this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
1059 points (99.2% liked)

People Twitter

6843 readers
1514 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 minutes ago

They'll need a population boost after Trump deny's immigrants entrance into America.

[–] qbus@lemmy.world 3 points 7 minutes ago

$5k in a Roth IRA in the sp500 at birth is the only way that it is worth anything.

[–] Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee 18 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 hour 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.

[–] SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works 2 points 28 minutes ago

Wages have not kept up with productivity and GDP increases since the 1970s.

How about making single income middle class families possible again, so you can have one stay at home parent.

[–] baltakatei@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 hours ago

monkey paw finger curls You get free healthcare coverage and half minimum wage for each child just for existing. However, you and your child must renounce your citizenship, forfeit your passport, and accept indentured servant status until you can buy back your citizenship after repaying the government child support in full.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 17 points 4 hours ago

Having a kid will cost you much more than 100grand. Giving you 5k to fuck is such an insult.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 30 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The type of person who would think 5k for having a kid is a great deal is exactly the type of person conservatives would bitch about having kids and leeching all the other government resources.

[–] Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee 4 points 2 hours ago

Coincidentally, it's also the exact type of person conservatives want having kids. They make up the majority of prison labor, military fodder, and wage slaves.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 46 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

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?

[–] Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago

yea the birth rate is going to plummet.

I'm not so sure. Impoverished countries have the highest birth rates. I can imagine the logic of the wealthy 0.001% being "if we make the rest of the country as broke as Somalia, the birth rate will also be as high as Somalia."

[–] GenXLiberal@lemmy.world 14 points 6 hours ago

And all to fund tax cuts for the wealthy - who don’t need them.

[–] peekingduck@lemm.ee 17 points 6 hours ago

It really is a bummer to have such a legitimately retarded man just riding this country into the earths crust all Slim Pickens style.

[–] ERROR_100_000_100@infosec.pub 37 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

That's a weird way of wording "You'll only have to pay 95K out of your 100K bill of your hospital stay for giving birth"

5K PER MONTH and paying for the full hospital bill would be a great place start. But of course, they aren't really pro-life to begin with.

Pro-Birth =/= Pro-Life

They don't care what happens after birth.

[–] Lemmy_2019@lemmy.one 2 points 3 hours ago

$100k wtf? I only remember paying for parking at the hospital...evil socialism!

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago

In a lot of places 5K a month covers daycare, and not much more

[–] The_Caretaker@lemm.ee 8 points 6 hours ago

Wow, two months rent for having a baby. That should fix it.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

daycare costs $2k a month? are they training the kids to be astronauts?

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

No, just extracting the maximum possible amount of profit, it's the American way. And 2k is the low end.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

wild. you'd think as a capitalist country that wants to maximize workforce for cheap labor people would be more incentivized to procreate. yet you have insane costs to childbirth alone, no parental leave for either parent (or a pathetic amount on state level), no child support... and this on top.

[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 1 points 50 minutes ago

Same problem as ever. Short term gain vs long term growth.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

$2k gets you Jimmy "Boots" McClusky, on day release from the work farm.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 18 points 7 hours ago

Based on data presented here: https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child

It takes a minimum of $200K USD to raise a child from birth to 18; which works out to ~$1K/mo.

If the Government were serious in wanting to address the aging population issue, the best way to tackle it would be to provide family funding at this level for a family’s first ~3 children.

Would it be expensive? Absolutely it would be in the initial term - but the increase in economic activity would arguably more than cover it in the long run.

Would it lead to inflation? Not if the costs were derived from taxes due to the government (which currently get dodged), rather than through national debt.

Would it lead to a positive outcome for the nation? Arguably yes, but there may also be unintended consequences to the negative. Human greed knows no bounds, after all.

[–] Hayduke@lemmy.world 85 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

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.

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

giving birth in a hospital costs $10k, after insurance payback?

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Our deductible was about 6,500. It depends what kind of plan you're on

[–] raltoid@lemmy.world 19 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours 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 15 points 8 hours 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 168 points 12 hours ago (6 children)

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.

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours 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)

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 59 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

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.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

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

Mmm yes, Borrasca.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] KelvarIW@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Free daycare and free healthcare for people under 18 are two social services that would only benefit parents. How about free college tuition moving forward?

This is just a sad attempt making an exclusive version of establishment Dem stimulus checks...

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 hours ago

Idk, it seems like US doesn't even have the basic shit going on, any of that is a good news.

[–] papertowels@mander.xyz 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Additionally, government supplemented/paid for day care is the only way to pay the teachers fairly. Given places often aim for 4 students:1 teacher, you already have a hard cap of 4*monthly fees for salary for that one teacher. I pay 1.2k/ month, so a teacher can get a max of 4.8k/month if EVERYTHING went to them, which we all know it doesn't due to taxes, administrative staff, utilities, facility fees, etc.

However, if they raise fees, they price people out of a much-needed service at a time when folks typically haven't reached their max earning potential yet.

[–] fuzzzerd@programming.dev 2 points 5 hours ago

And folks wonder why parents these days are so old. Earning potential to afford daycare in the first place.

[–] boreengreen@lemm.ee 20 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

My personsl hypothesis is that when couples are living in times of prosperity or growth, they can see a future and can comfortably grow a pension, then they are likely to consider having kids. This also happens to be the time they are getting a share of the wealth society generates.

In recession and uncertain times, couples tend to hold of on getting kids, and if they do get kids, they do it much later in life, when they have saved some money.

Of course couples need free time as well. If both parents need to work full time, it's gonna be a lot less palatable to have kids.

I think the global low fertility is the problem of infinite growth self correcting.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 7 points 8 hours ago

No matter the state of the economy, if you look at birthrate stats in various countries, it goes down with women rights and access to contraception. People just don't want kids.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] salvaria@lemmy.blahaj.zone 146 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (3 children)

WE CAN'T DO THAT, IT'S LIKE PUNISHING THE MOMS WHO ALREADY HAD CHILDREN!!!! /s

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] boreengreen@lemm.ee 22 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

This has been tried elsewhere I believe. It ends up being a gift for those who can afford kids anyway, and does not incease the number of couples deciding to have children. A small gift for upper middle class.

Better wealth distribution however; that works.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›