“Conservatives should oppose a move back toward the pre-1996 model. But they should support policy that gets the most resources to the working families most in need, that makes joining the labor force and earning income generally more attractive, and that also affords a parent greater flexibility to take time off after giving birth, or to spend fewer hours in the labor market and more hours at home with a young child.
If any of those outcomes strike you as a problem, you may be the problem.”
It is rather amusing that the conservative solution to fix the American family and our low birth rate is a policy born in communism and continued on in socialist societies. In eastern Europe six months (not 6 weeks) of maternity leave and up to 3 years of subsequent leave (with whole or partial income replacement) has not reversed a falling birth rate (perhaps it has stabilized it at a low level) In nearly every county in the world the wealthy have fewer children than the poor and as a country gets richer through time the birth rate falls - see China for the most recent example. The policies sound like they should work but the fact that they have not suggests other factors dominate the decision about whether to and how many children to have. I raised four and I can tell you that any incentive would be appreciated but a 5k credit is not nearly enough. There is not enough appetite in the USA to push a number that is high enough to really change behavior.
Well said. You really are a good writer, maybe the most articulate writer "conservatives" have going for them right now. I put "conservatives" in quotation marks here because in many ways you are an old-fashioned liberal: proposing to reform those things that aren't working well—as opposed to conserving those things that are, which of course is equally important. Any healthy democracy requires both liberals and conservatives. (See Emerson's essay on Conservatives)
Sometimes, like this, you can best judge a person by his enemies. Those enemies don't hate Vance because of his child tax credit but from fear he will succeed Trump and end corparatism and forever wars.
Walz is a generic leftist while Vance is something new.
Fine writing except it’s premised on an embarrassing misinterpretation of Vance’s words. Read it again. Vance is not commiserating that families don’t earn enough to redeem the child tax credit. He is very clearly bemoaning that he earns too much to qualify. He may not know the exact amount but it’s unrealistically high for most families ($400k jointly last I checked.) The line was dangled for the very same old school, flat-taxer Republicans you’re panning in the article, the crowd who retch at any policy that could be construed through squinty eyes as welfare, even progressive tax.
This was great. As a mother who has lived in 2 countries and talks to a lot of other mom's, (even abroad when I can). The policies that really help families be healthy are affordable daycare, excellent healthcare (my personal preference is a mix of public/private with children always covered), quality public schools. That nails a lot of problems. 20 years of experiences and listening. These policies help raise a whole society, decent citizens and provide ROI. You invest in people they are more likely to give back.
I lived in Portland. They have buried themselves in Weird and don't seem to be recovering. It's a bizarre, corrupt, poorly governed, self fulfilling prophecy. Let's not do that.
Affordable housing will help the most as that is the biggest chunk of anyone's paycheck. That few hundred dollars can alleviate a lot of stress.
The problem is that the market is overvalued (through monopoly pricing, zirp, PE, hedge, foreign ownership, parking money) we have not mathematically solved/calculated a gentle deflation. That is a wealth transfer. I'm aware and hate them on principle except when the funds were favorably gained through redlining, zirp, gatekeeping etc...... Just like in the commercial real estate sector.
So you add affordable housing through lowering costs like 3D printing, completely disrupt the corruption prevalent in land acquisition and construction or you get population decline.
“Yes, this is the governor (Walz-MN) who set up a hotline to call and report anyone violating COVID restrictions, after all.”
“Conservatives should oppose a move back toward the pre-1996 model. But they should support policy that gets the most resources to the working families most in need, that makes joining the labor force and earning income generally more attractive, and that also affords a parent greater flexibility to take time off after giving birth, or to spend fewer hours in the labor market and more hours at home with a young child.
If any of those outcomes strike you as a problem, you may be the problem.”
*Don’t be the problem.
It is rather amusing that the conservative solution to fix the American family and our low birth rate is a policy born in communism and continued on in socialist societies. In eastern Europe six months (not 6 weeks) of maternity leave and up to 3 years of subsequent leave (with whole or partial income replacement) has not reversed a falling birth rate (perhaps it has stabilized it at a low level) In nearly every county in the world the wealthy have fewer children than the poor and as a country gets richer through time the birth rate falls - see China for the most recent example. The policies sound like they should work but the fact that they have not suggests other factors dominate the decision about whether to and how many children to have. I raised four and I can tell you that any incentive would be appreciated but a 5k credit is not nearly enough. There is not enough appetite in the USA to push a number that is high enough to really change behavior.
Well said. You really are a good writer, maybe the most articulate writer "conservatives" have going for them right now. I put "conservatives" in quotation marks here because in many ways you are an old-fashioned liberal: proposing to reform those things that aren't working well—as opposed to conserving those things that are, which of course is equally important. Any healthy democracy requires both liberals and conservatives. (See Emerson's essay on Conservatives)
Sometimes, like this, you can best judge a person by his enemies. Those enemies don't hate Vance because of his child tax credit but from fear he will succeed Trump and end corparatism and forever wars.
Walz is a generic leftist while Vance is something new.
Fine writing except it’s premised on an embarrassing misinterpretation of Vance’s words. Read it again. Vance is not commiserating that families don’t earn enough to redeem the child tax credit. He is very clearly bemoaning that he earns too much to qualify. He may not know the exact amount but it’s unrealistically high for most families ($400k jointly last I checked.) The line was dangled for the very same old school, flat-taxer Republicans you’re panning in the article, the crowd who retch at any policy that could be construed through squinty eyes as welfare, even progressive tax.
This was great. As a mother who has lived in 2 countries and talks to a lot of other mom's, (even abroad when I can). The policies that really help families be healthy are affordable daycare, excellent healthcare (my personal preference is a mix of public/private with children always covered), quality public schools. That nails a lot of problems. 20 years of experiences and listening. These policies help raise a whole society, decent citizens and provide ROI. You invest in people they are more likely to give back.
I lived in Portland. They have buried themselves in Weird and don't seem to be recovering. It's a bizarre, corrupt, poorly governed, self fulfilling prophecy. Let's not do that.
Affordable housing will help the most as that is the biggest chunk of anyone's paycheck. That few hundred dollars can alleviate a lot of stress.
The problem is that the market is overvalued (through monopoly pricing, zirp, PE, hedge, foreign ownership, parking money) we have not mathematically solved/calculated a gentle deflation. That is a wealth transfer. I'm aware and hate them on principle except when the funds were favorably gained through redlining, zirp, gatekeeping etc...... Just like in the commercial real estate sector.
So you add affordable housing through lowering costs like 3D printing, completely disrupt the corruption prevalent in land acquisition and construction or you get population decline.
A rock and hard place for conservatives aint it?