The Trump administration is apparently looking to introduce a “baby bonus” —a cash payment to people who have babies— in an attempt to reverse the decline in the US fertility rate. The total fertility rate in the US is very low, 1.62 children per woman in 2023. And it’s been falling most of this century:
Higher than a lot of developed countries but well below the replacement rate for about 2.1 children per woman. I always thought the religious people in the US were breeding enough to make up for the others? Harvey Danger lied to me [youtube.com].
This sort of paying for babies has been tried a few times. Wikipedia has a page on baby bonuses that lists, some 11 counties. Most are piddling amounts but let’s look at two places where a similar sort of bonus as the US is discussion were introduced: Australia and Singapore.
Australia
Introduced a baby bonus in early 2000’s. $3,000 in 2004, raising to as much as $5437 in 2012. Slashed to around $2,000 in 2014. Did it affect the fertility rate?
Maybe? The fertility rate rose, a bit, from 1.76 in 2002 to 2.02 in 2008. But then it fell steadily from 2008 and was sitting at 1.64 in 2023.
Singapore
Singapore has a more complex system including cash gift, matching savings, tax credits and so on. The initial scheme was introduced in 2001, I don’t know the amounts at introduction but it has risen. In 2008 and 2012, when my kids were born, it was around a $6,000 cash gift, for first and second child (it goes up after that). Today the cash gift is $11,000 for first and second child. Has there been any change in fertility rate?
Hahaha! Singapore’s fertility rate in 2000 was 1.34. Today it’s .94. In a few generations there will be no Singaporeans.
China
As a bonus let’s look at China, because this week the Economist has an article on China’s attempts to pay for babies. Some local in China has offered up to $38,000 all-in (including things other than cash, like paid leave.) But, it’s unclear if it is helping any. One province saw a 17% increase in births in 2024 but a lot of that can be attributed to 2024 coinciding with the Chinese Zodiac’s year of the dragon, traditionally the most auspicious year to have a kid.
The best quote in the article is this one talking about our a particular local, Hothot’s, offering:
Wang Feng of the University of California, Irvine, thinks Hohhot’s policy will not “make a dent” in the city’s population decline. “Babies cannot be bought,” he says. “The cost is lifelong and it’s not just monetary.”
The Economist, China’s $38,000 baby formula [economist.com]
China, Singapore and Japan are bad, but Korea is leading the race to the bottom:
This is from GapMinder, you can play with it here [gapminder.org].
So, yea. This is a problem for a lot of counties. But how fucked is everyone? Seriously fucked. In fact, South Korea is so bad, it’s doomed, past the point of now return. At least according to this Kurzgesagt video:
So, this is an existential crisis, if you want your culture and/or country to live on, you need to find ways of encouraging people to have more babies. A lot more. Quickly. But really, most of the “first world” is doomed at this point.
One last thing, a lot of discussion around this the Trump Administration’s discussion of a Baby Bonus includes an unhealthy dose of modern dysfunctional politics. It’s sad that we have to talk about racism and the return of Nazi ideology, but here we are. The nasty, racist, christo-fascist streak in MAGA must be worried sick about the end of (white) America because empowered, woke, women aren’t having enough babies! Er mah gawd.
The Hill quotes Art Caplan, a professor of medical ethics at the New York University School of Medicine:
“If you’re really interested in babies, there are plenty of immigrants here whose kids are being deported,” Caplan said. “If you’re interested in babies, there are plenty of people who would come here and become citizens and bring their babies.”
Caplan argued that what the Trump administration wants is the “right kind of babies.” He called the notion “morally offensive.”
Jeff Arnold, Would $5K ‘baby bonus’ be enough to boost US birth rate? [thehill.com] published by The Hill
At least bribing people to have babies is better than the Handmaiden-esque alternative.