Why do we need women to have more children when Elon is repopulating the entire planet with his spawn?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want a higher birth rate, baby bonuses don’t work. They need to address the housing problem, the economic uncertainty, and the unavailability of daycare/expense of daycare. Men also need to modernize their approach to marriage and family. (Gift article)

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/21/us/politics/baby-bonuses-fertility-planning-trump-aides-assess-ideas-to-boost-birthrate.html?unlocked_article_code=1.BU8.NtkN.WagWczUEi5e6&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

exactly who gets harmed with lower birthrates?

our nation is already overwhelmed with too many people.

please explain the problem with a lower birthrate?

What are you talking about? We don’t have enough people! If you had your dream and got rid of all the brown people who would pick our props? Who would care for our elderly? Who would build our houses? there aren’t enough white people to do the work.

is this like the $5000 stimulus checks and the $10000 Greenlander checks?

I got snipped after our second kid...and that was when Obama was president. I don't know what these people think they're going to do.

Anonymous wrote:None of this is going to work. You have to get people interested in being married and having families. People simply aren’t motivated to care. And they’re already tiring of life by the time they might have enough money to afford children.

France has tried more generous incentives for years and it's not working.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everything you suggest if obvious to any mother.

And yet largely ignored by republicans who can’t wrap their head around why a woman should be able to plan a family or decide she can’t afford to raise a child.

Women are largely chattel to republicans. Their opinions do not matter. Men will tell then what to feel and do.

And women will resist bringing kids into that dynamic and the birth rate will drop lower and lower.

One clue on where the pronatalist agenda of the Trump administration is coming from:

*Project 2025, the policy blueprint that has forecast much of Mr. Trump’s agenda so far, discusses family issues before anything else, opening its first chapter with a promise to “restore the family as the centerpiece of American life.”

*Much of the movement is built around promoting a very specific idea of what constitutes a family — one that includes marriage between a man and a woman, and leaves out many families that don’t conform to traditional gender roles or family structures.

The article ends with this exhortation from Dear Leader--get to it, mamas!

*Mr. Trump himself weighed in on the issue at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2023, with a statement that has become a rallying cry for many in the movement.

“We will support baby booms and we will support baby bonuses for a new baby boom,” Mr. Trump said. “I want a baby boom.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everything you suggest if obvious to any mother.

And yet largely ignored by republicans who can’t wrap their head around why a woman should be able to plan a family or decide she can’t afford to raise a child.

Women are largely chattel to republicans. Their opinions do not matter. Men will tell then what to feel and do.

Part of the plan is to cut Medicare and Social Security so that the elderly have to move in with their kids and the kids can take care of mom and dad AND the children. The "bonus" will no doubt pay for a couple of trips to the doctor and physical therapy for the parents. Just another great part of the "plan".

Great plan.

Step 1: Cut food, housing and medical assistance to low income folk.

Step 2: Incentivize low income folk to have more babies!

F**king genius, I tell you! GENIUS!

Make America grow again is going to be up to the dems. The GOP is clueless.

The population growth doesn’t have to be large. It’s a few percentage points per generation.
Anyway, somehow I think that incentives will be given to certain groups and not others.

Anonymous wrote:Everything you suggest if obvious to any mother.

And yet largely ignored by republicans who can’t wrap their head around why a woman should be able to plan a family or decide she can’t afford to raise a child.

None of this is going to work. You have to get people interested in being married and having families. People simply aren’t motivated to care. And they’re already tiring of life by the time they might have enough money to afford children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are some of the more "interesting" proposals being considered to boost fertility in the US that are mentioned in the article:

*Reserving 30% of Fulbright scholarships for married applicants or those with children. [I thought the current admin was eliminating the Fullbright program?]

*Providing a $5,000 “baby bonus” for new mothers. [But how are they going to ensure that it motivates the "right" kind of women to have more babies?]

*Funding programs to teach women about their menstrual cycles and fertility awareness. [I'm all for women knowing more about their bodies, but conservatives have been attacking sex ed programs for decades].

*National Medal of Motherhood for women with 6+ children. [Gives Soviet Union vibes.]

These ideas will cause no one to change their minds and have a baby. These are the dumb ideas of men, who know exactly zero about motherhood.

+1. What genius developed these poor quality ideas.

The number one thing they could do would be to get some justices on the court that have some respect for Women and their right to privacy and right to decide about their own pregnancies. They have created an anti-women antipregnancy environment that is threatening to women. Going through pregnancy and childbirth was fraught enough before these monsters made it even worse. Dont listen to me....overall abortion rates have increased since this administration has gotten power. That is the fact shown by the data.