|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:11 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| 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. |
Why the massive dearth of facts in support of the assertion?
Your position above is: if the state (admittedly I concern myself with the state per se and not the Italian state necessarily) paid moms a generous salary as it does teachers and police officers and fire fighters, the state would collapse within a year. What study, what evidence, which facts, convinced you to take this position? |
Italy's population is 58,147,733 and its birth rate is 8.54 births per 1000 population. Even assuming that the "mom benefit" would not be retroactive, that translates to 496,575 beneficiaries in the first year. Call it 500,000 for a nice round number. 500,000 times $30,000 is $15 billion. In the second year, the outlay would be $30 billion, then $45 billion and so on. (Do moms get paid more for having more than one kid? Even if not, you're looking at maybe a 10% reduction in outlay per annum, which would be more than offset by population growth and the surge in immigration Italy would experience.)
Italy's total federal budget is about $1 trillion. By the time the first beneficiaries' kids were ready to leave home, they would be spending about $270 billion per year -- more than a quarter of the budget -- paying mommies to be mommies. The point at which this program would create actual insolvency and systemic collapse is left as an exercise for the reader. In a year? Maybe not, but it wouldn't take long.
This idea is so bizarre and obviously unworkable that I'm annoyed I just spent five minutes looking this stuff up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| peppermint wrote: |
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.
|
In France and Sweden, it is even subsidized more. I think subsidizing daycare entails not penalizing women for having children. I mean without the mothers there would be no men, anyway, so men shouldn't grumble about subsidizing mothers who want to work. There would be no tax base without women. Many white collar jobs, on the subject of white collar jobs, don't necessarily pay so well considering the debt you incur.
If you can get a good trade instead you can make as much or more.
People need to very careful about incurring debt if they want to have families as well which is becoming a problem in Canada and the U.S. |
That's right. The biggest gripe people have about having children is the commitment of time and money, particularly in relation to the sacrifice you make to your career. But, society needs a minimal amount of children, 2.14/couple is replacement level.
Day programs would best be fit in with schools, as the facilities are already available. Pre-school could be added. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin Hale
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SNK wrote: |
| Italy's population is 58,147,733 and its birth rate is 8.54 births per 1000 population. Even assuming that the "mom benefit" would not be retroactive, that translates to 496,575 beneficiaries in the first year. Call it 500,000 for a nice round number. 500,000 times $30,000 is $15 billion. |
Even if your 1 trillion fig is correct, $15bn would be 1.5% of its federal budget and 0.7% of its GDP
So doubling the fertility rate will see 3% of federal budget going on it. A little expensive, I agree, but sure as blooming hell worth it if you ask me.
| SNK wrote: |
| In the second year, the outlay would be $30 billion |
3% of its federal budget / 1.3% of its GDP
We need to basically double the fertility rate of 1.29 babies per woman.
| SNK wrote: |
| Do moms get paid more for having more than one kid? Even if not, you're looking at maybe a 10% reduction in outlay per annum, which would be more than offset by population growth and the surge in immigration Italy would experience.) |
I believe women who have 2 or 3 kids should be paid more than women who have one, but 3 is the cap.
I seek a complete end to immigration to Italy in any case. State maternity salaries would apply only to EU citizens, so these immigrants of yours can bugger off!
| SNK wrote: |
| Italy's total federal budget is about $1 trillion. By the time the first beneficiaries' kids were ready to leave home, they would be spending about $270 billion per year -- more than a quarter of the budget -- paying mommies to be mommies. The point at which this program would create actual insolvency and systemic collapse is left as an exercise for the reader. In a year? Maybe not, but it wouldn't take long. |
Like I said, the figs involved to achieve an average fertility rate of double what it presently is are paltry in the context of a 1 trillion federal budget and 2 trillion GDP. Once a slightly-above-replacement-level rate is achieved, we could end the policy to stop it spiraling out of control. Actually, Italy's expenditure is already 51% of its GDP, so this policy mightn't be wise at this stage, but elsewhere I'd do it.
| SNK wrote: |
| This idea is so bizarre and obviously unworkable that I'm annoyed I just spent five minutes looking this stuff up. |
Where did you get the federal budget 1 trillion fig from? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
