Replies

"It has to be treated as a credible profession."

As it used to be? I'm not comfortable with the state assigning a financial amount to having or raising children. That's a slippery slope.

As it used to be? I'm not comfortable with the state assigning a financial amount to having or raising children. That's a slippery slope.

Heck, it's that way now in the US! Look at the Infertility Fee--where a couple who can't have children gets taxed more than the same couple with identical income who has a child.

Even many people who claim to be "conservative" have bought into the idea that it's okay to have the government penalize people with fees/higher taxes if they don't do what the government wants, by calling them "tax credits" or "deductions" if you do what Nanny says.

"As it used to be?"

...and still is, at least to most people on this site (although maybe not to Dems and the MSM). The problem is that there is no pay for the work. It just can't compete now, given the other options available to women. Sure there are still families having children, but not as many, and not nearly enough (at least in Europe and free Asia).

"I'm not comfortable with the state assigning a financial amount to having or raising children. That's a slippery slope."

2 things - we already give some money in tax credits and deductions, and I'm sure that it is having some marginal effect in this country. And we are fortunate in having a lot of immigrant and Christian families that still look at children as a blessing.
But EVERY single advanced country is now depopulating their primary culture, some like Japan and Italy, so fast that they will be literally running out of people by the end of the century (assuming, in the case of Italy, that the majority Muzzies haven't already dispensed with the ethnic Italians by then). No advanced society has solved this problem, and now even Mexico and Latin America are starting to turn the corner on population.
The only societies that seem to be able to withstand this trend are Muslim, where they essentially keep their wives locked up at home, with the assignment of producing and raising children - which is not much different than Western cultures were until about 35 years ago - which is about when we stopped having kids. The connection - when women work they don't have kids. The solution, either send women back to the kitchen (which I don't advocate, being the nice guy that I am), or make child rearing competitive, financially. The level of incentives that we have now is a joke. When you get into the $5,000 to $10,000 per year, per child, range, you will encourage people to have kids.

The survival of a just society has to supersede all other priorities, for if the society dies out, what good is it. That is the reason why treason is the only crime called out with the death penalty in the US Constitution. The slippery slope is being on a downward population curve - trying to get off of it, while still maintaining freedome and justice is fine - at least to me.

If anyone has a better idea, it's time to get it implemented (it may even be too late).

I'm not comfortable with the state assigning a financial amount to having or raising children. That's a slippery slope.

Our tax system provides incentives to have and raise children.