Current Affairs and Politics

Hockeynomics 101 - The Whiny Welfare Western World

Reply
Page 2 of 2
  Tools
EeeeeeeJ +

Registered User

Joined
May '10
Times thanked
< 19
Posts
330
I think that job security is an issue that will affect whether a couple decide to have children at a particular point in their lives. Keeping flexible positions open for parents moving back into the workforce will be more important than bolstering the income of those who can get back in easily. Paying parents extra incentive money to work will put them further ahead but won't find extra childcare placements, unless they are then wealthy enough to afford a nanny.

Many of the large families of past generations did not have the luxury of a middle class income.

Having children is unlikely to have worked as a substitute for welfare, except maybe in old age. In past generations, many would have died in infancy or before reaching working age.
claude glass +

Registered User

claude glass's Avatar
Joined
Jun '10
Times thanked
< 757
Posts
4,154

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abziie View Post

On the point of middle class women/families not having children, imo there are bigger issues at play and government maternity leave addresses none of it. The transitory nature of employment is probably the biggest issue. There is less security in the employment sector, plus a middle class income is just not enough to sustain a large family.

The interesting thing is that lower fertility rates in the western world are probably partly due to the welfare state. Once upon a time children were an insurance policy.

I have to agree.
Page 2 of 2
Reply

« Previous Thread Next Thread »

Posting Rules

+
    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts