Given the negative world wide trend with birthrates, this should be a priority with every developed country even if it eventually comes at the expense of elderly socialized healthcare.

▲

seneca 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We would be even better off subsidizing parents staying home with their own children. Unfortunately most subsidies have proven ineffective at nudging up birth rates.

	▲	Avshalom 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		In an emotional development sort of way: maybe. Subsidized childcare however provides two jobs to the economy for the price of one and every single person worried about birth rates is either a white supremacist or the sort of emotionless economist that 2:1 is appealing to.
	▲	runako 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Those subsidies tend to be €X00 per month. I am not aware of any scheme that even attempted to replace 80% of forfeited wages. A subsidy that ends up with you having to move impoverish yourself is not going to have the desired effect.
	▲	mritterhoff 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Why would that be better? I think you'd miss out on economies of scale and end up paying more.
	▲	chaostheory 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		No, we wouldn’t. This subsidy directly benefits the survival rate of children while universal basic income is too broad. healthcare is more affordable than UBI.

▲

jameslk 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The arguments for more humans always sound like a Ponzi scheme to me: we need more people so we can support existing people. There’s plenty of downsides of having more people on the planet. And tech seems to be making it so there will be less and less a need for more people anyway, for better or worse

▲

esrauch 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There's potentially an argument for a ponzi scheme for one-ish more generation after which robots can do elder care and it's not necessary anymore.

Japan already bet on it and the robots haven't materialized, so maybe it's a bad strategy or maybe they bet too soon or maybe it will turn out they did it at the right time.

▲

chaostheory 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Every modern economy, socialism included, requires a growing population.

You’re right about the main benefit of population decline though. It gives Nature a needed break

▲

monero-xmr 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

It does not, because productivity can increase. You have a very common misunderstanding

	▲	trollbridge 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Doesn’t work if all of the productivity gains are captured by the wealthy owners of most of the capital though.