• Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    How about some of that socialism for the rest of us, and not just for breeders and soybean farmers?

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    4 days ago

    Trade:

    • One person’s wages

    For:

    • Mortgage payments on a reasonably sized house
    • All bills
    • Food for two adults plus children
    • Entertainment

    Then you might see more babies.

    It was their greed that caused this.

  • cannon_annon88@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    This wouldn’t even cover the hospital bill for most people lol.

    And since hospitals know moms will be getting an extra 5k they will just add that into the cost somehow. /s

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    234
    ·
    5 days ago

    They chose to use a stock photo of a million dollars.

    $5000 is only 2 and a half of those bundles of $20’s.

    These people are trying to run propaganda for Trump, they can’t even keep their fascist bullshit straight.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      101
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      but when you look through maga glasses, that’s what you see when a black single mom of 2 receives a wic voucher for a couple gallons of milk.

      • SavageCreation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        5 days ago

        You see, its not one black mom, its the millions of moms getting subsidies!

        Lets ignore the part where we somewhy have a million moms needing subsidies.

    • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      5 days ago

      I worked both Brinks type security and for Chase, so the inside and outside. That’s not a million. It’s probably somewhere between a quarter and a half, but the picture doesn’t make it super easy to tell.

      Your point is very valid however, they used a deceiving picture on purpose.

        • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yeah looks about right with the hundred stacks in there. I’m not putting a ton of effort in here, but eyeballing it looks about like what I’d expect.

          • parody@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Was gonna say actually you’re probably right because it was probably a couple of suitcases and then the 300 K backpack

            Cheers for low effort irrelevant curiosities

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Is that a million? They’re 20 dollar bills in packs of what looks like it might be 100, so $2000 per pack. There’s about 50 of those, so $100.000 in total. Maybe I underestimated the pack size and number of packs and it’s actually $400.000, but I think it’s unlikely to be a million. (I still agree with the rest of your comment of course)

    • Donkter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      This is literally going to be an argument if people start proposing free daycare/child care :/

    • naeap@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s the nice thing in a social democracy

      When the next generations has better education, my pension fund will be more filled

      In practice though, it seems people are the same kind of stupid…

  • optional@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    4 days ago

    5000$ is a lot. In Germany you get only 250€

    well, that's

    per month until they’re 27 (as long as they’re still in school/university)
    plus free healthcare for mother and child
    plus free daycare (depending on the state)
    plus free schools and universities

      • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’m with you here, but we need to keep in mind that the nazis never “leave”. We’ll need to forever and continually keep these bastards from power.

        • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          This was the whole problem, they’ve been here all along.

          We thought we beat them in the civil war, they just hunkered down and changed the name of slavery to Jim crow.

          Now they think this is their moment.

          • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Same thoughts here. Once they’re beaten, no “reconstruction” can be offered this time around. They’ll need to re-assimilate into our society.

      • VitoRobles@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        If it’s like the civil war, we’ll kick them out and then build statues and name bases after them.

        • Treczoks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          The paid variety. You stay at home for a certain time for being a mom (or dad!), and you employer respectively the state still pays for it. Horrible, this “communism”, isn’t it?

          • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 days ago

            i understand the individual words you use, but when you put them in that order my blood starts getting all bubbly and full of nitrogen. i think i’ll take a nap

    • qarbone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      To add on, seems like the 5k (USD) is a one-time lump sum. Your price quote from Germany is already 3k (EUR) after a year. It only ever outscales the 5k.

  • AniZaeger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    $5,000 is a lot to those braindead morons who insist that “nobody wants to work” because they’re still living comfortably off of a few $1,400 checks from half a decade ago…

  • Hayduke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    125
    ·
    5 days ago

    That won’t even cover half of the (insured) cost of even the smoothest birth with my plan, and I work for a multi-billion dollar company.

    This country, man. Having traveled abroad a bit, you start to realize how tunnel-visioned people stateside can get. Don’t even realize how much they/we are getting fleeced.

    • Raltoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Having traveled abroad a bit, you start to realize how tunnel-visioned people stateside can get. Don’t even realize how much they/we are getting fleeced.

      It’s the classic of someone having to visit a doctor while in Europe. And they’re always shocked at how cheap it is in comparison. Even people who know it’s much cheaper tend to think it’s like 50% , not 99-100% less. I had an emergency room visit with blood and urine testing, painkiller injection, private exam room, etc… It took a few hours and was about $25 that you could pay at a machine on your way out.

    • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      5 days ago

      I was gonna day $5k is just a handout to insurance companies for just the birth of the baby.

      Which is, well, the end of Republicans giving a shit about babies and children.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I wouldn’t use the word “tunnel-visioned”. That implies focused on something and ignoring the things nearby.

      I think it’s more accurate to say “ignorant”. Many, probably most Americans just have no clue about most things outside the USA. You’ve travelled abroad, most Americans have not. The US is such an insular society that people can get away with saying things like “Canadians hate their healthcare” and people actually believe them.

    • kyle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah, I counted at least 50 stacks of $20 bills. Usually those stacks are 100 bills each, so over $100k in that pic.

  • Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    4 days ago

    It won’t even cover the cost of giving birth. This is some real “how much could a banana cost” energy.

    • skisnow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Also, the cost of giving birth will magically jump up by $5,000 as soon as this passes. It was never a function of how much it cost to actually provide that service.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    They just cut head start, slashed medicade(51% of us babies are born on this program), no medicade no pediatric care for your baby either, cut hud, slashed the department of education, blocked student loan forgiveness, are dismantling the aca preventative care mandate, gutting worker protections, canceling child labor laws, laid off 275,000 workers and destroyed their livelihood and tanked the economy ……yea the birth rate is going to plummet. 5k lol doesn’t even cover a fraction of the utter devastation coming to American families from these moronic policies. Who in their right mind would want to bring a child into this racist sexist tech bro oligarchy?

  • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Better Idea, let’s fix the economy so people can afford to have Babies.

    Or fix the world so we want to have Babies.

    Or lower the price of housing so we have a place to put babies.

    Or open forced breeding camps, shanty towns and and slave labor…oh wait.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 days ago

      One of those are more likely than the others. It’s the last one.

      And you just know the people coming out of those labour factories will all share a visibly distinct attribute - or tint, god help me for saying that - that makes them recognizable as low-caste now as it did in the 1800s.

      I hate fearing that is right around the corner. Again, fuck.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      Look at the historic birth rate in countries where where these things aren’t an issue and you’ll realize that unless you walk back on women rights and access to contraception, people won’t have enough babies to renew the population because they simple don’t want to have enough of them to do so.

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

        There might be other factors at play. Deciding to have a child is a complex decision. But not having those things mentioned just makes the problem worse.

        Also, speaking of historical facts. Even outlawing abortion and such doesn’t stop it. They travel or use risky methods. Or they put the kid up for adoption which leads to a massive spike in crime. Which is why roughly 18 years after Roe v Wade there was a drop in crime.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          As I said, it’s just historical stats from a bunch of different countries that all show the same thing.

          Both my sisters in law have three kids and get about $1.6k in financial help, super cheap childcare and free healthcare, they’re still in the minority of people who have 3 kids in Canada and most of the decline happened just as the pill was made legal and women started having rights and didn’t depend on their husband to, for example, open a bank account and at a time when buying a house wasn’t an issue.

          Look at migrants from African countries, childbirth over there is super high, they move to a rich country and they don’t have as many kids as the average in their country of origin even though living conditions are better.

          Women rights. Contraception.

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

            You call out all the reasons they should have a kid, like free healthcare. But ignore all the reasons why people don’t want to have kids.

            You also ignore all the reasons why someone in a 3rd world country might have more kids. Like mortality rate, needing more hands for work, etc.

            Yes contraception and reproductive rights are part of it. But acting like those are the only things it’s naive.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Acting like making peoples lives more comfortable will make them want to have kids is every more naive, that’s why I was replying in the first place. There’s plenty of reasons people don’t want them, women rights gives them even more reasons, women rights and contraception gives them the means to prevent it.

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

                Lol, you’re clearly invested in one side and doing research in only one direction. There are plenty of reasons people would want kids too. There are plenty of reasons they don’t have kids that can be changed.

                You also pick out a chart that conveniently only has things that support this view called out. Ignoring correlation doesn’t equal causation. If you think so, this site will blow your mind https://search.app/RrPkGZ5UpJcSrvHU9

                I’m not here to change your mind, you’ve made it up. I’ve said my piece.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Thing is, when you see the same thing happen all over the world then saying “correlation doesn’t equal causation!” just makes you look dumb.

      • msage@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        How in the fuck do you write “unless you walk back on women rights”? Like what happens in your mind that you actually post that for the public to see? Shame on you for that misogyny, you deserve a slap.

        Also, where is this magical country where I don’t have to worry about wealth inequality and climate catastrophe?

        You are absolutely arguing in bad faith, and for that, fuck you.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Reading comprehension much?

          I never said it was acceptable to walk back on women rights, I said it’s something that people who want to see a higher birthrate will have to fight against because it’s not happening otherwise. I couldn’t give more of a crap about increasing birthrate, I won’t have kids by choice. I do give a fucking crap about women rights though!

          I mentioned historical statistics because you can look back at times before climate change and wealth inequality worried anyone and birthrate was going down as women rights increased and contraception became readily available.

          So, conclusion, if women are given the right to do more with their lives than being mothers and if contraceptives are made available, couples will make the decision not to have enough kids to renew the population, no matter how easy it is to have them, as we can see in all developed countries where socio economic inequality is lower than in the US. Scandinavian countries don’t renew their population without immigration and haven’t for a fucking long time, in Finland birthrate went below renewal rate before WW2 for fuck’s sake!

          • msage@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s the most horrendous correlation-is-causation I’ve ever seen.

            And people outside US have it better, but the trajectory is mostly the same everywhere, so you’re just full of shit.

            It’s not easy to have children ANYWHERE, and in most places it just too expensive or downright impossible due to childcare issues or tons of other things.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I’m talking about historic data and you’re unable to understand what that means in terms of variation in quality of life over time. Even when people could make it on a single income they didn’t have 2.1 kids if they had the means to prevent it.

              Hell, millionaires and billionaires don’t have enough kids to renew the population either, but I guess you will find some way to not understand that either.

              • msage@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                What the fuck are you on about?

                “Billionares are parenting on average 2.99 children”

                It’s you who mixes shit with stats and acting tough.

                Shut up.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Wrong again

                  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369921158_Fertility_behavior_at_the_top_of_socioeconomic_hierarchy

                  The average number of children among the 512 billionaires was 2.64, with US and Russian billionaires having higher averages of 2.8 and 3.2, respectively. The average number of children was also higher among older billionaires, **ranging from 1.05 among billionaires aged less than 45 ** to 3.2 among billionaires aged over 75. Among female billionaires, the average number of children was 2.41, while among males, it was slightly higher at 2.66. Tables 1-4 provide a detailed breakdown of the data.

                  1.05 kids for the ones under 45, will you look at that, just like everyone else in their generation, they don’t have kids!

  • MithranArkanere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    4 days ago

    Daycare is free where I live. It has to be. You can’t expect people to pay for public services themselves; that’s done with taxes. Corporations can’t have customers or employees without people, and to get people to make more people, you have to make it easier for them. So what makes the most sense is cutting corporation porfits, which they don’t need past a limit if they aren’t investing in things that will benefit the public. So if a corporation isn’t doing anything good, raise their taxes, use them to pay for daycare.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      60 years ago, wages were sufficient that one partner could be a homemaker even if the other only had a modest job, and they could afford a house and a car. We’ve only needed daycare as wages have stagnated against the cost of living.