3 ms·
>Even in countries with robust (ie expensive) pro natalist fiscal policy Nit: This patently does not exist. Zero countries pay or provide anywhere close to the
by mrguyorama 2y ago
>Even in countries with robust (ie expensive) pro natalist fiscal policy
Nit: This patently does not exist. Zero countries pay or provide anywhere close to the actual cost of raising a child, let alone the lost opportunity of choosing to raise children vs living a life dedicated to yourself.
That actual cost is horrifically high, but I promise you if it was offered, people would have more children. We WILL have to have that discussion eventually, unless we somehow return to a society where women are property and don't have rights, or unless we just outsource the whole baby making process to the places of the world that DO work like that, but people hate immigrants, especially when they are poor (for some fucking reason).
- toomuchtodo 2y agoI strongly agree, and that is a material component of this story: global depopulation is underway. Why? Because women can affirm their reproductive decisions now. We've built entire systems upon historical fertility assumptions, assumptions that did not assume women having agency at scale would lead to a rapid decline in fertility rates. Those systems are now in objective peril. Does the will exist to pay the "horrifically high" costs you mention? Based on all available evidence, that does not appear to be the case. There is enough will to loudly complain, but nothing can be done about it, nor would the costs ever be accepted as necessary by anyone with the power to accept said costs and institute said costly policy. That's the story, in my humble opinion. Not that depopulation is underway, but that nothing can be done about it, and any policy put forth to try to do something about it would be so expensive as to be deemed impossible.