White House proposes giving out $5,000 checks to address falling birthrates amid growing ‘pronatalist’ movement

One of Donald Trump’s priorities for his second term is getting Americans to have more babies – and the White House has a new proposal to encourage them to do so: a $5,000 “baby bonus”.

The plan to give cash payments to mothers after delivery shows the growing influence of the “pronatalist” movement in the US, which, citing falling US birthrates, calls for “traditional” family values and for women – particularly white women – to have more children.

But experts say $5,000 checks won’t lead to a baby boom. Between unaffordable health care, soaring housing costs, inaccessible childcare and a lack of federal parental leave mandates, Americans face a swath of expensive hurdles that disincentivize them from having large families – or families at all – and that will require a much larger government investment to overcome.

  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    He “could” TOTALLY pay his way into a baby boom.

    Step 1: Tax the rich. Lower the pressure on the lower and middle classes.

    Step 2: Fix housing pricing so that a single hard-working person can afford a house, a car, and two kids without their partner having to work.

    Step 3: Put some guardrails in place to stop the 2-3 companies that are buying up everything. Give medium and small business a chance to thrive without needing to be purchased by a giant company.

    Step 4. Fix healthcare so that the family above gets 100% coverage for whatever happens. Pay for it with Step 1.

  • Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Wow, look at that! The price of strollers just went up 5k!

    Replace strollers with basically anything related to birth or infants. 5k more to spend? 5k more to earn by big business selling wares.

    This assumes the hospital doesn’t determine that you seem to owe 5k more for that one out of network service provider they slipped in while you were distracted during birthing.

    • Tire@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I hate our healthcare system so much. Individual bills for random doctors you never asked for that are somehow working for the hospital but are unrelated in terms of their insurance policy makes zero sense. How could anyone consent to anything in a reasonable fashion

      • Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Preach. I can do nothing but agree, and I have insider info in the insurance industry, pharma and healthcare. It’s all a game to make the rich even richer and the politicians are colluding in such a bipartisan fashion you’d think the parties were fully unified.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    If $5000 is a lot to you, he’s really not interested in there being more of “your type” of person.

  • adm@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Just birthing the damn thing is like $50,000. He can shove the $5,000 right up his ass and I hope he gets paper cuts up there too.

    • seat6@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I believe $5k is around the average cost (after insurance) to have a baby in the US if you have insurance.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    We don’t even have to ask the experts. Just look at Japan that tried something similar in the past. Of course it was a complete failure… This is basic reality, right? Families that don’t have money simply can’t afford to raise a child even if they get a bit of cash at the start. Pay them more than a living wage if you want them to have kids.

  • opus86@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is how you get Idiocracy. The people that would take advantage of this would be the people you don’t want to over-breed.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      In any case this combined with his dismantling of public education will certainly not help.

    • BlackSheep@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      The people that would take advantage of this would be the people completely lacking in critical thinking.

      • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Thats mostly what happned in Australia back in the day when we tried it. Mu friends wife was a social worker, she said coercion to have babies was endemic and the money taken off the mother by the asshat father when said money arrived. Not really a lack of critical thinking per se, just desperate :(

        What a debacle.

      • opus86@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        The people that would take advantage of this wouldn’t have the ability for critical thinking skills. I doubt the kids would be much better.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    He’s making everything more expensive, gutting medicade to nothing (50% of babies are born on medicade), taking away food stamps, getting rid of the department of education, gutting hud, gutting head start, getting rid of free lunches in schools, sending us into a Great Depression, stripping worker protections and removing any hope for a future….but yeah 5k sure that will cover your first 15 minutes of delivery. What a joke this man is

      • Formfiller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        and most elderly in nursing homes. That is going to be a whole lot of care work dumped onto women with little to no pay and dire economic consequences for families. It would be absolutely stupid to have a baby with this level of uncertainty

        • medgremlin@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m just looking forward to when I have time to yeet my uterus (get a hysterectomy). It was a pain to find an OBGyn who would do it without asking too many questions, but I still brought my husband to the consultation appointment just in case there was any push back because I’m a woman in her 30’s with no children. I’ve had previous OBGyn’s refuse to even discuss a hysterectomy with me because “what if your future husband wants children” when I wasn’t even in a relationship or dating at the time.

          • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            “what if your future husband wants children”

            “Then he shouldn’t be marrying someone without a uterus” would be the logical response. Sorry you had to go through that bullshit.

            If it makes you feel any better, my wife and I were both 40 and already had two healthy kids in elementary school when I got a consultation for a vasectomy. They still made me do everything short of swear on a bible that I wasn’t going to change my mind before they would agree to do it. They insisted that my wife come in with me and sign a document affirming her agreement with the procedure before they would schedule it. Then they made us both give verbal and written agreement AGAIN right before they started. It was nuts (pardon the pun).

  • The_Caretaker@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    How about $5000 per month per child with adjustments for cost of living and inflation until the child is or children turn 18? I bet some women would have babies for that.

  • Mallspice@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah girls don’t really wanna fuck like they do where/when abortions are an option and there’s no chance of legally being sentenced to death because of a still birth I’m shocked conservatives are too stupid to get this.

    • BlackSheep@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Maybe sperm donors should also be held accountable because of a still birth. Maybe men who commit incest and rape should be held accountable.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    $5k when having a kid costs $3k in insurance copays with a normal birth and average insurance. So you’re down to $2k before even leaving the hospital. This dude has all the intellectual depth and forethought of a mushroom.

    • angrystego@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Do we really need a baby boom though? I agree we need affordable housing, everything you mentioned and more. At the same time I don’t think the population should grow forever (so education and available birth control).

      • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I don’t disagree. I was just clarifying what would spur one.

        Truthfully, we are fucked either way. The truth is having a baby boom would help the economy, but accelerate environmental degradation and the consequences of climate change, which will be extremely destabilizing to society and possibly lead to collapse.

        But, if we don’t continue to grow the population, the capitalist world, based on a need for endless growth will falter. We will see less productivity and consumption, which will also be destabilizing to society as the economy shrinks or becomes stagnant. This is also destabilizing to society and could also create a collapse.

    • The_Caretaker@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      There is no housing shortage, just an abundance of greed. There are 14,000,000 empty homes in the USA and most are owned by corporations who hold them as part of a financial portfolio or hedge funds. Ban corporations from owning residential properties and the housing shortage will vanish without cutting down more trees and burning more fossil fuels.

      • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Idk man, around me it’s sprawling single family homes for miles, when it should be blocks and blocks of condos and town homes. The NIMBYs have prevented construction for decades and now a house costs $1.5m. There is a housing shortage. I think corporations recently taking an interest in buying houses is because the shortage makes their value appreciate so quickly. They’re like parasites taking advantage of the situation, not the root cause.

        • BlackSheep@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          The corporations buying houses, and property, is exactly the root cause. If they own it all, they set the prices. It’s a cash cow. You pay, or you’re homeless. You pay $2500/month rent, but they won’t give you a mortgage where you would be paying $2000/month.

          • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            The root cause is a lack of multi family housing. Corpos buying houses is not the primary issue with housing, though it is also a serious concern.

            • BlackSheep@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              https://www.cbc.ca/radio/sunday/federal-social-housing-1.6946376 The Canadian government used to build social housing. We have a real problem with homeless people in Canada. There are only a few places left like this where I live. They are very well run complexes. My Son-in-law’s retired Mom lives in one. She worked hard all her life, but through a divorce and buying a “leaky condo”, she was left without a lot of resources. She was lucky enough to find a placement in one of these places. The rent is a percentage of her income. We need more places like this…