[O]ne year into President Trump’s second term, his administration has enacted few policies to reduce the rising cost of having children — frustrating some conservatives who expected Mr. Trump to prioritize their plans to boost the U.S. birthrate as it continues to drop....
Conservative advocates in touch with the White House said family policy issues were not a current priority for Mr. Trump’s domestic policy team, which has been hyper-focused on immigration.
Posts
55 comments:
The "administration" isn't the problem.
The problem is traitors in congress. The Republican party and congress people are worse than useless. They are Democrats pretending to be Republicans.
Everything everywhere all at once. Or be mad at Trump.
Reducing the cost of having children is a vast endeavor that ranges from tax policies that punish people for getting married to auto safety standards that punish people for having a third child to neighborhood watch programs that criminalize parents who let their kids play outside.
It's a generational project, not a one year or one administration project.
What is wanted is a child-friendly lifestyle (outside our big cities): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00U0C9HKW
I think on my next orgasm I will say, "MAFA."
Dependency ratio, dependency ratio, dependency ratio......
What Achilles said...
…a foregone conclusion it’s the economics that’s the reason, eh? Maybe the problem is the perception it’s a problem?
Scott Adams has passed.
I've read that the main cause of dropping birthrates is dropping marriage rates, and I think marriage already has tax benefits.
Expense is not the cause of low birthrates, so mitigating it is not the solution. (Though it still might be something to pursue.)
If everything's a priority, then by definition nothing is.
People respond to incentives, but we're essentially 70 years down the path of a longitudinal project to reduce the incentives for women to give birth and embrace motherhood generally. You can't flip a switch and make it 1956 again. Even with different incentives, you're still going to have a large cohort of women who think it's more important to play chicken with an armed federal agent while at the wheel of a Honda Pilot than it is to care for their children. A GoFundMe that may never help the child is no substitute for a dead mother.
" family policy issues were not a current priority for Mr. Trump’s domestic policy team ... "
Delegate. Delegate. Dance to the music. 🎶
Hmmm only halving energy costs, getting rid of millions of illegal aliens putting pressure schools, hospitals and housing. Stopping the runaway inflation. Stopping the dei and the mutilation of children. Only little things like that.
Drive feminism out of existence with ridicule. Feminism is devil worship. It’s the problem.
“ tim maguire said...
Everything everywhere all at once. Or be mad at Trump.”
Exactly it tires me no end.
One of the problems with young people having children is the sheer cost of living, or what some call the affordability crisis. It’s a real thing. To me, the biggest driver of the affordability crisis is the sheer size and expense of government at all levels. First, there’s the fully loaded cost of employing so many people including salaries, benefits, facilities, and equipment. On an average basis, it takes the full taxes of several taxpayers to pay for a single government employee, and there are millions of them. That’s bad enough, but when you factor in the taxes and regulations that drive up the costs of everything. Trump is trying to reduce the size of government, taxes, and regulations. Given time, that should reduce the affordability crisis. It has taken generations to build the mess we’re in. It’s unrealistic to expect major results in a year.
"hyper-focused on immigration." Dealing with immigration, along with reducing energy costs and lowering inflation, have the side effect of making it cheaper to have kids and for those kids to be able to find work as they get older.
Thank you Peachy.
What a slacker that Trump guy is! Hell, Obama caused the oceans to stop rising and won the Nobel in his first year in office.
Also if I'm not mistaken it takes about nine months before you get to count the results.
Hey, baby - wanna help America be more fertile?
Abort Obamacares. Sequester academic pricing. #HateLovesAbortion and other modes of Diversity (e.g. racism, sexism, ageism, etc).
CJinPA said...I think marriage already has tax benefits.
Marriage has tax benefits if one spouse works while the other spouse stays home. Marriage has a tax-penalty if both spouses work. But there are myriad other tax provisions that make it hard for a family to live on one income.
Welfare, on the other hand...
Keep women affordable, available, reusable, and taxable?
And the "burden" of evidence aborted, sequestered in sanctuary states.
Politically congruent? Maybe, baby, not.
Of course it did forget this is coming out of the mouth of the lying NYTimes. The people taking about this may understand that there are very large immediate items to handle, but the corrupt lying Nayatines won’t frame it honestly. I need to make sure I never forget where the lies are coming from.
Emigration reform to mitigate labor arbitrage, progressive prices, and collateral damage at both ends of the bridge and throughout.
Take anything you read in the NYT with a grain of salt, but as "things to hyperfocus on" go, immigration isn't a bad one now.
IMO it’s mostly the allure of feeedom from responsibility. Lower income people see it as freedom from their drudge life. Upper income people see it as freedom to live a hedonistic life. There is a reason that the more prosperous a country becomes the less children they have.
Well, my daughter and son-in-law are happy that their newest baby born this past fall will benefit from the $1000 "MAGA-baby" account set up by this administration. The frustration for them (and other young parents with more than one pre-school child) is that car design and child-safety seat requirements aren't friendly to larger families, so it is very hard to find a practical vehicle that fits multiple car seats.
Practitioners of critical theory must criticize everything, relentlessly, free from the burden of offering something creative and effective.
Apparently, Prez Trump is now saying that he will abolish the income tax. No word on whether he'll repeal 16A to keep it from coming back.
So what will that do to fertility? On the one hand, it will make everything cheaper so the cost of raising kids is less.
On the other, there will no longer be any tax benefit to having kids.
So abolish income tax does fertility go up, down, or steady?
John Henry
Shouldn't they wait nine months to see?
I've long believed other people's bratty children lowered the birthrate. Am I wrong?
When you get things done, people start thinking you can fix everything right now. People around the world are calling on Trump to fix anything that's unfair, because there is nobody else who will even try. That's unfortunate, because there are limits to what one man can do with millions fighting him at every turn, including these people's own leaders.
"Stalls Under Trump"? That, to me, implies that the effort was well underway under the "Biden" administration. Which I think is clearly untrue.
"I've long believed other people's bratty children lowered the birthrate. Am I wrong?"
Nope, that's one of my reasons. I've seen people do nothing wrong raising a child only to end up with an enemy. Same goes for wives, so I never had one of those either. I also know people with wonderful examples of both, but the cost of failure was always too high and the odds too close.
The left are obsessed with Abortion - and abortions, i hear - are up.
Moloch must feed, that is their commandment
"Conservative advocates in touch with the White House said family policy issues were not a current priority for Mr. Trump’s domestic policy team..."
Why can't they just ask someone in the Trump administration (With a real, verifiable name and title) to tell us their policy and what they're doing about it?
Why all the unnamed sources? I really doubt that this is a story that requires secrecy and protection of sources. It's just a story about the what the current administration might, or might not, be doing to encourage people to have more children. (But I will say that the implication of having to use unnamed sources does tend to make the current administration look more sinister.)
If the pussy-grabbing president can’t refertilize America there’s zero chance anyone else will.
I thought Trump delegated the fertility project to Musk. CC, JSM
"I've long believed other people's bratty children lowered the birthrate. Am I wrong?"
Yes, Ralph. If someone else's bratty kid is enough to cause you to forgo procreating, you weren't ever going to to.
Your occasional reminder that lefties always lie because the truth hurts so much:
the pussy-grabbing president
Once more for the slow kids in back, Trump did not DO that he said that women in show business are so nutty that they will " let you" do that. Such a statement is not an admission of action, it is a statement of feminine being. The pursuit of Trumpcrime took you idiots around the world and all you found was a crazy broad who claims she did it in the middle of a department store with him.
But please keep saying it because it makes you guys sound insane with your never-ending Trump hate cult. What in the world did you subtards occupy your minds with before he took up residence?
The problem with Kash for Kids reward schemes is obvious. It started with LBJ's ludicrous Great Society, the root cause of much of the social pathologies that has all but destroyed something America took for granted for so long, the black nuclear family. Johnson's anti-poverty initiatives rewarded women for producing bastards, and the trend has not abated nor will it ever cease and reverse as long as the financial incentive doesn't reward stable family life. One man and one woman united in marriage and committed to raising their own biological offspring. No more bastard grandchildren of bastards begetting another generation of bastards. That's the only goal worthy of pursuit. But how?
Here's my plan: Reward success. Success in this context must mean a married couple producing and rearing their natural offspring from birth to independent maturity or age 18. And what will be the reward? A 45% refund of all Federal taxes collected on joint returns starting in the filling year of the child's birth plus interest. If the couple produce and rear two children within a 22-year span, the refund will be 80% plus interest. A three children begotten and reared with a 23-year span nets a 100% refund plus interest. Crazy, you may scoff. Perhaps, but it has the virtue of making the shirkers and perverts foot the bill for the diligent and responsible. Of course, such a generous system must be rigorous policed. Get divorced before the kids are grown, then its bye-bye refund. Try to scam the system by remaining wed but live separately, then it's no soup for you! To get the money you must be Ward and June Cleaver with at least one Beaver to your credit. You open marriage hippies can pay and pay and pay while the rest of us laugh.
Surprise! NYT “reports” another Trump failure. Are NYT devotees so deluded that they don’t understand that Trump and his policies can’t be “all bad?” Let’s ask Howard, Kak and RJ, shall we.
“I’ve long believed other people's bratty children lowered the birthrate. Am I wrong?“
Well, other people’s bratty daughters are the ones getting pregnant….CC, JSM
I have another plan which I call the Baby Daddy Gulag. I won't waste your time outlining it, your imagination will suffice, but it boils down to keep it zipped or become a zek. The honest taxpayer should not financing your hobby.
Stupid typo alert: A three children begotten and reared with a 23-year span nets a 100% refund plus interest.
I started to write A third child... then changed my mind but forgot to property edit. I blame Blogger for my imperfections, mainly because Blogger is a glutton for punishment.
Wait. The NYT has discovered the replacement rate and the importance of having kids?
Earnest Prole said...
If the pussy-grabbing president can’t refertilize America there’s zero chance anyone else will.
Trump made an obviously true statement about how women make decisions. Not about what he did. That is why intelligent people weren’t particularly concerned about that stupid recording.
You managed to fit Dishonesty and stupidity in a small little post.
We are used to that from you though.
Typical Leftist trope: Dems won't do anything but when a Repub does something, it is not good enough
Trump made an obviously true statement about how women make decisions. Not about what he did.
You doth protest a touch too much. There’s nothing wrong with pussy grabbing as long as the woman lets you.
And I’m pretty sure you’re the type of guy who believes if Trump can’t do it, it’s not humanly possible. So when I say if Trump can’t refertilize America, no one can, you and I should be in violent agreement.
"Success in this context must mean a married couple producing and rearing their natural offspring from birth to independent maturity or age 18."
The government can't even hand out sandwiches without billion dollar fraud, there's no way a program running for 18 years won't end up as an enormous toilet to flush dollars down.
"The Quest to ‘Make America Fertile Again’ Stalls Under Trump."
The NYT is f*cked up as a three peckerd goat.
Mason G. should consider at the hundreds of billions that have been unwisely, but completely lawfully, transferred to unmarried mothers over the last 60 year, and then rethink his 4:34 PM comment.
"unwisely, but completely lawfully"
Like I said, flushed down the toilet. Lawfully or not, the result is far too often the same either way.
Quality matters more than quantity. Another 30 million savages is not gonna make the USA a better place.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.