• Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 hour ago

    It won’t even cover the cost of giving birth. This is some real “how much could a banana cost” energy.

    • skisnow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      49 minutes ago

      Also, the cost of giving birth will magically jump up by $5,000 as soon as this passes. It was never a function of how much it cost to actually provide that service.

  • baltakatei@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 hours ago

    monkey paw finger curls You get free healthcare coverage and half minimum wage for each child just for existing. However, you and your child must renounce your citizenship, forfeit your passport, and accept indentured servant status until you can buy back your citizenship after repaying the government child support in full.

  • altphoto@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Having a kid will cost you much more than 100grand. Giving you 5k to fuck is such an insult.

  • Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    5 hours ago

    The type of person who would think 5k for having a kid is a great deal is exactly the type of person conservatives would bitch about having kids and leeching all the other government resources.

    • Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Coincidentally, it’s also the exact type of person conservatives want having kids. They make up the majority of prison labor, military fodder, and wage slaves.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    They just cut head start, slashed medicade(51% of us babies are born on this program), no medicade no pediatric care for your baby either, cut hud, slashed the department of education, blocked student loan forgiveness, are dismantling the aca preventative care mandate, gutting worker protections, canceling child labor laws, laid off 275,000 workers and destroyed their livelihood and tanked the economy ……yea the birth rate is going to plummet. 5k lol doesn’t even cover a fraction of the utter devastation coming to American families from these moronic policies. Who in their right mind would want to bring a child into this racist sexist tech bro oligarchy?

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 hours ago

    daycare costs $2k a month? are they training the kids to be astronauts?

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 minutes ago

        wild. you’d think as a capitalist country that wants to maximize workforce for cheap labor people would be more incentivized to procreate. yet you have insane costs to childbirth alone, no parental leave for either parent (or a pathetic amount on state level), no child support… and this on top.

  • peekingduck@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    It really is a bummer to have such a legitimately retarded man just riding this country into the earths crust all Slim Pickens style.

  • ERROR: UserNotFound@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    8 hours ago

    That’s a weird way of wording “You’ll only have to pay 95K out of your 100K bill of your hospital stay for giving birth”

    5K PER MONTH and paying for the full hospital bill would be a great place start. But of course, they aren’t really pro-life to begin with.

    Pro-Birth =/= Pro-Life

    They don’t care what happens after birth.

  • thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Based on data presented here: https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child

    It takes a minimum of $200K USD to raise a child from birth to 18; which works out to ~$1K/mo.

    If the Government were serious in wanting to address the aging population issue, the best way to tackle it would be to provide family funding at this level for a family’s first ~3 children.

    Would it be expensive? Absolutely it would be in the initial term - but the increase in economic activity would arguably more than cover it in the long run.

    Would it lead to inflation? Not if the costs were derived from taxes due to the government (which currently get dodged), rather than through national debt.

    Would it lead to a positive outcome for the nation? Arguably yes, but there may also be unintended consequences to the negative. Human greed knows no bounds, after all.

  • Hayduke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    10 hours ago

    That won’t even cover half of the (insured) cost of even the smoothest birth with my plan, and I work for a multi-billion dollar company.

    This country, man. Having traveled abroad a bit, you start to realize how tunnel-visioned people stateside can get. Don’t even realize how much they/we are getting fleeced.

    • Raltoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Having traveled abroad a bit, you start to realize how tunnel-visioned people stateside can get. Don’t even realize how much they/we are getting fleeced.

      It’s the classic of someone having to visit a doctor while in Europe. And they’re always shocked at how cheap it is in comparison. Even people who know it’s much cheaper tend to think it’s like 50% , not 99-100% less. I had an emergency room visit with blood and urine testing, painkiller injection, private exam room, etc… It took a few hours and was about $25 that you could pay at a machine on your way out.

    • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I was gonna day $5k is just a handout to insurance companies for just the birth of the baby.

      Which is, well, the end of Republicans giving a shit about babies and children.

  • KelvarIW@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Free daycare and free healthcare for people under 18 are two social services that would only benefit parents. How about free college tuition moving forward?

    This is just a sad attempt making an exclusive version of establishment Dem stimulus checks…

    • papertowels@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Additionally, government supplemented/paid for day care is the only way to pay the teachers fairly. Given places often aim for 4 students:1 teacher, you already have a hard cap of 4*monthly fees for salary for that one teacher. I pay 1.2k/ month, so a teacher can get a max of 4.8k/month if EVERYTHING went to them, which we all know it doesn’t due to taxes, administrative staff, utilities, facility fees, etc.

      However, if they raise fees, they price people out of a much-needed service at a time when folks typically haven’t reached their max earning potential yet.

      • fuzzzerd@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        And folks wonder why parents these days are so old. Earning potential to afford daycare in the first place.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    168
    ·
    12 hours ago

    They chose to use a stock photo of a million dollars.

    $5000 is only 2 and a half of those bundles of $20’s.

    These people are trying to run propaganda for Trump, they can’t even keep their fascist bullshit straight.

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Is that a million? They’re 20 dollar bills in packs of what looks like it might be 100, so $2000 per pack. There’s about 50 of those, so $100.000 in total. Maybe I underestimated the pack size and number of packs and it’s actually $400.000, but I think it’s unlikely to be a million. (I still agree with the rest of your comment of course)

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      but when you look through maga glasses, that’s what you see when a black single mom of 2 receives a wic voucher for a couple gallons of milk.

      • SavageCreation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        9 hours ago

        You see, its not one black mom, its the millions of moms getting subsidies!

        Lets ignore the part where we somewhy have a million moms needing subsidies.

    • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I worked both Brinks type security and for Chase, so the inside and outside. That’s not a million. It’s probably somewhere between a quarter and a half, but the picture doesn’t make it super easy to tell.

      Your point is very valid however, they used a deceiving picture on purpose.

  • boreengreen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    9 hours ago

    My personsl hypothesis is that when couples are living in times of prosperity or growth, they can see a future and can comfortably grow a pension, then they are likely to consider having kids. This also happens to be the time they are getting a share of the wealth society generates.

    In recession and uncertain times, couples tend to hold of on getting kids, and if they do get kids, they do it much later in life, when they have saved some money.

    Of course couples need free time as well. If both parents need to work full time, it’s gonna be a lot less palatable to have kids.

    I think the global low fertility is the problem of infinite growth self correcting.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 hours ago

      No matter the state of the economy, if you look at birthrate stats in various countries, it goes down with women rights and access to contraception. People just don’t want kids.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 hours ago

      You’re right, when they have the choice, which is also why the Reich Wing wants to limit abortion and contraception and LGBT+ (non-accidentally-reproductive) relationships.

  • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Better Idea, let’s fix the economy so people can afford to have Babies.

    Or fix the world so we want to have Babies.

    Or lower the price of housing so we have a place to put babies.

    Or open forced breeding camps, shanty towns and and slave labor…oh wait.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 hours ago

      One of those are more likely than the others. It’s the last one.

      And you just know the people coming out of those labour factories will all share a visibly distinct attribute - or tint, god help me for saying that - that makes them recognizable as low-caste now as it did in the 1800s.

      I hate fearing that is right around the corner. Again, fuck.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Look at the historic birth rate in countries where where these things aren’t an issue and you’ll realize that unless you walk back on women rights and access to contraception, people won’t have enough babies to renew the population because they simple don’t want to have enough of them to do so.