Link from the economist on this issue:
Reader comment on: Steve Forbes on 2016
Submitted by Lyle (United States), Jul 28, 2015 10:22
The article suggests that subsidized child care is the best way to raise the birth rate, over child allowances (which is what the Child Tax credit really is). Here is one quote from the article that points out the economic disadvantage children cause: "The trouble with babies is that costs and benefits are misaligned. Couples must pay for them directly, in the form of clothing, extra bedrooms and school fees, as well as indirectly, by cutting back on paid work to look after the little horrors. In Europe a single child is reckoned to cost 20-30% of household income. Parents get scant economic return on this investment. Their children might help them in their dotage, but are rarely forced to do so by law in the way that parents must care for their children. Some of the fruits of their children's labour, which they might reap, are instead taken in taxes."
Another quote that suggests that big cities and urban life also push folks not to have children
"The Japanese government is convinced that big cities are actually causing infertility, and wants to prevent young people from moving to them. Economically, that is loopy: people are more productive in big cities. But if the prescription is wrong, the analysis might not be."
Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.
Comment on this item