Better get busy, people

"Seoul is rolling out a new cash voucher scheme to subsidize the costs of having a child.

The city is giving $1,650 in cash vouchers to parents for each baby born in 2022.

South Korea has a fertility rate of .84, the lowest in the world.

The Seoul metropolitan government is distributing cash handouts to parents of newborns in a bid to boost the country's dismal birth rate.

Parents who registered the birth of a child from January 1, 2022, will be eligible to redeem 2 million South Korean won (or $1,650) worth of cash vouchers, per the Chosun Ilbo. The parents can redeem vouchers online and at local community centers but will have to use the vouchers by the end of 2022.

The incentive is among several childbirth subsidies that the South Korean government has rolled out in recent months. In November, the country's National Health Insurance Service announced that it would give cash vouchers of $837 to new mothers and $1,172 to new mothers who give birth to twins.

The South Korean authorities also lifted a previous restriction that prevented new parents from using vouchers to pay for medical expenses."

Having my baby
What a lovely way of asking
Your country for money
Having my baby
What a lovely way of saying
I need some extra dough

The Canadian province of Quebec has subsidized child production for over a quarter century.

The Canadian province of Quebec has subsidized child production for over a quarter century.

Universal childcare is great. Do they offer anything else?

A million won!

I guess that covers the lifetime costs of 2M a month of raising a child to maturity.


if you want a growing population u need to do like the UK and lay on a proper welfare state with all kinds of lucrative fortnightly cash benefits for mothers. Free housing, free education, etc.

A million won!

I guess that covers the lifetime costs of 2M a month of raising a child to maturity.

if you want a growing population u need to do like the UK and lay on a proper welfare state with all kinds of lucrative fortnightly cash benefits for mothers. Free housing, free education, etc.

Except the UK let in all kinds of people (from the Commonwealth) on visas + their extended families.

Korea only wants immigrants to do the jobs that Koreans won't do. They don't want them raising a family here and providing for them, in the same way, as they do for Koreans.

The misogynistic dinosaurs that still roam this country treat
women like shit in the workplace. More so when they are
pregnant or have children. Also husbands are looked down
upon by coworkers when they want to take maternity leave
and help with the baby.

Only when these primitive, stupid practices are eradicated
will the birthrate increase.

This is plainly the fault of the government, which is basically a big
herd of dinosaurs.  There should be commercials and ads
promoting and showing happy families sharing child rearing
activities. Young people of both sexes will see these and things
will change.

Screw NHIS! Trying to pose as being helpful and providing support.
When my wife was pregnant, she had some complications that were potentially life threatening for the fetus. It was not some one in a million case either. A fairly common condition. Guess what? The treatment and hospital stays weren't covered by NHIS. How great of them.
So we ended up paying around 5 million out of pocket to add a very much needed new member to the society.

Screw NHIS! Trying to pose as being helpful and providing support.
When my wife was pregnant, she had some complications that were potentially life threatening for the fetus. It was not some one in a million case either. A fairly common condition. Guess what? The treatment and hospital stays weren't covered by NHIS. How great of them.
So we ended up paying around 5 million out of pocket to add a very much needed new member to the society.

Yeah, it is absolutely crazy. This idiot, Lee Jae-Myung, wants hair loss treatment
to be covered by the NHS.

Is this specimen completely out of touch with reality, or what?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/06/south-korean-presidential-hopeful-says-state-should-pay-for-hair-loss-treatment

The misogynistic dinosaurs that still roam this country treat
women like shit in the workplace. More so when they are
pregnant or have children. Also husbands are looked down
upon by coworkers when they want to take maternity leave
and help with the baby.

Only when these primitive, stupid practices are eradicated
will the birthrate increase.

This is plainly the fault of the government, which is basically a big
herd of dinosaurs.  There should be commercials and ads
promoting and showing happy families sharing child rearing
activities. Young people of both sexes will see these and things
will change.

This.  Also in such a country (widest gender wage disparity in the OECD), bashing feminists and measures to promote equality because it gives  you so many fanboys among angry young Korean men, as the young leader of the conservative party here likes to do, is so shortsighted it beggars belief.

A fairly common condition. Guess what? The treatment and hospital stays weren't covered by NHIS. How great of them.
So we ended up paying around 5 million out of pocket to add a very much needed new member to the society.

Yeah NHIS is practically useless.

Woe to you if you have a rare condition! You could be out of pocket 20-30 million won.

That's pretty shite, isn't it.

Personally, we carry another 400.000  a month in payments for extra private health insurances, just to be covered some more in case of those, as Sagi put it, 'rare conditions'. Shouldn't have to carry so much extra, and it still doesn't cover all costs, or all treatments.
 

Yeah, we got supplementary as well. I was in hospital for
three days with diverticulitis. Got a semi-private room.
Came out to about 200,000.

Anyone here for the long-term should have private medical insurance. NHIS will subsidize a lot until it doesn't.

Yeah, it is absolutely crazy. This idiot, Lee Jae-Myung, wants hair loss treatment
to be covered by the NHS.

Is this specimen completely out of touch with reality, or what?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/06/south-korean-presidential-hopeful-says-state-should-pay-for-hair-loss-treatment

I had to google that one. That looks like it would be uncomfortable. 200.000 won, not bad though.

Between my privates, they covered the 3,000,000 for my new knee. But....I  can't claim on another replacement (knee, hip, whatever) for 5 years. I had to pay 100% for a clean-out on the other, because of this. Only a grand though. 2 years to go. Should be about bone on bone by then 

Well admittedly a knee in your privates does sound like a pretty rare condition.

;)

The reason the birth rate is low is because from age 18 to ~35 most people want to frolic around and have a hard time making commitments. There's also 40% who are not gainfully employed enough to really give marriage and chil-rearing a go. Plus another 20% to whom more than one kid is a stretch financially. Finally, medical advances in birth control and abortion make it easy to plan pregnancy.

You want high birth rates? Get people marrying young, have kids be uhm...be an economic non-moneypit (agrarian/trade labor), support religious notions relating to family practices etc. You look where birth rates are highest it's where these things are the case.

The same thing is happening in "enlightened" Europe and those measures still aren't boosting rates.

The people on here bitching about birth rates and the govt could contribute by having another kid and not taking overseas vacations and blowing money on hobbies and gear. If you don't want to do that, then stop blaming other people and look at yourself.

You can give people 4 years paid maternity, it still doesn't solve the problem. When most women and their partners have little desire for parenting during 2/3rds of fertility AND the most optimal parenting strategy is to push resources on 1-2 offspring for them to have a good outcome at maturity, you're going to get birth rates like these.

The reason the birth rate is low is because from age 18 to ~35 most people want to frolic around and have a hard time making commitments. There's also 40% who are not gainfully employed enough to really give marriage and chil-rearing a go. Plus another 20% to whom more than one kid is a stretch financially. Finally, medical advances in birth control and abortion make it easy to plan pregnancy.

You want high birth rates? Get people marrying young, have kids be uhm...be an economic non-moneypit (agrarian/trade labor), support religious notions relating to family practices etc. You look where birth rates are highest it's where these things are the case.

The same thing is happening in "enlightened" Europe and those measures still aren't boosting rates.

The people on here bitching about birth rates and the govt could contribute by having another kid and not taking overseas vacations and blowing money on hobbies and gear. If you don't want to do that, then stop blaming other people and look at yourself.

You can give people 4 years paid maternity, it still doesn't solve the problem. When most women and their partners have little desire for parenting during 2/3rds of fertility AND the most optimal parenting strategy is to push resources on 1-2 offspring for them to have a good outcome at maturity, you're going to get birth rates like these.

If someone is still "frolicking" in their early 30s, they need to do some growing up.

As for your other assertions, do you have any research to support it?

Do you have any children? Could your matrimonial/parenting situation be giving you a biased perspective?

If someone is still "frolicking" in their early 30s, they need to do some growing up.

I'm a huge fan of frolicking and I'm well past my early 30's. That said I wouldn't use it as an excuse for a low birth rate. Quite the contrary in fact!

I'd be interested to enquire as to the effect of the pandemic on birth rates. I'd expect it may have compounded the problem.

There was a similar scheme used in Australia named 'the Baby Bonus' that was quite successful in raising fertility rates.
https://theconversation.com/what-the-baby-bonus-boost-looks-like-across-ten-years-81563

It's easy to go back to work here after giving birth.  Right?  Right?

Employees respect paternity leave.  Right? Right?

There is plentiful shame-free help for women who experience postpartum depression.  Right? Right?

It's easy to go back to work here after giving birth.  Right?  Right?

Employees respect paternity leave.  Right? Right?

There is plentiful shame-free help for women who experience postpartum depression.  Right? Right?

Then explain low birth rates in "Enlightened" Europe?

It's not the government support. It's the fact that people aged 18 to ~35 generally don't want to have kids and that pregnancy from 35-45 is not an easy thing.

Where are fertility rates highest? Where government support is indifferent, agrarianism/unskilled labor is still a thing, there is substantial societal pressure to marry young and secondary education is not as widespread. And access to abortion and birth control is not as readily available.

It's the cold hard truth. You can fling money at the issue but you can't force 23 year olds to marry and stop partying.

As for your other assertions, do you have any research to support it?

You need research to support the idea that getting married at 18 vs. 35 is going to affect birth rates?

Take a look at a map of birth rates. Look at what the countries above replacement level vs. below tend to have.