Posted on 08/06/2008 1:42:02 PM PDT by traumer
FORGET those plans to have a third child for the country because further increases in the birth rate could harm the economy, the nation's productivity watchdog has warned.
A major analysis of the nation's increasing fertility rate said it was at its highest level for 25 years - but the Productivity Commission yesterday warned further increases may aggravate rather than solve the problem of the ageing of the population.
This is because it will shift women out of the workforce while they care for babies, depressing labour supply and reducing the taxation base as our population ages, the Daily Telegraph reported.
The small number of extra babies born would make little difference to the rate of population ageing, the commission said.
And the women having the babies would be exacerbating the financial impacts on the government of the ageing of the population because the tax breaks offered to parents to have children occur up front, while the cost savings of a bigger working population and bigger tax base from extra children are deferred until they are of working age.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
Isn’t socialism grand.
Wagglebee I think this story be in your pro life list
It's always about the revenue...
We need to give the money to those poor, underprivileged SAHM on welfare, doncha know....after all, their vote counts as much as yours, slave...
Have some cheese with that whine!!! Argh!!
It would be much BETTER for our economy if there were more babies and moms staying home. The government will have to adjust. This country is FOR the people, not FOR the government.
Demographics decides the victor.
Funny how governments stand behind a woman’s right to choose when it comes to abortion, but not when it comes to a woman’s right to choose to have more children.
Idiots! Soon the gov. won’t even HAVE a tax base if everyone raises one child or none at all.
This is insanity. Sure, women out of the workforce might affect labor availability, but raising those babies costs money that is spent in the economy—clothes, medical, food, etc. I’ve never heard of anything so stupid in my life.
When these people look at you, they see an annuity, not a person.
A drag in the immediate term perhaps, as they consume a lot of resources and produce nothing. But what would happen to the economy in the long term if everybody stopped having kids?
Well, it’s about the revenue,
AND
the destruction of the traditional family, of course.
Freerider ping?
Why don’t the members of the Productivity Commission put their money where their mouths are.
What will fill the void? Starts with an "I"...
Australian government busybody should study the cost and carbon footprint of faulty government studies.
This might be the stupidest thing I've ever read.
Damn morons!
I think Japan will show us in 20-30 years.
YES! Nanny government needs to get on the stick and make it mandatory that all children are born already 16 years old and ready to work (pay).
YES! Nanny government needs to get on the stick and make it mandatory that all children are born already 16 years old and ready to work (pay).
As if your sole purpose for existing is to make money for the government to take !
Up theirs !
Have lots of children, families are the only thing in life really worth having.
Note that this analysis assumes that the worth of a person in society is completely summed up by the amount of tax revenue they pay. The purpose of the individual, in this analysis, is to support the state, and nothing more.
This is an accurate reflection of what the modern socialistic state thinks of the citizens.
Consider your children to be arrows in your quiver.
Psa 127:3-5
The other problem is that liberals don't want new jobs and apartments to be created because it will spoil the environment. So now we have a surplus population with no place to go.
They should replace the title, Democrats are a drag on the economy. That would sound more logical.
the article is about australia’s economy.
“...it’s about the destruction of the traditional family, of course.”
_________________________________
Of course....(sigh)
With few exceptions, those having more than two or three children are the very poor who are not working anyway.....
I was thinking about the post-feminist effect of women in the work force. It would seem to me that the overall effect has been to depress wages for families making it generally harder to maintain two parent families. Economic stability is not just based on the ability to find cheap labor and provide a tax base. That is the flaw of socialism. It is not about increasing quality of life it is about increasing the available funds to the growing bureaucracy and those who control the bureaucracy. Any bureaucrat that sees growing his or her tax base as their function should be dealt with harshly.
I have four kids and I consider it my finger to the modern world to have even more. I’ll make as much money and have as many kids as I want. My wife stays home and home schools not because she has to but because we together decided it was better for the kids. I’ll teach each of those kids how to shoot and how to be skeptical of those who want to raise taxes and grow government. Fighting the collective should be the badge of honor for every red blooded conservative. We do not have to accept the idiocy of those who’d have families fatherless and fathers emasculated. The world does not have to be the way it is becoming. Weakness is not a virtue. Being a victim is not a blessing deserving of compensation from those who did not victimize.
nowhere in the article does it say people should stop having kids.
Well yeah that explains it but I thought Australia and other "enlightened" countries were going into decline. So what's with that?
More people need to recognize this and CALL THE LIBS ON IT.
The thing that makes me the maddest about the whole con/lib and culture war is our capitulation to fighting it on their terms -
letting them fight their battle under cover without exposing what they are trying to do.
This allows them to say that THEY are in the “neutral” position while WE are the “extremists”.
But jihad babies from Muslim polygamists in the UK would still be OK?
A dad after my own heart.
Handshakes to you, brother.
Children are a complete waste of time. After you start on them they aren’t doing anything useful for at least 18 years. Sure at around ten years they can check your tire pressure, but even then they aren’t all that useful because they are more likely to deflate your tires and waste gas than to check it properly. < /sarcasm>
FreeRider Ping?
-Productivity Commission, 2008
"Jews a drag on the economy"
- Wannsee Conference, 1942
I wonder if the Aussies might have a final solution in mind.
It says kids are a drag on the economy. My point of contention is that NOT having kids is a BIGGER drag on the economy, at least long-term.
What a load of tripe. I am willing to bet the study was conducted by people either too repulsive or too socially inept to procreate.
FREERIDER PING!!!!
White Christians having that third child (or more) gets in the way of the Muslim demographic takeover the Left seems to yearn for. Why would that be? After all, Muslims are seemingly against most liberal causes (like equal rights for women & gays). The answer, quite simply, is that Muslims are more easily led than freethinking peoples. If an Imam can convince someone to be a suicide bomber, convincing them to pay higher taxes should be a piece of cake.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
This is really amazing, considering that during some of the most prosperous decades in American history, most women *never* entered the work force and the average family had more children than it does today.
Oh and where’s the study showing the much larger carbon footprint for a woman in the labor force than being home with her children? Where are the libs with that info? (crickets chirping...)
I wouldn’t say *few* exceptions. I know a fair number of families with more than 3 kids and they’re all hard working productive members of society.
That being said, the government needs to stop paying welfare for babies once the women get past one. Cut off the cash flow and you’ll see the number of welfare babies drop like a rock.
I try to be charitable,but I guess this is one of those times when my sense charity is failing.
What a %^$#ing idiot.
Japan? Look at Italy today, and the rest of EU.
Sure - here is one: http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1105.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.