The raising of a family can be made an individual or a social decision. I prefer it to be a social decision.
In a society, each family can have the right to raise two children with the cost being largely borne by the society. The cost will cover pregnancy, childbirth, medical care of the mother and child, education of the child and an allowance to be given to each child.
This will encourage every family to have at least two children. Families that wish to have more children will have to bear a larger proportion of the cost, maybe 50% to 70%.
Some religion encourage their followers to have children, according to the will of God or Allah: "Go forth and multiply". Similarly, a secular society can meet a large part of the cost of raising children.
If a large part of the cost is borne by society, the citizens will have to pay a higher tax. But they will get it back through the benefits provided to their children. Those who prefer to remain single will have to pay a tax for reduce the burden of the parents. This will encourage more people to have a family and raise children.
Maybe, each person can work 1 or 2 hours a day (on top of 4 hours of work for the basic necessities) to pay for the cost of raising the children needed by society.
Tan Kin Lian
Should the government also pay for fertility treatment for those who have difficulties conceiving?
ReplyDeleteWhat about those who adpoted a child, after having two already? The adopted child could have been a single child of perhaps a single mum whose husband has passed on. Do we treat that adopted child differently from another one who comes from a larger family?
I feel that if there should be a kind of welfare programme, it should cover all children. After all, Singapore needs ALL of them. A discriminated 3rd male child will still have to go through the same NS, pays the same tax, and contributes at the same rate to CPF as any other first or second child.
Since the large cost of raising children will be borne by the society which means citizens will have to pay a higher tax, if each person works only 1 or 2 hours a day extra on top of 4 hours of work for the basic necessities, would this be sufficient?
ReplyDeleteI mean, the cost of labour per hour would be high and this is not that practical in our society when the government is trying to keep cost low to attract more business.
I will recommend reducing human population to conserve resources and reducing global pollution.
ReplyDeleteThere will be more space and less tendency for fighting over resources like land and minerals.
Adopting children should be promoted to reduce homeless children.
"Those who prefer to remain single will have to pay a tax ..."
ReplyDeleteMr. Tan, this proposal alarms me...
If everyone works productively, it should be possible with 6 hours of work a day to meet the following:
ReplyDeletea) basic needs
b) savings for the future
c) cost of raising children
At present, many people work 8 hours or longer due to the followoing:
a) unnecessary work
b) wasteful competition
c) uneven distribution of work (i.e. many people are unemployed or under employed).
Under my concept, the cost of raising children will be borne by society and will come from the tax payable by everybody (i.e. singles and parents).
My proposal is for a society of people who are not individualistic.
"My proposal is for a society of people who are not individualistic."
ReplyDeleteThen your suggestion will not work because individualism( also thinly veiled as independence) is promoted, encouraged and imposed on us in our very competitive and materialistic society.
Ex-PM Thaksin (Capitalist)introduced such a policy since early-2000 and it works.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, royalist get rid of him!