Subsidies to get more children? 28 replies

Please wait...

Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#1 12 years ago

Many western countries are worried about the increasing need for a new workforce. Immigration & labour laws are made less strict to allow foreign workers to fill this gap, but some people argue that what they need is more children and that the government should help in this.

What do you think, should the government hand out child benefits or is it unnecessary government interference? Is it a good idea in principle, but just too costly to implement?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#2 12 years ago

You said to “get” children. Do you mean to acquire, or to produce? Or both? As it is I believe if you foster a child, you receive some financial benefits if the child is a differing ethnicity. I know of several white families who have taken in colored children and receives quite a monthly sum for doing so. As for typical run of the mill adoptions, I doubt they receive any compensation. I think that aspect should be addressed, and switched to equally beneficial ratio’s for children of all colors, not just specific’s. As for broad sweeping “have kids and we’ll pay or reimburse you for it“, no I don’t think that’s a good idea. People should want to have kids for the kids, not the financial benefits. You see this in welfare families. Some of which have lived entire generations on it. The mentality of it is this “It’s there, all I have to do is pop out some kids and I don’t have to work anymore.” I think such a system would only enable future laziness and is generally a bad idea. Adjust the system sure, reinvent it or add to it, no.




Pethegreat VIP Member

Lord of the Peach

70 XP

19th April 2004

0 Uploads

20,892 Posts

0 Threads

#3 12 years ago

I know in the US we have the child tax credit. I think it is around $600 for every kid under 18.

I know there is no problem with people having too few kids in the US. Most families have 2 or more kids. I know this is more of a problem in europe where it is normal for families to either have none or only one kid.

We don't need to give a subsidy for people to have kids because of the reasons sed listed. The goverment can campaign for people to have more kids though.




Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#4 12 years ago
SedistixYou said to “get” children. Do you mean to acquire, or to produce? Or both?

Produce.

As for broad sweeping “have kids and we’ll pay or reimburse you for it“, no I don’t think that’s a good idea. People should want to have kids for the kids, not the financial benefits. You see this in welfare families. Some of which have lived entire generations on it. The mentality of it is this “It’s there, all I have to do is pop out some kids and I don’t have to work anymore.” I think such a system would only enable future laziness and is generally a bad idea.

I don't think that's a major issue, at least not here. Raising children is expensive thing to do and carrying it in the stomach & giving birth takes some will power, not to mention mother's natural instinct of taking care. If you have to "produce" children to get more money, then you're already in a big mess and even mentally unstable. Besides, I don't think it even brings that much money to live off from it. Child benefit only makes getting children more easier and takes off the financial issue from the decision.

Personally, I have a mixed opinion about child benefit. It increases people's wants to have children and thus helps the workforce issue in a long term but on the other hand, we already have enough people in the world. To put it short, my answer is "I don't know".




WarHawk109

From the Austrian School

50 XP

21st July 2003

0 Uploads

2,926 Posts

0 Threads

#5 12 years ago

tax cuts yes, subsidies never.




Chris

I pretend I'm cooler than AzH

50 XP

20th February 2006

0 Uploads

5,663 Posts

0 Threads

#6 12 years ago

Surely subsidies would be not worth it financially.




GuineaPig

All my base are belong to n0e

50 XP

14th February 2004

0 Uploads

505 Posts

0 Threads

#7 12 years ago
SedistixYou said to “get” children. Do you mean to acquire, or to produce? Or both? As it is I believe if you foster a child, you receive some financial benefits if the child is a differing ethnicity. I know of several white families who have taken in colored children and receives quite a monthly sum for doing so. As for typical run of the mill adoptions, I doubt they receive any compensation. I think that aspect should be addressed, and switched to equally beneficial ratio’s for children of all colors, not just specific’s. As for broad sweeping “have kids and we’ll pay or reimburse you for it“, no I don’t think that’s a good idea. People should want to have kids for the kids, not the financial benefits. You see this in welfare families. Some of which have lived entire generations on it. The mentality of it is this “It’s there, all I have to do is pop out some kids and I don’t have to work anymore.” I think such a system would only enable future laziness and is generally a bad idea. Adjust the system sure, reinvent it or add to it, no.

What? How much do you think people would get per child? $30,000 a year?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#8 12 years ago
GuineaPigWhat? How much do you think people would get per child? $30,000 a year?

I would like to see familes getting 1200 a month for a kid or two to get much, much less, and the payments should be equal all around, not based on ethnicities.




czech speacial forces

I pretend I'm cooler than AzH

50 XP

3rd September 2005

0 Uploads

3,369 Posts

0 Threads

#9 12 years ago
RelanderMany western countries are worried about the increasing need for a new workforce. Immigration & labour laws are made less strict to allow foreign workers to fill this gap, but some people argue that what they need is more children and that the government should help in this. What do you think, should the government hand out child benefits or is it unnecessary government interference? Is it a good idea in principle, but just too costly to implement?

we need people in rich countrys to have more kids. we have too many people from other countrys coming and creating problems. people in mexico have 6 kids they cant take care of yet americans have like 2 kids which they can easily take care of, same in africa. immigrants are usually very uneducated (from mexico, africa) and create problems because they speak a different language and have a different culture and do not integrate.




masked_marsoe VIP Member

Heaven's gonna burn your eyes

50 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

8,063 Posts

0 Threads

#10 12 years ago
we need people in rich countrys to have more kids. we have too many people from other countrys coming and creating problems.

If you want more workers, then it's much more cost effective to use migrants than to grow your own. Of course, then you get race problems, massive inequalities, and a subhuman underclass.

But seeing as all Western nations already have unemployment, why is there a need for even more workers?