Responsible people don’t procreate when they can’t afford children. Incentivizing such people to procreate is how you propagate quality citizens. This is probably the only way to counteract cratering birth rates without resorting to mass immigration, which doesn’t save the nation so much as replace it.
Again, your inability to grasp these simple concepts is a big part of the reason why people are so eager to have you as an opponent. It’s like beating up a small retarded child, except everyone understands why you’re doing it.
Except data shows the opposite of that. The number of children people have is inversely proportional to their wealth. I'm sure there's some people who would like to have an additional kid but are in financial straits, but most people either don't want to have kids regardless or are going to have kids regardless.
The problem is cultural, not financial. And giving more government money to women to have kids just increases their dependence on government.
That's true as a refutation of the post you're replying to. But people who understand their finances well enough to build up capital understand it well enough to know that children are a loss of discretionary and luxury spending power. I'm sure some of them that are on the fence on the pros and cons will be convinced if that loss of living standards con is mitigated.
Responsible people don’t procreate when they can’t afford children. Incentivizing such people to procreate is how you propagate quality citizens. This is probably the only way to counteract cratering birth rates without resorting to mass immigration, which doesn’t save the nation so much as replace it.
Again, your inability to grasp these simple concepts is a big part of the reason why people are so eager to have you as an opponent. It’s like beating up a small retarded child, except everyone understands why you’re doing it.
Except data shows the opposite of that. The number of children people have is inversely proportional to their wealth. I'm sure there's some people who would like to have an additional kid but are in financial straits, but most people either don't want to have kids regardless or are going to have kids regardless.
The problem is cultural, not financial. And giving more government money to women to have kids just increases their dependence on government.
That's true as a refutation of the post you're replying to. But people who understand their finances well enough to build up capital understand it well enough to know that children are a loss of discretionary and luxury spending power. I'm sure some of them that are on the fence on the pros and cons will be convinced if that loss of living standards con is mitigated.