Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Justin Hale]

Well, I've already said it - state-sponsored incentives (obviously financial). Precisely how much is appropriate I've no idea, but perhaps the salary of an experienced teacher or police officer? So $50,000-$60,000 per annum. For the career girls who are on 6 figs or more, it mightn't be much of an incentive, but in any case, my goal is to get young women out of McJobs like call centers and hagwons. This is as essential as getting young males out of hagwons and call centers and back plastering, plumbing, building and roofing. Whether the latter can come via the state I don't know, but certainly the marketplace can't get more babies born. What happens in today's society is that women believe they're doing their McJobs and their Sex and the City Studies degrees because of increased opportunity. What's actually taking place is decreased opportunity to get pregnant and raise children.

One of my heroines is Cherie Blair. She's one of Britain's top, most distinguished lawyers and had 4 kids. Compare that to Britain and its binge-drinking unemployable call center girls.

[stillnotking]

[Justin Hale]

[Kuros]

Justin,

How about instead of creating kiddie welfare, we incentivize the creation of children by providing childcare services. Most importantly, the State can fund higher education and learning. The idea is to bring the cost of having children down, and to allow incentives for people to not simply have children, but have educated and healthy children.

Giving $50k/year to mothers can go wrong in so many ways. What we need to do is allow women to work as much as they want without feeling guilty about taking care of children.

I would even go so far as incentivizing maid service and cleaning. Because the house gets dirty when you have children.

[Justin Hale]

Maybe $30,000 would be better than $50,000, but really the latter is bollocks all these days.

Childcare idea was good, but it must be statist and dirt cheap or even free.

[peppermint]

Kuros, they're doing something along those lines in Quebec and have been for a while. Both childcare and higher education are highly subsidized for Quebec residents, and from what I understand, it's worked out quite well.

Back to JH's plan, I wonder what role if any, he envisions for fathers in his parenting plan, and why since he advocates young men taking up trades as opposed to white collar jobs, he's currently teaching?

[blaseblasphemener]

[ontheway]

Two separate things are being discussed here:

One. Why do women have a lower "official" employment rate in Italy, especially the southern portion, than other parts of Europe?

Question. Is the real employment rate lower or higher than the rest of Europe? Italy has the one of the largest underground economies in the world. Perhaps the real employment rate is higher than the rest of Europe.


Two. Declining birth rates. Before looking for "solutions" for this "problem" we must first find out if it is a problem. The world still seems overpopulated to many people. What gives anyone, government or otherwise, the right to choose the population level?

It's ironic that not long ago, all the "leftists" (really fascist-socialists) were lamenting the overpopulation of the world, demanding that action be taken. Now that we have adjusted to higher living standards and longer lifespans by reducing the birth rate through the wise and voluntary actions of individual choices of the citizens, the fascist-socialists are at it again. Now they are demanding action to increase the birth rate.

The only reason that declining birth rates have suddenly become a "crisis" for the fascist-socialists is that the unfunded, criminally fraudulent, fascist social security programs face their final collapse. So, their solution is to increase the birth rate. Assuming that these extra citizens would all work and contribute to continue the failed socialist security programs, it would still only delay the inevitable collapse.

Nazi Germany ran such a breeding program. Produced thousands of babies. Nice model for your efforts.

[Justin Hale]

[itaewonguy]

[Pluto]

Those who think the Italian State must intervene for the sake of Italy's population, must think again. The state is running broke, the economy is in the gutter, and young workers can't find work due to arcane employability laws. Also, when young people do find work, they're taxed to the hilt to pay for Italy's generous pension program. Many young workers would just rather find work themselves so they leave. Sorry, but with these ridiculous entitlements that Italy has already got to pay, I don't think Italy can afford $30,000pa for every mother. Besides, if young workers keep leaving, the state won't be able to tax their production.

I came accross this article a few days ago:

[stillnotking]

Exactly... giving mothers some huge cash payout just for popping out kids is ridiculous and would never work. You'd have to give it to all of them, and the state would be broke in a year.

Basically, I think social engineering is all bollocks anyway. The Law of Unintended Consequences is so powerful that no one can predict the actual results of any government program aimed at raising the birthrate. Government should focus on individual needs and let people live their lives as they see fit.

Expansion of social services, like universal health care, more paid time off, more daycare, etc. might have the effect of raising birthrates. Then again, they might not. I don't really care, because I support them for individual reasons. Trying to shape the course of a society's future is a game for fools and fascists.

[Kuros]

[Justin Hale]

[Adventurer]