WTF
Edit: I wasn’t sure what I was appalled by at first but now I realize it’s that this fucking medal just encourages women to be treated no better than a prized heifer.
Jesus fuck, if you want people to have kids, it is not that hard. Remove obstacles. On average, people want to have kids. It’s an evolutionary drive. People override that drive when they do not feel secure enough to start a family. Just make that easier. That’s it. Make sure people can afford to have kids, that they can provide them a comfortable and safe upbringing, that they can ready their kids to become adults, and that their kids’ future seems likely to be bright. How?
Decrease inflation. Subsidize child care. Increase wages and benefits (raise the mimimum wage). Mandate maternity/paternity leave. Make coverage for kids on health, dental, and vision insurance less expensive, or provide medicare for all (or at least all children). Make sure young people can afford good homes off of minimum wage. Make sure good schools are available to everyone by improving public education and providing bussing. Make sure kids are safe in schools with gun control laws. Make sure college/trade schools are inexpensive and accessible. Stablize the economy. Promote good middle class jobs. Avoid war. Fight bigotry. Provide comprehensive sex education and family planning resources including abortion rights so that people can start families when they are ready and promote generational wealth and welfare rather than propogating generational poverty.
Notice how damn near all of these things that would increase the birth rate are antithetical to GOP policy though? You want the results, but not the means. You want to offer “medals” for motherhood like a boss offers a pizza party for a record profits last quarter. It’s unserious, unhelpful, condescending, insulting, and still leaves new parents struggling to get by. Be better leaders with sensible policies. Maybe then you will get your wish.
The GOP wants to have their babies and eat them too
I would gold this comment if I could!
Governments are always offering weird wacky incentives for women to have children, when the solution is usually patently obvious: you can increase fertility by making it easy and affordable to have children. Stipends for food, paid maternity/paternity leave, free childcare services, affordable housing, and a good economy with an abundance of high-paying jobs.
I mean… there’s a reason the baby boom happened in the 50s! But no, that would be socialism!!
These fuckers will do anything to invent a flying machine except the proven model that works because they knoooow it gotta be possible with large square blocks of quarried marble tied to huskies. Just need more dogs. Or maybe more marble. mush! Ok add some more marble see if that works.
I posit that if we add a spoiler with 20" rims and a high flow muffler, this block of marble will surely take flight.
Well somebody’s about to get added to a Signal chat
Honestly, we need to reform our economic system and not continually rely on fertility to solve all of our problems.
I’ll add that even those incentives probably won’t help, as fertility declines are strongly associated with education levels and money (and women’s liberation in particular). Give women options and unsurprisingly, some will choose not to have children.
I think you’re forgetting the marital rape, financial dependence on men, lack of choice, sexist culture and general helplessness and misery of women involved in creating the ‘baby boom’.
Were those new problems that didn’t exist before the 50s?
Of course they did. But medical advancements have reduced infant mortality and increased life expectancy.
I think you misunderstood my point. Even with all material comforts and financial stability, what makes the original commenter think women will voluntarily choose to have children? The huge surge in population was not only because of government subsidies, but brutal repression and lack of any real choice women had. It is not natural – it was artificially created by a system of violent repression of women.
If it was due to reduced infant mortality then why didn’t the same pattern happen from 1800 to 1880? Infant mortality dropped from about 1/3rd to 1/5th dying before their 5th birthday. Fertility rate being fairly consistent around 5 with a slight (10%) increase for a few years around 1815 before going back to around 5.
Then fertility rates nosedive from 1880 to 1935 with a temporary increase (boomers are the peak of this) before dropping down again and continuing to where we are today.
I get it, people have been treated badly throughout history and it even continues today. But that isn’t the reason the boomers exist.
Except your point doesn’t contradict mine at all. The post-war economy offered a lot of job opportunities as well as social safety nets, unlike the 19th century. This was a factor, but it wasn’t the only factor. Because it was also a period with bad contraception. Soon after contraception became more reliable, fertility rates declined. If financial stability was the only factor, why did fertility rates decline as soon as women had the choice? The population boom was also stronger among Catholics. What explains that other than a misogynistic culture?
The fertility rates in Germany persist in being low despite the country having a decent safety net. Might be because women never really liked having children. Perhaps, just perhaps, having rampant marital rape has something to do with the baby boom?
So you think marital rape significantly increased specifically in the parents of the boomers, and was lower both before and after?
The post-war economy offered a lot of job opportunities as well as social safety nets, unlike the 19th century. This was a factor
I have no idea why you have trouble comprehending that. You also conveniently skipped over my point on contraception and modern Germany.
Germany has most of these and a low birth rate.
You still need 2 working parents, few people want to balance a career and children. We’re not designed for it. And their social help, while good for global standards, amounts to a fraction of the cost of having kids. In prehistory a whole village raised children and people barely worked. Social policies help but we need a global structural change.
In the past, people had several children because most would die before adulthood. The 20th century population boom is because better sanitation and healthcare reduced child mortality but it takes at least one generation for women to adapt and have fewer children.
Not true and it misses the point. Infant mortality was never over 50% and women aren’t having significantly fewer children because of it. It’s become impossible to raise even 1 kid for many couples. There is no financial, marital, or familial support anymore. Now that women have a choice via birth control, they aren’t putting up with it.
I do not disagree with you on the reasons why women have fewer children. I think there is also a significant cultural shift in the number of children women were supposed to have. In pre-industrual Europe, women were expected to be quickly married and then have lots of children with their husband. Women today can enjoy long careers and fulfilling lives without marriage or a family while such options were not available to women of the past.
Yes, the social support structure is essential. If you have extended family for example; that will help you out a lot with costs and care. Families are small, atomized and fractured today.
But that’d hurt billionaires.
Nooo not the billionaires!
Someone think of the poor billionaires!
There are also signs that there is an opportunity window that closes for large families.
As families sizes shrink, the children of those families go on to have a family size similar to what they grew up in. This is especially problematic for single child households.
It’s nickel plated in the event the woman sleeps with an incel and gets knocked up.
The truth is that Trump is a poster child for why abortion should not only be legal, but encouraged.
That’s what women of child bearing age want and need. A medal. Not jobs, food, housing, security, nor equality.
goes along nicely with the female celebrity “astronauts” from last week. “Putting the ‘ass’ in astronauts”, They said. “There will be eyelash extensions floating around the capsule”, and saying that they were very concerned about their hair in space. Thats is who the republicans need women to be. less concern about the stuff you mentioned, more referring to yourself as a piece of ass who will be required to make a whole lot of babies. Got it?
/s
Also those child-bearing age women do not want nor need maternity care, and are TOTALLY into receiving a huge hospital bill after giving birth.
All the best countries did that, and US will be greatest of them all, that is what he will make it. Great it will be made…
Ah, here is step one. The “Mutter der Nation” medal for women having 5+ children.
Next stop: Lebensborn projects where women are forced to get impregnated by real american patriots ™
Blessed be the fruit.
Why do you think he wants to be “The Father of IVF.” Musky’s little breeding program.
Wait so we have too many immigrants but not enough babies?
What’s going on?
Trump is the sum of the reasons I won’t procreate and can shove every single medal up his rectum to form Trump piñata. However, we can then string him up and take turns beating Trump-yata with a bat until we all get a medal, and the world will be on its way to healing.
“Coincidentally” also a thing that Putin is currently doing
the US Government is bought, paid for, and owned by the Russian Mafia. So much so that the Subordinate tries to emulate the master in every facet now.
This is the more accurate comparison. Yes, Trump’s government is like nazi Germany in many respects but the pronatalist movement is straight out the Putin playbook.
Founding of the Trump youth organization in 3… 2… 1…
Students For Trump already exists, sorry.
Oh, well. Better just start working on the propaganda now in case I need to blend in:
what? no. Trump would never use child soldiers.
He needs them in the factories cranking out more of his cheap-shit product lines like hats, ties and bibles with the constitution in them. If they survive the factories- then they get to become soldiers and die for him. he doesn’t like losers, afterall.
My mistake:
Making American kids exert their bodies in ways Trump never ever has.
Your masters want you to breed.
Whether you can afford to have children or not.
Especially when you can’t afford their education. Those are the best kind of voters.
Can this medal be exchanged for food and shelter?
That would be communism!
…could he just skip to the part where he feeds himself a bullet just like daddy-Hitler, already?
Augustus did this 2000 years ago. Dictators can only imagine so far.
Meloni copying this (once more, as Italy has already done it many times, since the 1920s) in 3…2…
