Many countries face an declining and aging population. People are getting married later, and producing fewer children. Singapore face worse than many countries.
The root cause is the desire of women to compete with men in the working world. Many give priority to a university degree and a steady career. By the time that they are ready to get married and start a family, they are in their late 20s or early 30s. This is past their most productive years.
To change this trend requires a new approach by the government. The state should be willing to bear a larger part of the cost of raising children, and reduce the burden on the individual family.
I propose that each non-working mother should be given an adequate monthly allowance for each child, up to a maximum of three children in the family. The amount should be adequate to meet 80% of the cost of raising the child, and can be paid until the child is 18 years old. I think that a suitable sum is $500 per child.
This will encourage more women to choose to stop work and to raise a family. The women may marry at a younger age and produce a family with 2 or 3 children. The family will not need to depend on foreign maids.
This family payment will be an added cost to the state, and will have to be met with higher taxation. I think that the people who choose not to have children should share in the national cost of producing our next generation.
Many countries already have generous family allowances, of the type proposed by me. They have problems in implementing the benefits, which can be abused. I am sure that we can find a way to prevent the abuse, and focus on the positive aspect of this proposal.
Tank Lian: This is most interesting! In America, many women are career oriented and put off having children until much later. We may be a little different in that the women do end up having children, but it's not unusual to see 40+ year old women having their first child!
ReplyDeleteI support this approach.
ReplyDeleteThis will encourage more mothers to stay at home to look after their children instead of just leaving them in the care of maids and child care centres.
I observe a growing trend of teen social problems as a result of parental neglect in their formative years partly due to the fact that the parents are busy trying to put bread on the table.
Mr Tan's proposal will also help in a way to reduce future social ills.
there's one clear problem.
ReplyDeletewith higher taxes, singles and couples who do not have children (who also consequently have higher disposable income) can easily leave for countries with lower taxes.
the real question is this: why is Europe aging more rapidly than USA, despite the fact that the welfare state in Europe provides generous welfare and maternity benefits?
Surely if you understand the reason behind this puzzle, then you will understand why higher taxes to subsidize childbirth is a pointless exercise.
Shaunux post an interesting question.
ReplyDeleteWhy is Europe aging rapidly than USA, in spite of having a welfare state, with generous maternity benefits?
I think that their benefits are aimed at the wrong purpose - eg single mothers, poor, etc.
My proposal is to make it attractive for the ordinary families to produce children when they are young.
After the children goes to school, the mothers can re-enter the workforce.
Shaunux is worried that higher taxes will lead people to migrate. I do not think so. The increase in tax to fund the family benefits is likely to be modest.
I thought why people produce less children is because babies and children are Expensive.
ReplyDeleteYou have to feed, school them until about 20+ years old and even then you may not be assured of any economic return from them.
I think your proposal assumes that marriage, childbirth, careers all follow a logical sequence. However, in truth they aren't. You've hit the nail on the head by saying it's competition that drives the women to want to establish a career. Some women just do not want to have babies, for various reasons. And it's not quite true that it's the state that is paying for it. I think it's future generations that are paying for it. So I would counterpropose that for your suggestion to work, there has to be 2 conditions: (1) The scheme applies equally to men (which might reduce the competition element), (2) That those who benefit from the scheme must also "pay-in-kind" as a form of national service payment (so that abuse can be checked). I'm not sure what 'National Service' can be implemented... maybe for every 2 mths of paid leave, they do "social work" for 3 weeks?
ReplyDeleteOther than the financial aspect, we must change the mindset of young Singaporeans. Thye must want to have children. They be willing to love and make sacrifices for them.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the purpose of life? When one is dead gone without issues, we leave not a trace behind of our existence. Confucius said that the most unfilial thing a son can do is to remain unmarried and if he is married not to leave any issues behind to continue the family line. The Bible says " blessed are the man with many children like the grapes on the vine"
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete