Why doesn’t the country support having children?

[NameChangeAsICouldBeOverReacting]

Just seen an article on The Guardian about the 15 free hours for childcare for under 2’s and how the whole system is a mess.

I’m just starting to lose hope that this country doesn’t support working families anymore?

AIBU and need to think more positively, or have we screwed up massively by not supporting families?

The Guardian article which I read.

There's a big difference between a population decline and a population crash.

It takes a long time to be visible because there is still huge momentum from the baby boom and the sub-booms that rippled on from it. But once it becomes unmissable, some thirty years from its start, it's all but impossible to reverse. At current rates, one hundred South Korean adults will have sixteen grandchildren. That's not the kind of gradual decline that a country can cope with.

@drspouse , maybe the more likely scenario is that when AI replaces the jobs that can be automated, with driverless vehicles and automated checkouts among the first to be robotised, the jobs that will remain are the hands-on caring roles. Looking after the elderly, hairdressing, plumbing and practical tasks will be what remains.

ANd as @LardyCakeAgain suggests, the Black Death ended serfdom and raised wages.

I do think there will be a global fall in population but hope this is achieved via fewer births rather than all out war or a truly cataclysmic volcanic event, which is actually overdue. The planet could kill us all, much faster and more brutally than environmental degradation.

Technically, I agree with this. But in this day and age, with the cost of literally everything sky rocketing, this logic means that the majority of people either don't have children or they have to stop working and live on benefits to afford them.

So either we have no children being born or half the workforce quits. Which is your preference?

Utterly pointless, illogical and tone deaf statement when 90% of the population can't really afford to have children...

Many reasons:

1. They want to see how much they can get away with the status quo. Doing more will cost money
2. They can get new workers with immigration. Not popular but they can speak against it and still increase immigration see Brexit for an example
3. AI is going to reduce the need for many many jobs
4. I don't think the government really cares about climate change but

But to parents, do you really just want to make another drone worker? Do you want your children to work in elderly care or the caring professions in general? Fewer people and children in particular might give your child more options and freedom. Someone mentioned how workers got improved conditions after the black death. Positives can come from being a rarer resource.

So soon only the super rich can have children as the price of everything you need in life increases?

It's partly a demographic vicious cycle - we have an ageing population, that costs more of state wealth and puts more pressure on people of working age, they're less likely to have children - also these issues get less coverage in press and by politicians - you end up with a society that's pretty hostile to young families.

yep & it suits many to ignore the issue.

Why isn’t child benefit universal, my parents got something, maybe family allowance that was universal.

I think this is more likely generally if it were not for tech replacing jobs at an increasing rate

all Empires fall.

If you can't afford children, don't have them

Education standards are dreadful too.

There is only so much money available, and all of it comes directly from the taxpayer one way or another.

In an ideal world, money would grow on trees.

It is essentially the middle classes that choose to have a lifestyle that needs planning accordingly. I say that as someone who had kids as poor and middle class. We did take a dip in our lifestyle when we had kids and had to consider that if we want to stay in our nice house in our nice area and maintain a certain standard of living then having more children and the timing would affect that. Maybe background I came from but never expected we could have it all.

I’d also question if a falling birth rate is a bad thing anymore

Reduced birth rates are ok it’s the fact there is so many old people vs young. It’s not particularly economically advantageous or progressive to have those demographics.

There is only so much money available, and all of it comes directly from the taxpayer one way or another.

which is why a shrinking pool of taxpayers needs to be planned for plus there should be perhaps discussions around what taxpayers want their money to be spent on.

and therefore be worthless.

Maternity leave, statutory maternity pay, maternity allowance, free prescriptions, free and subsidised childcare, UC for low paid working parents, flexible working legislation - just a few things.

You also need to contribute yourself and having children can mean sacrifices.

Child benefit was universal until 2013 and then some stupid super rich twats complained about how they were getting all this money they didn’t need, instead of modestly just giving it away to charity. (A bit like rich OAPS twats who complain about getting the heating allowance despite evidence showing that such a universal system was the most efficient way get the money to those in need. So now we have single parents that are ironically entitled to UC but not child benefit and lots of skilled people in the economy who are put off doing overtime or taking a promotion due to the 70% + marginal tax rate this has created for those on 50-60k

On this point it is not suprising that ultra capitalists want an increase in birthrate like Elon Musk for example. Fewer children, fewer workers may have more power than they would like.

Japan and Italy further along with aging society curve and would be better indicators to watch on economy and wages than black death where people died rather than lived longer and became economic dependents in old age.

It seems to be more stagnation in economy and in Japan and prolonged stagnation in average wage as well. Older people tend to buy less but also have higher medical needs and costs - so there's a shift in jobs and where money get spent.

American is behind us in aging but many of their baby boomers haven't saved enough and some that did had those saving wiped out by medical bills - I read somewhere they are fastest growing age group of homeless people

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-06-20/homeless-crisis-housing-californians-older-seniors-study#:~:text=Kushel%20and%20her%20team%20found,in%20families%2C%20are%20over%2065.

People will always have children and find ways to do so - with compromises that may well force on them - but the replacement level round the world has dropped only exceptions are sub saharan Africa. It's a societal shift that brings challenges.

It’s a major economical issue particularly since our productivity has been so shit since the crash.

“The demographic changes means government spending on the elderly is expected to quadruple from £225bn to £950bn by 2072, according to CPS estimates.
More crucially, this expenditure is set to double as a share of GDP to 21pc over the period.
That means more tax will be needed to pay for it, or other spending will have to fall – threatening a vicious cycle where a shrinking, younger workforce has to fork out ever-larger sums to support the elderly.
To offset the impact of the ageing population, the UK economy would need to grow by 2.9pc every year, for the next 50 years.
But on present trends, growth for the next five years will average an annual rate of just 1.4pc, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility”

And I bet growth will be lower!

Japan and Italy further along with aging society curve and would be better indicators to watch on economy and wages than black death where people died rather than lived longer and became economic dependents in old age.

Japan has actually tried to mitigate some of the impact & introduced policies years ago but doesn’t seem to be helping.

@TripleDaisySummer If falling birthrates are that widespread then it suggests that differences between how various govts are subsidising parents/families don’t actually matter that much. Or in other words that increasing subsidies in the UK wouldn’t have an overall effect.

A global trend towards having fewer or no children has to be on the basis of global trends - such as climate change and/or this being one of the first generations in human history where there is ready access to birth control and societies that recognise that it’s perfectly normal to choose not to have kids.

I really do think this is an area where research is fundamental - just throwing money at people so they’ll have kids may not mean they actually do.

I thinkt he comparison with the black death would be post the boomers. The period in between will be awful for adults/older people now but do we want to perpetuate a broken system?

@mia45 it doesn’t help that wages have stagnated & the band hasn’t changed. 55k in 2013 is approx 73k today & 55k today is like 30k in the yr 2000.

I'm older, when l had my children there was no 'maternity leave '. Mothers to be just collected the E45 form( think it was that) and had to leave their job. I was lucky, because there was no guarantee or thought that you could return to the job,but l was asked if l could return to my job due to staff shortage when my child was about one year old.
I found a child minder, later a private nursery. Same again with my second child. I really enjoyed both doing a part time job and being a mother
When l later told this to expectant Mothers going off on maternity leave they had difficulty believing it.
I believe maternity leave started in about 1975 in the UK. So some things have improved for working Mothers.