Reply to Family life sucks

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Family life sucks"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Np I have friends overseas. The pay isn’t 100% of your salary on maternity leave (and their pay is already lower). So once they have a baby, their salaries take a big hit. They can’t return to work earlier because it’s stigmatized and daycare don’t take babies before 1 (one friend mentioned before 3 but idk if that’s true). Once kids are school aged, they have the same issues that moms have here where school ends at 3 but work ends at 5, however aftercare’s aren’t plentiful. Many stick to one kid for financial and logistical reasons. My Norwegian friends own their own condo, but it’s a 2 bedroom. They only had one kid for space reasons. I’m sure none of those reasons are insurmountable for people who really want kids but maternity leave isn’t this panacea that it’s purported to be. [/quote]

I'm sure you understand that it varies by country.[b] In Norway, the pay is 80%[/b]. For one year of parental leave split between two parents.[b] Their pay takes a 20% hit [/b]but they don't have to do any work, and their jobs are protected.

Do you think things work better in the U.S., where there are 0 weeks of mandated paid parental leave for either parent? And only 40% of Americans have access to unpaid leave under FMLA? Do you think that's encouraging people to have babies more than 80% paid leave for a year?

And I ask again, why are we as a society okay with only women taking a salary hit for having children? Why shouldn't parents bear equal risk in bringing children into the world?

If your solution is to fund parental leave 100% of salary instead of 80% of salary, I'm all for it. But I strongly suspect that's not what you're suggesting. [/quote]

The max parental leave amount is $1,538 a week in Norway. It’s 80% if you have a lower wage job in Norway.  Stop being misleading.

[/quote]

Wages aren't comparable in the US and Norway. Norwegians pay a maximum of $300 in a healthcare costs (free for minors and pregnant women), have free higher education, have highly subsidized childcare (costs about $115/mo), and get a monthly cash benefit for all children under the age of 18 to offset the cost of having children (with an extra supplement for infants and single parents). [/quote]

Where are you getting your information and pls check the sliding scale. Only low income workers get that and they have to have individually paid into the system several years. You don’t just show up pregnant and your kid gets ER free delivery, snap and Medicaid like here.

[b]Also, if you’re going to throw around “cost” data, you need to include what the employers or taxpayers are paying per month, not just the employee.  
[/b]United Nations data has a good breakdown they release every few years. [/quote]

I don't care what employers pay per month. I care about what ordinary citizens are paying.

And before you melt down, Norway literally has higher GDP per capita than the U.S. They're plenty productive. [/quote]

You still don’t understand SWF work do you? 
Nor have you event been to Norway, nor have any friends there.

But hey, the generic ChatGPT links and studies out of context suit you just fine.  I bet you even call that “research”. [/quote]

Yeah NIH and OECD studies are whack! Yes, I know how the SWF works. If you’re now trying to pivot and say Norway’s policy can only be pulled off because of that, you’re wrong. Numerous countries without an equivalent have similar policies. And the United States is wealthier overall.

[b]Do we need to increase taxes to pay for this in the U.S.? Definitely. That’s okay! More taxes but healthcare at a tenth of price,  childcare at a quarter of the cost, and college for free is a very reasonable trade off.[/b]

And fwiw, I’m in the highest tax bracket and would benefit the least from such policies. Part of why I’m passionate about parental leave is because my employer offers 22 weeks paid. Everyone should get that.[/quote]

I disagree that increasing taxes to fund childcare or parental leave will result in more babies. If that’s your point. I personally don’t want the expectation that women stay home for extended periods of time after having a child.

What will result in more babies is a better economy and higher wages. This is what the Western European countries are missing. That’s fantastic you have paid parental leave, but what about the rest of the time? Mortgage debt is much higher in these countries and everyone I know seems more financially constrained than in the US.

Not only are the economies of these countries stagnant and declining, but they have fewer babies. Doesn’t seem like we should be copying their policies. [/quote]

Western Europeans have much lower levels of poverty, higher levels of happiness, and lower levels of financial stress.

Yes, providing generous benefits to families for having children will at least stave off further decline in the birth rate.

Are you aware of any industrialized nations with a birth rate over replacement? I only know of Israel, which also has much stronger parental leave and social safety net policies. Every other industrialized nation has a declining birth rate below replacement.

Perhaps if you’d like to increase the birth rate, you should take a page out of Somalia’s book and govern accordingly. That’s the kind of political system that supports a high birth rate.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics