this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
810 points (98.3% liked)

People Twitter

8468 readers
1919 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] boreengreen@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

This has been tried elsewhere I believe. It ends up being a gift for those who can afford kids anyway, and does not incease the number of couples deciding to have children. A small gift for upper middle class.

Better wealth distribution however; that works.

[–] jimmux@programming.dev 4 points 6 months ago

It was done in Australia quite a few years back and widely mocked. There was a bit of a bump in "XBox babies", but it was mostly from the kind of people who don't understand that a one-off cash bonus spent on a bigger TV doesn't cover the costs of raising a kid.

That is Trump's demographic, but he's being very optimistic if he thinks these kids will be going to the polls while he's still alive.

[–] nathanjent@programming.dev 3 points 6 months ago

After he rolls this out he'll start pushing to drop the child tax credit arguing, "they already get so much investment up front. They're so greedy."

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (4 children)

5000 for diapers and clothes in the first (or any) year? How?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

That looks more like 50k, 5k can easily go in pants pockets.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

daycare costs $2k a month? are they training the kids to be astronauts?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 months ago (7 children)

Spending money on families hasn't been shown to help in any way whatsoever in increasing the birth rate. You have countries with close to free day care and generous monthly child subsidies with the same or even much lower fertility rate as countries that give just about nothing at all. I still support these kinds of policies just for the sake of helping families and their kids, but doing it for the only purpose of helping the fertility rate is futile. Honestly I don't think the government can do much at all to help the fertility rate. It's a cultural issue first and foremost. And the government can't (and I think shouldn't!) do much to change the culture of our society. You see people living in poverty with 9 kids just because they belong to a certain religious or ethnic group who values children above all else. That's the main issue. How important is children to the culture? Is it prestigious to be a dad or a mom? Is personal success measured in how you've built your family or is success measured in how much money you make?

collapsed inline media

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Ironically, comically, higher education leads to more lefty leaning politics with more programmes, and you know higher education correlates with reduced family size.

So - and it's probably minor - the easier it is there to have and raise and educate a child, the less likely its people need as much help.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] 4am@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

instead of DEPENDING on GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS new parents should be GRATEFUL someone is WILLING to be GENEROUS and provide them with such GOODWILL. America is WINNING again under PRESIDENT TRUMP

@BigMacHole@lemm.ee am I doing it right?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›