|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 13, 2011 19:28:12 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by mak2 on Oct 3, 2011 19:40:41 GMT 1
Population 6 billion plus and increasing.
Some reprogramming is needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Oct 3, 2011 20:41:56 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 10, 2011 13:12:22 GMT 1
"Some reprogramming is needed".
Perhaps that could be achieved via financial and other incentives for not breeding at all or only having one child?
What sort of incentives?
Higher pension on retirement? Waiver of university fees? Lower tax rate?
|
|
|
|
Post by mak2 on Oct 14, 2011 21:04:42 GMT 1
No need for incentives to have fewer children.
Politicians just need to stop buying the votes of parents by massively subsidising them.
It would help with the deficit, as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 19, 2011 15:40:18 GMT 1
I disagree mak, I think the state has to have a population policy and it has to mildly reward appropriate behaviour and not subsidise inappropriate behaviour. I have already proposed the idea that only the first child should get child benefit. After that, with any subsequent births, that benefit should be withdrawn altogether. The result would be that those who are sensible get the one child benefit the rest pay for their family size preferences wholly from their own pocket.
What you are suggesting is no child benefit at all. That wouldn't bother me or a lot of the older generation at all because back at the beginning of the post war Welfare State when I was born, 1947 (I was on only child) there was NO child benefit until you had TWO children - the first did not qualify. So back then the cash incentive was entirely the other way round from what I propose. Back then the parents of just one child got nowt!
But I think a policy of encouraging a certain proportion of people (not just the involuntarily childless) not to breed at all deserves a prominent place in the state's pantheon of social policy. It needs to be recognised that these people have an important role to play as mentors etc or adoptive parents and I think voluntarily renouncing breeding deserves a conspicuous reward for being public spirited and pour encourager les autres. This could be a waiver of university fees &/or maintenance grant, higher rate of pension etc.
What's wrong with policies that reflect the fact that you can't have it all? You can have one thing OR the other from the state, but not both. This sort of attitude seem to missing in the "I want it all" , "everyone is entitled to everything" philosophy of the state as provider and parent.
|
|
