6
Trump is trying to pay his way into a US baby boom. Experts say it won’t work
(www.theguardian.com)
I bet it will have the opposite effect.
this post was submitted on 06 May 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)
News
37914 readers
3094 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Wow, look at that! The price of strollers just went up 5k!
Replace strollers with basically anything related to birth or infants. 5k more to spend? 5k more to earn by big business selling wares.
This assumes the hospital doesn't determine that you seem to owe 5k more for that one out of network service provider they slipped in while you were distracted during birthing.
load more comments
(2 replies)
He "could" TOTALLY pay his way into a baby boom.
Step 1: Tax the rich. Lower the pressure on the lower and middle classes.
Step 2: Fix housing pricing so that a single hard-working person can afford a house, a car, and two kids without their partner having to work.
Step 3: Put some guardrails in place to stop the 2-3 companies that are buying up everything. Give medium and small business a chance to thrive without needing to be purchased by a giant company.
Step 4. Fix healthcare so that the family above gets 100% coverage for whatever happens. Pay for it with Step 1.
$5000? Does Trump still think it's the 1950s?
YEA! Thats basically the whole thing
Does Trump still think it's the 1950s?
Very likely, yes.
load more comments
(13 replies)
Give me one year paid family leave and Medicare for all, then we'll talk.
Maybe a grant for college as well, so I can get a degree so that I might actually be able to participate in society at large.
Serious question, have you considered the trades? It seems that jobs like electrician, plumber, auto mechanic, etc are a lot more secure than white collar jobs are right now, especially STEM. I know at least where I live (Philly exurbs) there's a shortage of electricians, with only 2 going into the trade as 5 retire. You get paid during your training and through the union you get healthcare and a pension. Something to think about.
I currently work assembling cables. Soldering, crimping, etc. I grew up building stuff, be it with my father at his business or at home. I don’t have no skills, but the skills I have don’t seem to be those that are in demand for high wages. Furthermore, as someone with Autism, I don’t do well in positions where I have to interact with the general public.
Seriously, a one time payment that low won’t cover shit. The climate doesn’t support families to begin with like your comment points out.
Also you can’t ask people to have kids and cut funding to Medicaid & be actively dismantling Department of Education.. It’s counterintuitive to say we support families and then not support families. Oh but here’s some money.
Trump: "Gotta save the government money"
Also Trump: "Just throw money at it, maybe it will fix itself"
load more comments
(1 replies)
It really makes no sense of why they want to increase the population.. when close to 5% are unemployed, as more people is ready to work soon.
The only thing I can think of is they’re trying to sink the usd more, make it a country like China that is like manufacturing, and many Americans lost a huge chunk of salary (like what happened during the Great Depression).
What you're missing is that, in ~10-12 years or so, those babies will have grown into a massive labor demographic. I wish this was hyperbole.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Add at least one zero to that, ideally two.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-the-cost-of-raising-a-child-by-u-s-state/
Multiply by 18 years, closer to the 500'000 figure.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I was told this was communism. And that this is bad.
Other countries have tried this, and it was a spectacular failure
His arrogance means that he's incapable of learning from others though, so good fucking luck
It's not a monetary issue, otherwise the middle class would have more kids than the poor, which isn't the case. It's simply that when given the right and the means to control how many kids they have, people choose to not have enough to renew the population.
Same pattern everywhere as women gain rights over their body and as contraceptives become available. Even in periods where there was a strong middle class, even in countries where socio-economic inequalities aren't as much an issue. Northern European countries and Quebec are some of the places with the most socio-economic equity and their birthrate is down the drain.
Turns out having kids is hard on a body, and I don’t blame any woman for not wanting to go through that.
Don’t quote me but I’m pretty sure research funding for women’s health is pathetic. More so when they found out that mice are given “👻sex hormones 👻”
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Down the drain but they are much lower in countries like Germany, Italy, and South Korea where there's massive Hausfrau + Breadwinner cultural expectations. Wealth and autonomy decreases birthrates - letting women have careers and children gives you less of a decrease.
Reduction in birthrate is a problem when you decide that infinitely growing the human population is how you get prosperity. If you think the birthrate should be 4 so there's always a lot more young people than pensioners.
Even with a birthrate lower than replacement it will take a very long time to significantly reduce any country's population.
1.46 in Germany
1.24 in Italy
1.32 in Finland
1.52 in Sweden
1.41 in Norway
1.55 in Denmark
1.38 in Quebec
So no, it's not much higher than Italy or Germany, Korea and Japan are special cases though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I thought Japans idea to subsidize alcohol was really the low point of this "We need more babies but also want to do the least amount possible to help" trend.
No amount of money will convince a meaningful amount of people to have kids if they can't reasonably believe their children will have a good life. Climate disasters, pollution, financial struggle, no access to property, crushing work life, unemployment, racism, unfair public policies, regressing social rights. All of these have to be addressed seriously before you can even start dreaming about reaching replacement birth rate. Fascist governments will go for an easier solution: enslave women.
Youre not gonna get the eugenics you want with this. The most likely audience is people with short-sighted need for cash, aka the working poor.
This cuts out the middle. This is what they want. You need a poor desperate sick and uneducated underclass to serve the super rich. You don't want anyone new in the club.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›