Baby brain: Why MAGA's pro-natalist plans are ill-conceived
America's politicians have babies on the brain. In February, President Donald Trump told officials to make IVF cheaper. Even without its procreator-in-chief, Elon Musk, the White House is thought to be working on a bigger package of pro-natalist policies. Vice-President J.D. Vance is keen. Mr Trump says he favours a $US5000 (about $7700) handout for new parents. In Britain, meanwhile, Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, a MAGA-ish opposition party, has proposed tax breaks and benefits to encourage women to have more children.
Politicians have long feared the fiscal consequences of an ageing population, with too few young workers supporting legions of pensioners. Governments in places with very low birth rates, such as Japan and South Korea, have spent billions trying to reverse the decline, with little success. The new pro-natalist policies of the transatlantic right differ from older ones in that they are more targeted at working-class women, whose fertility rate has fallen the most. That might make them a bit more effective. But not at a reasonable cost, or without creating perverse incentives.
Previous attempts to deliver a baby boom have either failed or been eye-wateringly expensive, relative to the number of extra births they deliver. Hungary's prime minister, Viktor Orban, started a big pro-natal push in 2011, and has since given parents everything from tax breaks and cash handouts to free child care. These policies cost a staggering 5.5 per cent of the country's GDP annually – more than almost any government will spend on an ageing population in any year between now and 2050. In February, mothers of two were promised a lifelong exemption from income tax.
Hungary's fertility rate rose to 1.6 children per woman in 2018, from 1.2 in 2011, making it a poster child for populist pro-natalists everywhere. However, it has since dipped, suggesting handouts encouraged some mums not to have more babies, but to have the same number sooner. Other countries, including Japan, Norway and Poland, have tried tax breaks, handouts, maternity leave, subsidised child care and even state-sponsored dating, to little effect. Such policies mostly soften the blow to the finances and career prospects of professional women from having children, without persuading them to have more.
Like Mr Orban, both Mr Farage and Mr Vance see pro-natalism as a way to boost the native population over the immigrants they so dislike. However, they would not spend as lavishly as Hungary, and they would focus the cash more narrowly on poorer parents. Mr Farage would scrap a cap on benefits, which stops families claiming benefits for more than two children, and boost the threshold below which earnings are exempt from income tax for one half of a married couple. Mr Trump's handouts would be a bigger relief for poor households than rich ones.
Underpinning these policies is an assumption that poorer women are more likely to respond to incentives to have more children. Indeed, their fertility rates do seem more elastic than those of professional women. Whereas the fertility rates of older, college-educated women have remained fairly steady over the past six decades, most of the collapse in fertility in America and Britain since 1980 stems from younger and poorer women having fewer children, particularly from unplanned pregnancies.
Loading
In 1994, the average age of a first-time American mother without a university degree was 20. Today, about two-thirds of women without degrees in their 20s have never given birth. Mr Trump's and Mr Farage's policies might therefore lead to more babies being born than the approaches of places like Norway, which focus on offering child care, a benefit that professional women tend to take up.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7NEWS
an hour ago
- 7NEWS
Israel targets nuclear facility and other Iran sites in wake of United States' strikes
Israel has targeted Iran's Fordo nuclear site in the wake of the United States' massive strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites the day before. The Israeli military confirmed on Monday that it struck roads around the Fordo facility to obstruct access to the site. The underground site was one of those hit in Sunday's attack by the United States on three nuclear facilities. Israel's Defence Ministry said it also hit targets in Tehran including Evin prison and the security headquarters of the paramilitary Revolutionary Guards. 'The Iranian dictator will be punished with full force for attacking the Israeli home front,' the ministry said. The strikes also hit Tehran's Palestine Square and other 'military command centres belonging to the Iranian regime'. The airstrikes come a day after the US military carried out sweeping strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. While President Trump said the strikes had 'obliterated' the three sites, Iran has yet to reveal the extent of the damage caused to its nuclear facilities, and the real damage to Fordo, which is located deeply underground, remains unknown. The US President has also kept the door ajar to regime change, contradicting claims made by his Vice President and Secretary of State who had earlier said the US' activities were not about forcing such change. In a post on Truth Social, Mr Trump wrote: 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!'
West Australian
2 hours ago
- West Australian
Israel targets nuclear facility and other Iran sites in wake of United States' strikes
Israel has targeted Iran's Fordo nuclear site in the wake of the United States' massive strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites the day before. The Israeli military confirmed on Monday that it struck roads around the Fordo facility to obstruct access to the site. The underground site was one of those hit in Sunday's attack by the United States on three nuclear facilities. Israel's Defence Ministry said it also hit targets in Tehran including Evin prison and the security headquarters of the paramilitary Revolutionary Guards. 'The Iranian dictator will be punished with full force for attacking the Israeli home front,' the ministry said. The strikes also hit Tehran's Palestine Square and other 'military command centres belonging to the Iranian regime'. The airstrikes come a day after the US military carried out sweeping strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. While President Trump said the strikes had 'obliterated' the three sites, Iran has yet to reveal the extent of the damage caused to its nuclear facilities, and the real damage to Fordo, which is located deeply underground, remains unknown. The US President has also kept the door ajar to regime change, contradicting claims made by his Vice President and Secretary of State who had earlier said the US' activities were not about forcing such change. In a post on Truth Social, Mr Trump wrote: 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!'
West Australian
2 hours ago
- West Australian
Michaelia Cash: Australia must stand up for its interests in the wake of US Iran strikes
The old adage that 'a week is a long time in politics' has been starkly demonstrated as an enduring truth with the significant world events that have unfolded recently. Israel has further exercised its sovereign right to defend its people and ensure the security of future generations. The Unites States strongly backed Israel with a series of precision strikes on nuclear facilities in Iran. It appears the US strikes will end Iran's nuclear capacity for now. The Coalition supports actions taken by the US to ensure that the Iranian regime is stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons. We can never allow the Iranian regime the capacity to enact its objectives of the destruction of the US and Israel. The world can never accept a nuclear-armed Iran and acting now to ensure that is the case is the right thing to do. These events are a long way from Australia but have implications for us and the rest of the world. President Donald Trump left the G7 meeting in Canada early to deal with the situation in the Middle East. For Australia this meant a planned meeting between the President and our Prime Minister on the sidelines of the G7 was cancelled. Given the situation in the Middle East, the decision by the President to cancel the meeting is completely understandable but to the detriment of Australia. This was an important opportunity for the Prime Minister to seek assurances on AUKUS and protect Australia from tariffs. Given global volatility and the growing list of issues in our relationship with the US, this underscores that the Prime Minister should not have merely relied on meeting with the President on the sidelines of international summits. The Prime Minister should have been more proactive in seeking to strengthen this relationship — Australia's most important — and we encourage him to change his approach to advance our national interest. As Australians we must step up our engagement across the board with the US. President Trump won the US election more than 200 days ago and has held meetings with leaders from the UK, Canada, Germany, Ireland, France, Japan, Norway and South Africa. Our Prime Minister has only spoken to the President on the phone. On the international stage, Australia needs its leader to stand up for our interests so we can build a stronger Australian economy. President Trump's tariffs on our steelmakers are not in the spirit of our century-old partnership, nor in line with our 20-year-old free trade agreement. We urge the US administration to give Australia a fair go and remove the tariffs, as they have done for the UK. And we urge the Albanese Government not to compromise on policies that ensure affordable healthcare, bio-security, and a fair economic landscape for Australian businesses and families. It must not sell out our Australian farmers and producers. Success can not be achieved through putting our world-class agriculture at risk. In regard to AUKUS, the Coalition put it in place and we want it to succeed. But the fact AUKUS is under review by the Pentagon is concerning because any delay or downgrade in the US commitment will impact our future defence capability. The Prime Minister must seek assurances from President Trump to safeguard the AUKUS agreement. AUKUS is the most important strategic initiative Australia has entered into in decades. It provides the nuclear-powered submarines and technological edge we need to deter conflict and defend our sovereignty in a more contested Indo-Pacific. This is not business as usual. The Prime Minister cannot afford to be a bystander in our relationship with the US. Anthony Albanese must put Australia's case clearly and secure the commitments we were promised. We will always support bipartisan co-operation on national security, but that co-operation cannot mask inaction from the Government. The Coalition wants the Government to succeed here because that is in our national interest. Michaelia Cash is the shadow minister for foreign affairs
