You should have "one for your husband, one for your wife and one for your country," says Australia's treasurer/prime minister-in-waiting. He's not speaking Australian, referring to the nation's favorite drink. These are the new fertility rules.
Along with other Western politicians concerned about the global ageing population crisis, Peter Costello, a father of three, wants more than votes -- he wants babies. What's more, he wants net profit: more babies than it takes simply to replace two parents. And he's prepared to pay for it. From July onwards, the Australian government is to pay an un-means-tested A$3,000 (US$2,153) for every newborn, rising to A$5,000 by 2008.
It's not just an Australian concern. Every EU country (old and new) is below the population replacement level of 2.1 children. Italy has already addressed the problem with "the Berlusconi baby bonus" of 1,000 euros (US$1,227) for all women giving birth to a second child by the end of this year. And in Laviano, a tiny hilltop town southeast of Naples, the local mayor has offered a further 10,000 euros in an effort to stop young people leaving to find jobs and keep his town from disappearing.
But when a big country like Australia (population 20 million), renowned for its harsh immigration policies, offers incentives for babies, it smells more like bad attitude than real need: A$3,000 is both too much and not enough.
It's too much because it would be cheaper to buy the whole nation a free round rather than tell adult couples to tuck up in bed and procreate as if there were no tomorrow and no yesterday. What does Costello think the past 30 years has meant for women, if he now implies we must be happy with our laundry and our little ones?
It's too much because if I were 15, naive and poor, putting a few grand in my bank account by getting pregnant a couple of times might seem an easier option in life than either work or study. It's too much because there are already children in line from other countries who could be paid to have a better life in a safer, less densely populated country. It's too much because older people who are already born could be more productive if we cared more.
But more than anything it's not enough. If being paid to have results-based sex for the sake of your country is the deal, isn't this just another form of nationalized prostitution?
I'm not a parent, but any parent will tell you the offer is verging on offensive, and not what having babies is all about.
Just do the math. In the UK, the cost of a child's life was recently calculated as ?164,000 (US$301,268), with the average cost of the first five years alone being more than ?20,000.
If the principle of paying people to reproduce is a good one, then ?1,200 is a cheap bribe.
"You'll have to make up for some of your friends that aren't even replicating themselves," Costello told Australians in his ninth budget. To non-self-replicants (the new word for non-parents?), this man is not addressing the reasons why people are having fewer children.
We in the West are having fewer children, later in life, for as many reasons as there are individuals: we don't want them, we haven't met our life partner, we can't afford a mortgage and a child, we prefer freedom and choice over and above family, we're still travelling, we can afford to look after our aging parents but not more children of our own.
Having to spell out the many scenarios that inform the choices of modern life to a bean counter who would crush them because he thinks they're a luxury means we're witnessing a government losing touch with reality as well as the cost of living.
Life is far more complicated than that. Maybe families are the future, but it's not necessarily how things are working out. Divorce rates, cohabitation, single parenthood, the rise of happy singles, domestic violence -- it's all much more subtle than a birthrate graph that should read 2.6 children per family and rising instead of 2.1 and falling.
Paying people to have babies is a cack-handed, retrograde, imperialist policy. How different is it from eugenics or the white Australia policy of the 1960s? What is it if not another way of saying, "We want more people like us, not people like you?"
Not only that, it's a wham-bam man's view of solving the problem, equating having babies with all the emotional intelligence of a quick shag and a notch on the bedpost, with all the satisfaction of an orgasm yet none of the responsibility of what follows.
A numbers game is not what having babies is all about; and it's not what not having babies is all about, either.
Recently, the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) published three of my articles on the US presidential election, which is to be held on Nov. 5. I would like to share my perspective on the intense and stalemated presidential election with the people of Taiwan, as well as Taiwanese and Chinese Americans in the US. The current consensus of both major US political parties is to counter China and protect Taiwan. However, I do not trust former US president Donald Trump. He has questioned the US’ commitment to defending Taiwan and explicitly stated the significant challenges involved in doing so. “Trump believes
The government is considering building a semiconductor cluster in Europe, specifically in the Czech Republic, to support Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) new fab in Dresden, Germany, and to help local companies explore new business opportunities there. Europe wants to ensure the security of its semiconductor sector, but a lack of comprehensive supply chains there could pose significant risks to semiconductor clusters. The Czech government is aggressively seeking to build its own semiconductor industry and showing strong interest in collaborating with Taiwanese companies. Executive Yuan Secretary-General Kung Ming-hsin (龔明鑫) on Friday said that Taiwan is optimistic about building a semiconductor cluster in
China has successfully held its Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, with 53 of 55 countries from the African Union (AU) participating. The two countries that did not participate were Eswatini and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which have no diplomatic relations with China. Twenty-four leaders were reported to have participated. Despite African countries complaining about summit fatigue, with recent summits held with Russia, Italy, South Korea, the US and Indonesia, as well as Japan next month, they still turned up in large numbers in Beijing. China’s ability to attract most of the African leaders to a summit demonstrates that it is still being
The Russian city of Vladivostok lies approximately 45km from the Sino-Russian border on the Sea of Japan. The area was not always Russian territory: It was once the site of a Chinese settlement. The settlement would later be known as Yongmingcheng (永明城), the “city of eternal light,” during the Yuan Dynasty. That light was extinguished in 1858 when a large area of land was ceded by the Qing Dynasty to the Russian Empire with the signing of the Treaty of Aigun. The People’s Republic of China founded by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has never ruled Taiwan. Taiwan was governed by the
RSS