Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
GulMadred
Oct 20, 2005

I don't understand how you can be so mistaken.

Veskit posted:

Has fiscal policy been successful in any meaningful way in increasing fertility rates?
Yes, if you're willing to consider "spending money on social programs" as a valid example. If you want some kind of general Taylor Rule answer (e.g. fertility = marginal tax rate * depreciation rate ÷ GINI coefficient) then I can't help you.

Educated women tend to have fewer children. Women pursuing careers tend to have fewer children. Both of these effects can be mitigated by ensuring that child-related programs (such as family planning, obgyn, parental leave, pediatrics, nutrition, primary education, busing, and daycare) are highly available and delivered at minimal cost to parents. Here's an in-depth case study involving daycare in Norway. Here's a high-level comparison of childcare policies among OECD nations and their effects on fertility rates.

The cheapest legislative answer for a wealthy nation facing sub-replacement fertility is probably "accept more immigrants." But that's not strictly fiscal policy, and it strays into political territory (viz. criminals, rapists, and - I assume - some good people).

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread