White House proposes giving out $5,000 checks to address falling birthrates amid growing ‘pronatalist’ movement

One of Donald Trump’s priorities for his second term is getting Americans to have more babies – and the White House has a new proposal to encourage them to do so: a $5,000 “baby bonus”.

The plan to give cash payments to mothers after delivery shows the growing influence of the “pronatalist” movement in the US, which, citing falling US birthrates, calls for “traditional” family values and for women – particularly white women – to have more children.

But experts say $5,000 checks won’t lead to a baby boom. Between unaffordable health care, soaring housing costs, inaccessible childcare and a lack of federal parental leave mandates, Americans face a swath of expensive hurdles that disincentivize them from having large families – or families at all – and that will require a much larger government investment to overcome.

  • foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    126
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    $5000???

    Hahahahaha

    Give me a house. Anything short of 1500 sqft, 3br, 1.5ba, on a half acre or more is just not enough for my gf and I to even consider.

    And we are both gainfully employed.

    • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      1500sqft starts to feel cozy with a bunch of teenagers hanging out.

      $5000 probably won’t cover the lost salary from missing work, if adequate recovery time is taken to say nothing of the true developmental needs of the infant. Try 2 years of salary, just to get to a point where daycare can take over for some of the time (and you get to pay that too!).

      I get that “we need kids to grow the economy” but also, humans are killing the planet and if our population keeps growing, we’re going to just keep on killing it faster.

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      I get the sentiment here, but a half acre is a lot of land and the development of large suburban lots is a big thing that contributed to the housing crisis in north america. We need to diversify housing and increase the number of 1000-2000 sqft apartments as well. Relatively small homes on smaller lots (1/4 acre and under) should also be being built.

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          Which could be 10, 2000 sq/ft single story units or 40, 2000 sq/ft apartments in a 4 story building. We cant just keep letting cities build outward and cover farmlands with endless swathes of single family homes and barren lawns.

            • arrow74@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Honestly this is super common in many urban settings across the world. I think why this seems so unreasonable from the American perspective US due to the lack of public spaces/infrastructure/services.

              Having a private lot seems less of a big deal when there are accessible spaces and easy ways to travel around town.

              Like I get it, I also want a yard, but if I had an easy way to access other things and a safe place to recreate it would be less of a desire

              • foggy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                I did not say it was impossible. At all. Get your strawman bullshit outta here. Stick to the point or stfu.

                I said am not interested in those living conditions.

                Full stop.

          • kozy138@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Don’t forget parking lots! The suburban strip mall is dependent on them. And since they take up valuable real estate that isn’t providing any tax revenue, it gets subsidized by taxes from neighboring high-density urban areas.

        • wjrii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Maybe for any sort of food-supplementing gardening and/or egg-farming. For simple living space, it’s extravagant. I live in the Texas suburbs, and half-acre lots are nowhere near the norm until you get way out into the exurbs. Quarter acre lots are a rather generous and (and resource intensive), and 1/8 would be standard for “starter” homes.

    • Ledericas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      hes just copying putin, putin promised equivalent to 16k for 10 children from moms.

      • klemptor@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        True, but kids aren’t free-range anymore the way they were when I was growing up in the '80s & '90s. It didn’t used to matter if you had a small backyard if you had a big neighborhood to roam. But from what I understand, kids aren’t allowed to just get on their bikes and go explore like they used to. Larger yards give kids a place to play, to get some fresh air and exercise instead of being indoors glued to a screen.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          My in laws have an acre and their kids mostly play on about ⅒ of it because that’s where their stuff is, give people parks and they can live with a smaller yard. It’s not sustainable to give everyone ½ an acre.

          • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            As a kid I’d spend a lot of time in local forests, go to a local park to play. The benefit of these spaces is you can have all your friends meet up with you. Manhunt in a 1/2 acre backyard would be way more boring than access to various parks and forested areas.

            There are also activities like sports, camps, boy scouts/girl guides that kids can participate in to get outdoors time.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          True, but kids aren’t free-range anymore the way they were when I was growing up in the '80s & '90s.

          Then quit being fucking paranoid cowards and fix that!

          • klemptor@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Welp I don’t have children and it would be highly weird if I went around forcing other people’s kids to go play free-range so…