4 ms·

Paying people directly to have children seems like a horrible policy because it will have disproportionate effect on people who are less likely to be good and r

Paying people directly to have children seems like a horrible policy because it will have disproportionate effect on people who are less likely to be good and responsible parents.

pton_xd 3y ago
Instead of paying cash directly, give large tax breaks or other incentives that encourage staying productive members of society.
- aswanson 3y ago
  Facts. I remember daycare costs almost equalling mortgage payments back in the early 2000s, for 2 kids. It's wildly expensive to have kids in the US.
  - etimberg 3y ago
    It still does. Close to $3000 a month where I am
    - tombert 3y ago
      I own a house in NYC. My mortgage payment is almost exactly $2000 a month, and that's with taxes and insurance already added to it. $3000/month for daycare is utterly insane.
  - acdha 3y ago
    Even with employer-subsidized daycare, it was more than our mortgage. Watching what people who couldn’t make that work had to do really pushed me solidly into the camp of seeing free government-provided daycare as a basic right. Even if you’re a total sociopath who doesn’t care about the stress, there’s like a century of research showing that things like stable & supportive early years set children up to be more successful for the rest of their lives, and the challenges of finding and paying for daycare put a ton of stress on most parents, hitting the poorest the hardest.
- vladf 3y ago
  Isn't this literally the case in the US? You list dependents on your tax form.
emseetech 3y ago
Instead of cash payments having considerable services like in home care, free goods like formula and diapers, parenting support and education, childcare, etc. would go a long way to making parenthood easier for people of all classes.
- olah_1 3y ago
  Who says they want it to be for all classes? Right now, the rich are disproportionately punished for having children while the poor are basically paid for it. How about flip flopping that?
  - acdha 3y ago
    That’s a serious citation needed: if you think there are lavish social payments which reward poor people for having kids, the 80s called and want Reagan’s campaign mythology back. The United States makes parenting expensive but the richer you are the easier time you’ll have dealing with it.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    The rich can absolutely afford as many children as they want. Whom you are talking about are upstart "upper middle" who have a good wage but no capital of their own, and the rich are generally happy to have them thrown under the bus rather than face them as equals. The method of throwing under the bus is have them overwork for a wage and then second job to waste that wage on "fueling economic growth". Not turning these into anything permanent.
  - SamoyedFurFluff 3y ago
    If the poor have it so good why don’t the rich simply become poor?
    - 0xcde4c3db 3y ago
      Hey, thanks for reminding me of Ruben Bolling's classic (it's been 20+ years, that qualifies as "classic" right?) comic character "Lucky Ducky". https://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2002/12/21 https://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2002/12/21
dazc 3y ago
We have been doing this in the UK for at least the past two decades. Your theory has been proved correct.
Spivak 3y ago
As dumb as it sounds I think the solution is to only pay high income earners to have kids. Not for any kind of moralistic reason but because every time it's surveyed high income earners believe the minimum "lifestyle" required to ethically raise a child is much higher than people with lower incomes. So people living comfortably as DINKs will only raise a child if they can give their kid the same comfortable life they enjoy and often times they can't once you account for high healthcare, daycare and private school costs. You can be like "well then they shouldn't have such high expectations, expect and accept a lifestyle drop, and send their kids to public school" but you're yelling at a river to change course.
t-3 3y ago
I imagine that in this kind of scheme they would be paid for production, someone else would handle finishing, and another would do quality control. The final product would be packaged and delivered to the customer, who would distribute internally according to the budget.

Paying people directly to have children seems like a horrible policy because it will have disproportionate effect on people who are less likely to be good and responsible parents.

pton_xd 3y ago

Instead of paying cash directly, give large tax breaks or other incentives that encourage staying productive members of society.

aswanson 3y ago
Facts. I remember daycare costs almost equalling mortgage payments back in the early 2000s, for 2 kids. It's wildly expensive to have kids in the US.
- etimberg 3y ago
  It still does. Close to $3000 a month where I am
  - tombert 3y ago
    I own a house in NYC. My mortgage payment is almost exactly $2000 a month, and that's with taxes and insurance already added to it. $3000/month for daycare is utterly insane.
- acdha 3y ago
  Even with employer-subsidized daycare, it was more than our mortgage. Watching what people who couldn’t make that work had to do really pushed me solidly into the camp of seeing free government-provided daycare as a basic right. Even if you’re a total sociopath who doesn’t care about the stress, there’s like a century of research showing that things like stable & supportive early years set children up to be more successful for the rest of their lives, and the challenges of finding and paying for daycare put a ton of stress on most parents, hitting the poorest the hardest.
vladf 3y ago
Isn't this literally the case in the US? You list dependents on your tax form.

emseetech 3y ago

Instead of cash payments having considerable services like in home care, free goods like formula and diapers, parenting support and education, childcare, etc. would go a long way to making parenthood easier for people of all classes.

olah_1 3y ago
Who says they want it to be for all classes? Right now, the rich are disproportionately punished for having children while the poor are basically paid for it. How about flip flopping that?
- acdha 3y ago
  That’s a serious citation needed: if you think there are lavish social payments which reward poor people for having kids, the 80s called and want Reagan’s campaign mythology back. The United States makes parenting expensive but the richer you are the easier time you’ll have dealing with it.
- thriftwy 3y ago
  The rich can absolutely afford as many children as they want. Whom you are talking about are upstart "upper middle" who have a good wage but no capital of their own, and the rich are generally happy to have them thrown under the bus rather than face them as equals. The method of throwing under the bus is have them overwork for a wage and then second job to waste that wage on "fueling economic growth". Not turning these into anything permanent.
- SamoyedFurFluff 3y ago
  If the poor have it so good why don’t the rich simply become poor?
  - 0xcde4c3db 3y ago
    Hey, thanks for reminding me of Ruben Bolling's classic (it's been 20+ years, that qualifies as "classic" right?) comic character "Lucky Ducky". https://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2002/12/21 https://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2002/12/21

dazc 3y ago

We have been doing this in the UK for at least the past two decades. Your theory has been proved correct.

Spivak 3y ago

As dumb as it sounds I think the solution is to only pay high income earners to have kids. Not for any kind of moralistic reason but because every time it's surveyed high income earners believe the minimum "lifestyle" required to ethically raise a child is much higher than people with lower incomes. So people living comfortably as DINKs will only raise a child if they can give their kid the same comfortable life they enjoy and often times they can't once you account for high healthcare, daycare and private school costs. You can be like "well then they shouldn't have such high expectations, expect and accept a lifestyle drop, and send their kids to public school" but you're yelling at a river to change course.

t-3 3y ago

I imagine that in this kind of scheme they would be paid for production, someone else would handle finishing, and another would do quality control. The final product would be packaged and delivered to the customer, who would distribute internally according to the budget.