Cashing in on Cradles: A Look at Trump's Proposed "Baby Bonus"
Trump's proposed "baby bucks" plan is questionably effective
Elon Musk sounds the alarm, claiming a demographic crisis more perilous than climate change. US Vice President JD Vance warns of the dissolution of the American family, and now, former President Donald Trump floats a $5,000 "baby bonus" to counter America's tumbling birthrates. The alarm bells don't ring falsely - over the past decade, Americas birth rate dived 20%. Today, the typical woman has a paltry 1.6 children, a stark contrast to the Baby Boom's average of three. Yet, criticism of the US President's proposal is deafening. Critics argue the government should prioritize addressing America's lack of paid family leave and affordable childcare before doling out such handouts. But the bone of contention lies not in this, but in the fact that financial incentives, regardless of nation, have largely yielded failure.
Worldwide, every wealthy country, save Israel, now finds itself below the 2.1 replacement level necessary for population sustainability. A disquieting forecast unfolds: by 2050, China's workforce will contract by 25%, while Italy and Japan are predicted to lose over a third of their populations within 80 years. Trump's scheme isn't novel – Italy and Greece have experimented with per-child payments, while Russia has been testing this approach since 2007 and now offers a whopping $7,000 per child. Hungary even forgives $30,000 marriage loans for couples that produce three children. Yet, experience worldwide shows that such cash incentives have little effect on the issue. The same goes for countries that have invested heavily in childcare and parental leave, or countries that have adopted a plethora of family-related initiatives, like Taiwan, which has splurged $3 billion in these efforts. Even the family-friendly Nordic nations have failed to reverse their fertility declines.
Rather, disincentives – be it war or societal shifts – seem to exert a more profound impact. During the Vietnam War draft, US birth rates escalated because those with children were exempt, proving a, albeit, violent incentive. However, sending people to war isn't an ideal strategy today. The bigger and more lasting change, though, is women.
Since the 60s, birth rates have plummeted in tandem with progress in women's rights, improved access to contraceptives, the corrosion of religious conformity, and the expansion of educational and professional opportunities for women. Modern pro-natalists, however, view this advancement as the root of the problem. Figures like JD Vance lambast the "childless left," while China coins the term "leftover women" to chastise those who trade careers for babies. But while these claims may hold some sway, they neglect the true cause.
It's not college-educated women who are responsible for the sharpest fertility declines – their birth rates remain fairly consistent. The steepest drops are among working-class women, who delay motherhood significantly. In 1994, the typical first-time mother without a degree in the US was 20-years-old; currently, two-thirds of non-graduate women in their 20s remain childless. This trend stems not just from education but from the collapse of stable blue-collar employment and family structures.
From Rite of Passage to Sacrifice of Freedom
There's also a broader cultural shift. In today's hyper-individualistic society, parenthood is seen less as a rite of passage and more as a sacrifice of personal freedom and financial security. Governments will have a hard time convincing those who don't desire children to change their minds. Instead, it would be wiser to focus on persuading those with one child to have another. Surveys reveal that many Americans desire more children than they have. In 2018, a quarter confessed to having or planning to have fewer than they desired – with 64% blaming exorbitant childcare costs.
But the root issue isn't just the cost of early parenthood. Yes, childcare fees are high, but the more intractable problem is stagnant wages and exorbitant housing costs, which have redefined adulthood in the 21st century towards greater dependency on parents and a delayed family life. Potential parents now perceive children as a 30-year financial project with the most expensive years occurring post-age 18. The proliferation of the "Hotel of Mum and Dad" – young adults living with their parents – hits working-class families the hardest. Previously, offspring were a net gain for the household; now, they serve as a net drain.
This predicament has been brewing since the 70s – long before Millennials or Gen Z could be held accountable. However, the demographic crisis is now upon us, as rising life expectancy and low birth rates push our societies into chaos. An attempt to return to the Baby Boom era of 1940s is a futile endeavor – that era was a historical anomaly. The modern reality is a society with fewer children, an ever-growing aging population, stagnant growth, extended working years, immigration, and a drastically revamped economic model.
If governments truly aim to combat shrinking birth rates, they must abandon quick-fixes and confront the new reality honestly. The former First Lady and author of "Inheritocracy: The Bank of Mum and Dad," Eliza Filby, calls for comprehensive support systems, including accessible childcare, robust social welfare, and work-life balance policies. She also advocates for tackling societal and gender equality issues and revising economic incentives with a holistic approach. By combining these strategies, governments can create a more supportive environment for families, potentially leading to sustainable demographic outcomes.
- Elon Musk and US Vice President JD Vance share concerns about America's falling birthrates, with Musk likening it to a looming crisis similar to climate change.
- President Trump proposes a $5,000 "baby bonus" to address the issue, but critics argue that the government should prioritize paid family leave and affordable childcare instead.
- Worldwide, countries have tried various methods to boost birthrates, such as per-child payments and extensive investments in childcare and parental leave, but with little success.
- It's not women with higher education who are responsible for the sharpest fertility declines, but working-class women who delay motherhood significantly.
- In modern society, parenthood is often seen as a sacrifice of personal freedom and financial security, making it difficult to convince those without a desire for children to change their minds.
- To combat shrinking birth rates, governments should focus on creating more supportive environments for families, according to some experts, by implementing comprehensive support systems, work-life balance policies, and addressing societal and gender equality issues.
- The former First Lady, Eliza Filby, suggests a holistic approach that includes accessible childcare, robust social welfare, and revised economic incentives for long-term sustainable demographic outcomes.
