| ▲ | modo_mario 3 hours ago | |||||||
So basically they probably don't lose their wage for the duration of their absence but it's likely still a net negative to them (financially aside from the physical and time burdens) and in line with societal expectations created over decades? I say crank up the numbers then. Give them a bigger tax credit too. Hold it long enough for societal expectations to slowly adjust. | ||||||||
| ▲ | vidarh an hour ago | parent [-] | |||||||
The issue is how many places can afford that. Norway can afford what it does now in large part because of an enormous sovereign wealth fund that owns more than a percent of all publicly listed companies by market cap worldwide, on top of other assets. Despite that, Norway also has some of the higher tax levels. Elsewhere even reaching Norwegian benefits levels would involve an extremely sharp tax rise or very significant priority changes. Unless we find other means of driving up the fertility rate, it's not clear most places will stomach the financial adjustments it will take. | ||||||||
| ||||||||