c/australia · by okwithmydecay@leminal.space · 4d

Does Australia need another baby bonus as it faces a birth rate struggle?

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/baby-bonus-australia-declining-birth-rates/8ft5fodxf

11 points · 16 comments · view on lemmy.world

16 Comments

NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone · 27 pts · 4d (1 reply)

Politicians will do anything but fix the cost of living and environment.

Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 3d

Or tax the obscenely wealthy just a little bit more

No1@aussie.zone · 12 pts · 4d (6 replies)

I never understood the Baby Bonus as a financial incentive. I understand people wanting kids, just not how the Baby Bonus would change anyone's choice.

The bonus was something like $5K? But doesn't raising a kid cost hundreds of thousands of dollars over 16 to 18 years? From a financial perspective, that would have to be one of the stupidest deals of all time. $5K is two-fifths of fuck all in comparison.

And somehow, it seemed to work, and birth rates increased.

I just don't get it.

pHr34kY@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 3d

It was attractive to the financially irresponsible, who would do anything for $5k without giving it thought.

Those kids are now mid to late teens, and you can see how that turned out. It's a bit like crime suddenly dropping in New York 15 to 20 years after legalised abortions.

I don't want to see the scheme return.

hanrahan@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 3d (1 reply)

never understood the Baby Bonus as a financial incentive

i had a mate whos GF was a social worker at the time, talking to her one night she said she was overwhelmed by women who'd been forced into having a kid so their partner could collect the $5K

it was an appalling piece of legislation.

it doesn't matter what, when. women can self determine and have control of thier own money and careers they mostly chose to have 2 kids or less. 2.1 is a stable population.

fuck, expanding populations, stupidest of ideas (no i don't mean anti-migration)

No1@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 3d

That is horrific!

eremophila@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 4d (2 replies)

Stupid people are more likely to breed stupid people, who grow up to be duopoly voters.

The suggestion at the time was that the baby bonus was mainly spent on large screen tv's.

One nation wasn't an issue during the 1st baby bonus, the sbs clearly hasn't thought this through.

Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 3d (1 reply)

Ah sweet, eugenics.

eremophila@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 3d

You might want to find out what words mean before you use them.

I hope you enjoyed your large screen tv.

Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 3d

The birthrate worry is for the capitalist. Not the consumer

bignose@aussie.zone · 8 pts · 3d (2 replies)

Stop the nonsense about “shrinking tax base”. Australia's government spends as much as it wants any time it wants; Australian government spending does not come from taxation.

People aren't going to be moved to commit to the huge life change of raising a child, by a measly one-time “bonus”. They need a robust system of social support, good wages for reasonable working hours in fair conditions, an end to private monopolies on essentials, housing security. And, as NigelFrobisher points out, meaningful and demonstrated progress to a livable future in the world.

All things that are needed prior to the commitment to raising children. All things our federal government is empowered to do, that it doesn't need to wait for any “tax base” to fund, that will work much better than a “baby bonus”.

Does Australia need our government to use its unilateral power to spend, to meaningfully fight the causes of climate change, to fund universal social services and stop being scared of a fiscal deficit?

YeahToast@aussie.zone · 3 pts · 2d