Kanye West's proposal to subsidize childbirth.

[AspieAlly613]

According to this story from last week, Kanye West proposed giving $1,000,000 to everyone that has a baby.

 

While I think that number should be lower (maybe more like $10,000 per year for up to 26 years, probably more than that for the first year), that's just a matter of haggling over the price.  I agree with the general sentiment and plan.

 

Here are the reasons behind by support of the idea:

 

1)  abortion:  I think this was Kanye West's main motivation, so I should address it first.  In the minds of a lot of people, abortion is a great ethical wrong.  Some of those people are then faced with the difficult decision between betraying their ethics and financial instability.  This would ease that problem without infringing on a woman's right to choose.

 

2)  expense of childrearing:  There have been significant complaints about the lack of paid maternal leave or that low-income families with multiple children are faced with an undue financial burden.  I feel that this aid to low-income families would do a lot of good.

 

3)  fixing our unsustainably low birthrate:  The United States' birthrate is historically low and has been declining.  This means that, without positive net migration, we could actually be facing population decline soon.  Additionally, this would create problems for our social security system, as there wouldn't be as many earners per recipient.

 

4)  freedom of religious expression:  If I understand correctly, most Abrahamic religions interpret the commandment "be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the land" to mean that people are obligated to have at least two children.  I believe that religion should not be a luxury item, and that this policy would hep in that regard.

 

There are also two downsides that I considered and concluded are not significant:

 

1)  I don't think there's a significant overpopulation concern:  As I mentioned before, our birthrate is historically low.  if it gets to be problematically high after the change, the payout could be decreased.

 

2)  I don't think there's a legitimate concern over incentivizing irresponsible behavior:  Having children would no longer be irresponsible.  This would be like arguing that hospitals should not treat patient with complications from drug overdoses.  That comes off as a spite/relative welfare concern, which violates most textbook definitions of ethics/social welfare functions.

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Can I get a subsidy for not overpopulating the planet?

[Still]

As an antinatalist I obviously find this disgusting.

[Anthracite_Impreza]

1 minute ago, Arodash said:

Yes. 100 dollars for every year 

Dollars are no good to me; at least let me have the right currency, robbing bastards.

[Purple Red Panda]

3 minutes ago, Anthracite_Impreza said:

Can I get a subsidy for not overpopulating the planet?

I'll take a piece of that as well.

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Just now, Arodash said:

you will be paid with 100 potatoes every year

My auntie would love that the amount she gets through. I would exchange my potatoes for chocolate.

[Lord Jade Cross]

They should be paying people to not have kids, not the other way around. Haven't they learned the less..ohhhh wait, humans.

[Philip027]

Presidential candidates "hopefuls" being out of touch with reality.  I'm shocked, truly.

[Still]

I know this is kind of a joke topic, but here's some scientific evidence why nobody should be having kids:

 

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541#erlaa7541s5

 

We have identified four recommended actions which we believe to be especially effective in reducing an individual's greenhouse gas emissions: having one fewer child, living car-free, avoiding airplane travel, and eating a plant-based diet.

 

 

[Anthracite_Impreza]

1 minute ago, Still said:

having one fewer child, living car-free (haha no, fuck you all), avoiding airplane travel (planes are cool but I can't afford them ), and eating a plant-based diet.

Wow, 3 out of 4 achieved. I'm gonna have to start burning more coal to compensate.

[Philip027]

Quote

We have identified four recommended actions which we believe to be especially effective in reducing an individual's greenhouse gas emissions: having one fewer child, living car-free, avoiding airplane travel, and eating a plant-based diet.

"Don't eat beans" isn't on this list?  I call BS.

[Astrea]

 I never thought I would feel sorry for these people but considering the things I see pop up every week on my yahoo page regarding what he is saying and doing... this guy's psychological health seems to be deteriorating fast and that's never easy for anyone.
So yeah... I feel kind of bad about this, especially for their four children - I'm pretty sure being the child of Kim Kardashian and Kanye West can't be redeemed by billions of dollars ^^'

But yeah... I'd rather governments invest a million dollar in improving ecology and saving our environment everytime a child is born. I think it would give new children better odds in the long term.

[LeChat]

I feel it's important to mention that West has bipolar disorder and that, apparently, he chooses not to take medication for it; I noticed that many black people on social media, who've been following him or were fans, were expressing concern for him, that they weren't taking his comments about offering money, etc. seriously (I'm not complaining; I agree with them); they, and other news media outlets pointed that West mentioned about campaigning in South Carolina, yet, in the end, he chose not to put his name forth by the deadline, to appear on the ballot, 

 

So, that's another reason why many aren't taking his comments, seriously: he chose not to follow through with what he said he wanted to do.

 

https://theconversation.com/what-is-bipolar-disorder-the-condition-kanye-west-lives-with-143198

 

https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/celebritydiagnosis/87581

 

Society already rewards and gives tax breaks for people with children and married people with children, more than single people, even though, generally, a married couple earns more income than a single person.

 

https://money.cnn.com/2014/04/25/pf/taxes/parents-singles-federal-taxes

[Still]

Nobody took these numbers seriously. It doesn't exactly take a math genius to realize that if each of the 3.75 million people who gave birth in the US last year were given a million dollars, that would add up to a very large number.

 

edit: Then again, it's only a trillion dollars! The same amount that American taxpayers have already paid to fund a jet fighter that can't fly!

[Lord Jade Cross]

8 minutes ago, Still said:

Nobody took these numbers seriously. It doesn't exactly take a math genius to realize that if each of the 3.75 million people who gave birth in the US last year were given a million dollars, that would add up to a very large number.

 

edit: Then again, it's only a trillion dollars! The same amount that American taxpayers have already paid to fund a jet fighter that can't fly!

I wish this were true. But people see numbers like those and instantly go insane, much like how you put up a 20% discount sale and they will flock like wild beasts at the mere mention of it without even realizing that a discount like that is pretty standard, plus I bet you, you can ask them and they won't be able to tell you what the discount will substract from the price But hey "ITS 20%"

[gisiebob]

1 hour ago, AspieAlly613 said:

3)  fixing our unsustainably low birthrate:  The United States' birthrate is historically low and has been declining.  This means that, without positive net migration, we could actually be facing population decline soon.  Additionally, this would create problems for our social security system, as there wouldn't be as many earners per recipient.

population decline is not a problem, in fact it seems to be a trend that developed countries decline and then stabilize. it is the high rate, in either growth or decline, that is a problem.

[AceAnimeFan]

This is crazy - people should be getting money to not have children, considering the effect it has on the environment, and besides this is pretty much impossible considering the government can't even pay off the national debt; where would the money even come from?

Personally I think that, considering how much humans have damaged the planet and the other species that live in it, we should stop reproducing all together and give the planet back to the species that haven't caused catastrophic damage to it - at least that way life could continue to exist in some form instead of all known life being wiped out by our stupid species. 

[LeChat]

Just in case my earlier post might've possibly come across as being judgmental toward people with bipolar disorder or mental illness, I've grown up with a relative who would say odd things about people, like be moody and get angry at everyone in the world: at real people on T.V.; angrily accuse family members of stealing things that they'd misplaced and couldn't find; suddenly say they wanted to make major, life changes, like moving to another house (after already moving, recently, to a different house); a bigger, above ground pool; an inground pool; a gazebo in the yard; another house built on the property, etc. One moment, they'd want to buy a lot of new things; then, the next, they'd complain about how exhausting and tiring it is for them to have a house with too many things, how cluttered it is, etc., yet they'd never do anything to clear or get rid of anything. They always never seemed satisfied with what they already had/have in life. I've learned not to take everything they say, seriously, because it's hard to know what they really want, whether or not they really are going to follow through with what they claim they want to do. It's hard because their moods change, and I can't predicate whether or not they'll feel emotionally okay and neutral about everything that day, or completely angry about everything.

 

They've never been diagnosed, nor taken medication.

 

So, my earlier post was just about, "Yeah. I've lived with a relative who seemed similar, who's never taken medication (and doesn't want to). So, since there's nothing else I can do, I've learned not to take them seriously."

[Marrow]

1 hour ago, Anthracite_Impreza said:

Dollars are no good to me; at least let me have the right currency, robbing bastards.

you will get your payment in V-Bucks

[nanogretchen4]

I think this country is in desperate need of a stable president right now, and Kanye West does not fit the bill. I also think that so much of this country's wealth is being held by so few people that the country is barely functioning. Serious redistribution of wealth needs to happen. Instead of redistributing wealth specifically to incentivize large families, I would propose giving $1,000,000 to each citizen. Until a certain age, say 26, nobody could withdraw any of the principal, but the interest would amount to a universal basic income of about $20,000 per year. The legal guardians of a minor would be entitled to this interest until the minor turned 18. That should be enough to cover childcare or to allow one of the parents to stay home. Then when the kids grow up they will have enough money to be independent while they pursue higher education or internships. Once they reach the age of 26, they would have the option of withdrawing the principal if they want to start a business, buy a house, or invest. I suspect this would strengthen the economy much more than allowing a tiny minority to hoard more and more of the wealth. 

[Marrow]

58 minutes ago, Arodash said:

Worst currency ever

Wow, you insult my peoples currency? Us Gamers, the most oppressed group, dont take kindly to that mister.

 

[Lord Jade Cross]

19 minutes ago, nanogretchen4 said:

I think this country is in desperate need of a stable president right now, and Kanye West does not fit the bill. I also think that so much of this country's wealth is being held by so few people that the country is barely functioning. Serious redistribution of wealth needs to happen. Instead of redistributing wealth specifically to incentivize large families, I would propose giving $1,000,000 to each citizen. Until a certain age, say 26, nobody could withdraw any of the principal, but the interest would amount to a universal basic income of about $20,000 per year. The legal guardians of a minor would be entitled to this interest until the minor turned 18. That should be enough to cover childcare or to allow one of the parents to stay home. Then when the kids grow up they will have enough money to be independent while they pursue higher education or internships. Once they reach the age of 26, they would have the option of withdrawing the principal if they want to start a business, buy a house, or invest. I suspect this would strengthen the economy much more than allowing a tiny minority to hoard more and more of the wealth. 

The problem is that things as "higher education" are part of the problem that has allowed those few in power to remain there. You bleed out a population with promises of a better tomorrow that never comes.

[nanogretchen4]

Student loans are indeed a racket. For the plan to work correctly, higher education should be free and we should have single payer healthcare, thus eliminating two major causes of bankruptcy. The idea is to have very few people fall into desperate poverty while giving everyone a modest amount of capital to invest as they see fit.

[Lord Jade Cross]

Unfortunately, no one in power will yield having their income restricted or lowered. It's a little like how retail stores work, they will cut hours but demand ever higher amounts of work, even though they are making decent winnings. The greed of humans will always corrupt any system no matter how noble it may start out. In a way the very history of the foundation of the nation shows this.

[Alejandrogynous]

Cool, just another way that I'd get fucked over for being a responsible, socially conscious person by not polluting the planet with more children. Why not.

 

3 hours ago, AspieAlly613 said:

I don't think there's a legitimate concern over incentivizing irresponsible behavior:  Having children would no longer be irresponsible. 

Oh yeah, because people fostering for the money and then abusing/neglecting the children in their care never happens, lol. 

[nanogretchen4]

I mean, this is supposed to be a democracy. Having a handful of billionaires and a lot of poor people benefits only a handful of people. If the majority of citizens would simply vote in their own best interests, we could indeed tax and provide benefits in a way that reduces inequality and increases stability. Also, a universal basic income means that the workforce is not desperate. If they don't have a job they can still get by if they live frugally and either live with family or get a roommate. Therefore, bosses have to provide reasonably acceptable pay and working conditions if they want anyone to work for them.

[nanogretchen4]

I think this level of income redistribution would strengthen our economy, actually. Having too many people with no disposable income hurts the economy. That's why conservative economists are talking about "stimulous checks."

[nanogretchen4]

No, income redistribution is a graduated income tax, which we have already had for a long time. Bribing politicians to create ridiculous tax loopholes for the very rich is theft.

[gisiebob]

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

I mean, this is supposed to be a democracy. Having a handful of billionaires and a lot of poor people benefits only a handful of people. If the majority of citizens would simply vote in their own best interests, we could indeed tax and provide benefits in a way that reduces inequality and increases stability. Also, a universal basic income means that the workforce is not desperate. If they don't have a job they can still get by if they live frugally and either live with family or get a roommate. Therefore, bosses have to provide reasonably acceptable pay and working conditions if they want anyone to work for them.

well, see the thing is, I could be one of those billionaires...I just bought five more lottery tickets, see. and, well these billionaires are self made men, right? I could be one! I know it. or I could marry a rich person. that sounds so easy. all I have to do is marry a rich person, then I am set for life! if...I was a rich man, leddle dlreddle deedle dum...

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Taxes don't fund spending in a sovereign government and there's no such thing as a nation in debt in its own currency ~ Modern monetary theory (same "theory" as the "theory" of gravity). Look it up, seriously; you'll be amazed how much bollocks you've been told.