• Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Desperation?

    People don’t want to have kids. I wonder why. Remember the laying flat movement and the 996 culture.

    I wonder why.

    If only there was an actual solution to this LOLOL…

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The truth is that the strength of a democracy has little relation to the birth rate. If you live in the US, for example, you only live in a democracy if your income is in the top 10%. This has actually been studied. The opinions of the poorest 90% of the population have absolutely zero bearing on what government policy is implemented.

        The US and China actually have similar levels of democracy. China forms all its policies from the CCP, an organization of about 100 million people. The share of the population in China that has any impact on policy is actually quite similar to the share that does the same in the US.

        • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          While you are correct, taking a piss poor example of democracy against another piss poor example of democracy doesn’t really explain anything. I said authoritarian regime, I stand by that.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s true. The very poor people I’ve known in the US have believed that “the system is rigged” and they have little freedom and no voice. They believe they are exploited by powers far beyond their ability to challenge and the last way any of it would ever change is through voting, which they see as an empty, farcical gesture.

  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 months ago

    Good. Can’t wait to beat this drum to hopefully shame the less than useless US congress to do ANYTHING.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    I find it funny to watch these countries having issues with people not wanting to have babies.

    There are core reasons behind this, one large one being “raising a child is expensive and all the world’s money is being sucked up by billionaires, there is nothing left for children”. Another one (for certain countries like Japan and South Korea) is the “work 80 hours a week and never see that family you’re supposed to raise”

    And governments go like “sooooo, if we cover child birth, you’re good, right? What? Still nothing? We tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas, how oh how can we solve this?”

    Fuck the rich, end the rich. That will get births back to a healthy 2.1

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      officials have already expanded maternity leave benefits and housing subsidies to encourage couples to have more children.

      Seems like they’re trying multiple things. Meanwhile we’re over here trying to say middle school kids can be paid less than minimum wage, operate dangerous machinery and work late on school nights. If you can’t afford kids, might as well exploit them

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    They don’t have universal healthcare?

    Also DYK China now has a 3 child policy. Maximum, that is.

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    And then they help pay the roughly $15,000 usd per yr per child it costs to raise a child right?

    Becauae it would be really bad if China helped pay for a ton of kids to be born that can’t be provided for.

      • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It’s the planet’s own fault for allowing life in the first place

        I mean there is only one planet we know of that has life, why shouldn’t it be infested with it

    • rollerbang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      I agree with this in the basis of the thought. But depending on the social security in various countries there are groups that abuse this help. So I’m hoping that loopholes are plugged at the same time.

      • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        That kind of thinking is what stops the US from implementing any kind of decent social programs. If your first concern is ppl taking advantage of it you’re not really concerned with helping ppl

        • njordomir@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, when I support a social program, it’s with the knowledge and acceptance that some abuse will occur. It’s just that I think, despite the abuse, the upside is still a superior outcome to not doing it at all. Maybe one day we’ll rebuild the cultural fabric to the point where people don’t feel so desperate they immediately exploit any crack in the system regardless of the risks or long-term outcomes. With changes in culture and wealth distribution worldwide, I believe global prosperity is absolutely possible.

          I can’t imagine welfare of any kind is more abused than the process by which the US government farms things out to private companies. If the poor are suckling at the teet of the welfare cow, then private industry is the wolf ripping it’s head off. Just look at the clusters of contractors that show up like flies on shit any time the money faucet is opened.

          Yeah, I want my neighbors to have heat in the winter, food when they lose their job, and universal childcare. If I have to pay a few extra bucks a year for that it’s better than pouring it into the rest of the money-holes in Washington DC.

          OP mentions being from another country. I don’t have a ton of experience with countries commonly regarded as corrupt, though I did go to Nigeria once; money flows >>differently<< there. But there’s also a stronger social fabric. I don’t know if I could vote for any tax when there is suck a blatant track record of shady dealings (though it’s arguable we’ve all been doing that). It was fascinating and I hope to go back some day.

        • rollerbang@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not from the US… Not by far. Where I’m from many people abuse the system by having an exorbitant amount of children (10+), get free kindergarten care, extra money, don’t work, don’t contribute to society, steal, cause issues, etc.

    • poopkins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      That seems somewhat unfair towards people with other interests who aren’t being subsidized.

      • ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        China is thinking long-term and practical. If they lose their young work-force it won’t matter what those “other people” are doing or not.

        Someone in China told me once that one of the biggest differences between China and Europe/USA is that in the west we think in terms of years or decades. In China they are making plans for the next several centuries.

        This isn’t a glowing endorsement of the heinous shit China has done, but it should at least make you understand that this isn’t a social welfare program designed to help families as much as the first of many measures to fight the forces that are eroding the power and production capability of other countries. If you want to see how bad it can get, look into what the future holds for South Korea.

  • OccamsRazer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Sweden has some of the best policies for having kids: doesn’t cost anything, a year of maternity AND paternity leave for each kid you have, plus they straight up give you money. Birth rate is 1.45.

  • raviiishing@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    The solution is to pay workers enough so that the government doesn’t need to shift the burden of paying for children to those who don’t even have any.

    As always, the money needs to come from the people at the top. As always, privatize the gains and socialize the losses.

    • webadict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      That doesn’t make any sense.

      Paying workers more is fine, but you’re saying that the costs for reproduction should come from parents, and then you’re saying they should come from the rich. People without children should contribute to childcare costs, and they are incentivized to do so, too, because children are important to pretty much everything. By having the government fund childcare, the rich do contribute more.

      Whatever you said is inconsistent.

      • pachrist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t know, it makes a lot of sense, in an asinine way. Many people are self-centered and incredibly selfish. Of course we all benefit from living in a world where children are happy, fed, cared for, and well adjusted. But for folks without kids, it’s usually indirect, rather than direct benefits, making it harder to quantify.

        But, their property taxes that fund schools are easy to quantify, so the selfish get grumpy about it.

        It’s like not wanting your tax dollars to fund cancer research, because you don’t have cancer. It makes no sense, until you remember the person talking is a selfish dunce.

    • ameancow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The solution is to pay workers enough so that the government doesn’t need to shift the burden of paying for children to those who don’t even have any.

      I know you’re banned, and this comment tells me a lot about why that probably happened without me having to dig through the mod history.

      This is some pro-capitalism slop even if you think it’s so far left it has tank treads. This is a surefire tactic to put a nation’s healthcare in the same situation the US is in now. Without a total reform of the entire economic foundation of a country, you are simply NOT fucking getting a government who will tax their wealthy to keep up with whatever the healthcare system is charging for their procedures.

      This is why healthcare is more complicated than lopping off the heads of the elites and spreading that money. We have to make systems that ensure no single person or institution is left on the hook for figuring out what to charge or pay.

      edit: the comment gets worse the more I reread it.

      doesn’t need to shift the burden of paying for children to those who don’t even have any

      This is the very fundamental principle of having healthcare, whether it’s private or public, it’s very expensive and resource-intensive to keep people broadly alive and healthy, you absolutely cannot start deciding who gets this funding and who doesn’t deserve it if you want a fair system, and it feels like everyone (people like you) really get bent out of shape about this right up until YOU are the special case who needs society to pool our resources to help you with your stupid problem. Then suddenly the “social contract” that made you so mad previously seems like a pretty good idea. FFS I am so fed up with narrow-minded children weighing in on shit they have no understanding of.

    • KernelTale@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Everyone has been born so everyone should have had a free birth. I do agree that workers need better pay but certain expenses should be handled by the government only. It’s not gonna properly optimize itself by supply and demand when we as a society benefit in more children.