If I learned anything during a trip to China a few years ago, it was that anti-family policies can be awfully hard to reverse once they take hold.
My wife and I were there with our son’s family, which included three small children. This was not long after China had lifted its one-child-per-family policy, which had been in place 35 years. China, like many nations today, was beginning to come to grips with the realization that it faced a demographic catastrophe if it couldn’t reverse a child-limiting trend that had become part of the nation’s psyche. But after 35 years, it appeared many young Chinese didn’t want children. Large families, meanwhile, were, and likely remain, as rare as unicorn sightings.
My wife and I were there with our son’s family, which included three small children. This was not long after China had lifted its one-child-per-family policy, which had been in place 35 years. China, like many nations today, was beginning to come to grips with the realization that it faced a demographic catastrophe if it couldn’t reverse a child-limiting trend that had become part of the nation’s psyche. But after 35 years, it appeared many young Chinese didn’t want children. Large families, meanwhile, were, and likely remain, as rare as unicorn sightings.
We went to an ice cream parlor in Beijing. The servers seemed as nervous around the children as if we had come in with wild animals. It didn’t help that one of them dropped a bowl, which shattered on the floor.
With its national birthrate far below the accepted replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman in childbearing age, some local governments in China have begun offering cash bonuses to parents who have babies which, the Global Times reported, increase in amount for every child born.
Other countries have tried this and more, yet none has found a scheme that works in the long term. Birthrates remain low globally.
And now the Trump administration is about to try its hand.
Children seem to be much more readily accepted in the United States than in China, and yet the birthrate here is — or rather ought to be — as big of a concern as anywhere else.
A new CDC report this week said the fertility rate in the United States rose last year by 1% above what was a record low in 2023. The ‘24 rate was 54.6 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age.
CNN said experts cautioned that the uptick does not signal a change in what now is a long downward trend that gained momentum during the great recession of 2008. Traditionally, birthrates have tracked economic growth, but that trend has not held in recent years.
President Trump has talked about the need to create a new baby boom. He has good reason to be worried, as do the leaders of other countries. As the New York Times put it this week, a broad coalition of concerned people warn “of a future in which a smaller workforce cannot support an aging population and the social safety net. If the birthrate is not turned around, they fear, the country’s economy could collapse and, ultimately, human civilization could be at risk.”
As I’ve written before, capitalism requires a steady population growth in order to maximize outputs and increase markets through competition. While the population isn’t yet shrinking, the current trend makes it inevitable, and that would make government deficits and the national debt harder to address. The nation’s military would be harder to sustain as recruiting pools shrink along with the number of taxpayers available to support them.
Far from bringing peace, dwindling nations worldwide are more likely to engage in adventurism against smaller and weaker foes with rich resources.
Business Insider last year reviewed what other nations are trying to do about this. South Korea gives new parents a monthly stipend until their baby is a year old. Kazakhstan hands out medals to women — silver for six children, gold for seven or more, plus a lifelong financial allowance.
In Russia, President Vladimir Putin a few years ago offered $17,000 to people with 10 or more kids.
Other countries have tried public service ads on television urging young people to procreate. None seems to have made a dent in the problem. Money doesn’t seem to get to the root of the issue, which some identify as a lack of desire to sacrifice a career for parenthood.
It’s unclear what the Trump administration has in mind, although some have suggested making in vitro fertilization easier to obtain. The Times said the president is considering reserving a share of Fulbright scholarships for applicants who are married or have children, or bonus checks payable to each mother after delivery.
Those sound like warmed-over policies that have failed elsewhere.
In the Beijing ice cream parlor, the staff adapted quickly to the broken bowl, sweeping up the mess and giving the children plastic bowls instead. Solving the global issue of a shrinking population, however, won’t be nearly so easy.
With its national birthrate far below the accepted replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman in childbearing age, some local governments in China have begun offering cash bonuses to parents who have babies which, the Global Times reported, increase in amount for every child born.
Other countries have tried this and more, yet none has found a scheme that works in the long term. Birthrates remain low globally.
And now the Trump administration is about to try its hand.
Children seem to be much more readily accepted in the United States than in China, and yet the birthrate here is — or rather ought to be — as big of a concern as anywhere else.
A new CDC report this week said the fertility rate in the United States rose last year by 1% above what was a record low in 2023. The ‘24 rate was 54.6 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age.
CNN said experts cautioned that the uptick does not signal a change in what now is a long downward trend that gained momentum during the great recession of 2008. Traditionally, birthrates have tracked economic growth, but that trend has not held in recent years.
President Trump has talked about the need to create a new baby boom. He has good reason to be worried, as do the leaders of other countries. As the New York Times put it this week, a broad coalition of concerned people warn “of a future in which a smaller workforce cannot support an aging population and the social safety net. If the birthrate is not turned around, they fear, the country’s economy could collapse and, ultimately, human civilization could be at risk.”
As I’ve written before, capitalism requires a steady population growth in order to maximize outputs and increase markets through competition. While the population isn’t yet shrinking, the current trend makes it inevitable, and that would make government deficits and the national debt harder to address. The nation’s military would be harder to sustain as recruiting pools shrink along with the number of taxpayers available to support them.
Far from bringing peace, dwindling nations worldwide are more likely to engage in adventurism against smaller and weaker foes with rich resources.
Business Insider last year reviewed what other nations are trying to do about this. South Korea gives new parents a monthly stipend until their baby is a year old. Kazakhstan hands out medals to women — silver for six children, gold for seven or more, plus a lifelong financial allowance.
In Russia, President Vladimir Putin a few years ago offered $17,000 to people with 10 or more kids.
Other countries have tried public service ads on television urging young people to procreate. None seems to have made a dent in the problem. Money doesn’t seem to get to the root of the issue, which some identify as a lack of desire to sacrifice a career for parenthood.
It’s unclear what the Trump administration has in mind, although some have suggested making in vitro fertilization easier to obtain. The Times said the president is considering reserving a share of Fulbright scholarships for applicants who are married or have children, or bonus checks payable to each mother after delivery.
Those sound like warmed-over policies that have failed elsewhere.
In the Beijing ice cream parlor, the staff adapted quickly to the broken bowl, sweeping up the mess and giving the children plastic bowls instead. Solving the global issue of a shrinking population, however, won’t be nearly so easy.
RSS Feed
