To address the fertility rate collapse, many politicians say we should increase taxpayer subsidizes for those with children. However, every country in the world that has tried this approach has seen only a short bump for a few years before the decline resumes. In no case did the fertility rate climb above the population replacement level (2.1).
Currently, those with the lowest incomes have the most children while those with more money have fewer children – the pattern is remarkable. Intuitively, if household income is the primary reason for the low fertility rate, wouldn’t we expect those with more money to have more children?
Does giving away “free money” to have kids have a meaningful and sustainable impact on birth rates?
