages for the rest of us, and generally immigrants have higher fertility rates. Somehow neither party wants to acknowledge this. (yes, the above would come with inflation too—this can be reclaimed pretty easily from the top of the wealth pyramid with taxes.)
- astrange 3y ago
  > and generally immigrants have higher fertility rates Not by much, it's only higher in the origin country afaik. > yes, the above would come with inflation too Growing the economy isn't inflationary. > this can be reclaimed pretty easily from the top of the wealth pyramid with taxes Rich people don't contribute to inflation as much because they have lower marginal propensity to consume. You need to combat demand-side inflation by taking money away from everyone else, and supply-side inflation by increasing production.
  - JeffSnazz 3y ago
    > Growing the economy isn't inflationary. It is if you provide a route to citizenship for ~16M americans, many of which are not making minimum wage. > Rich people don't contribute to inflation as much because they have lower marginal propensity to consume. You need to combat demand-side inflation by taking money away from everyone else, and supply-side inflation by increasing production. The goal is to use the inflation to drive a reduction in wealth inequality. If the rich person finds it unfair, I'm sure they can find something to mop their tears with.
    - astrange 3y ago
      > It is if you provide a route to citizenship for ~16M americans, many of which are not making minimum wage. Hmmm, I think it more counters a deflationary trend of older local people retiring. It is true that people earning more is likely inflationary (but that's better than all alternatives). > The goal is to use the inflation to drive a reduction in wealth inequality. Causation would go the other way round. Wealth taxes are inflationary, insofar as taxes are paid in USD and so you have to sell your assets to get the USD, causing extra transactions. That's a problem since most other kinds of tax are deflationary.
ChainOfFools 3y ago
Idiocracy, the best accidental documentary of our generation, strikes again

loeg 3y ago

Consensus viewpoint is that population stability or (modest) growth is probably ideal from a long-term economics perspective. If fertility rates were sky high, you wouldn't need to incentivize parenting as much to achieve that outcome.

shiroiuma 3y ago
Yeah, but who cares about long-term economics? If you're a public corporation, the only thing that matters to you is short-term profits and stock price, and doing things in the society's long-term interest is usually against your short-term interest. Normally, we have governments and regulations to serve as a check here and worry about the long-term interests of society, but that requires a citizenry that votes for such policies. America's voters don't care much about this, as seen by their voting patterns, so it's wrong to worry about long-term economics there.