this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
42 points (100.0% liked)

News

39138 readers
2422 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong gave his annual address in late August, he said his government would invest vast new resources to tackle a national crisis: the dangerous decline in the island country's birthrate.

"We want to make a fundamental shift in how we support families," Wong said. "We will walk alongside parents throughout the journey of raising their children."

The package Wong unveiled offers the equivalent of roughly $55,000 per baby. The plan starts with a $7,000 cash payment at birth and is followed by annual payments and credits that continue until the child is 16 years old. According to Wong, the steps are needed to counter a looming demographic crisis that he said threatens "our ability to keep Singapore going."

Singapore is different in many ways from the U.S., a much smaller nation with a population of just over six million. Birthrates have fallen much more rapidly. But Karen Guzzo, an expert on family development and demographic trends at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said many American couples who are weighing parenthood need this kind of help.

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kaitco@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Society has made it no longer safe, desirable, or even useful to have children anymore.

Focus on reducing deaths during pregnancy and during childbirth. The fact that any woman could die during childbirth in the 21st century is an absolute travesty. The fact that women are more likely to be killed by their partners during a pregnancy than during any other point is a shame that all societies should feel.

Focus on ensuring that a woman can afford to feed, clothe, house, and educate her children, especially in the event that something happens to the father (death, war, being a jackass). Motherhood is a full-time job that has no pay and no PTO, and somehow we are expected to do manage a household and a full-time job on top of all that? If governments want more babies born, they need to make it feasible to do. If men want more babies to be born, they also must take up the responsibilities of managing a household so that the onus is not 100% on just the mother.

Focus on affordable childcare so women don’t have to choose between having a child and having a career, because if we have to make a choice…well, the birth rates speak for themselves.

Or! How about we prepare for a society with fewer people overall?!

The fact is for the first time in human history women have the ability to choose men, marriage, and children rather than having these things forced upon them, and we are opting out entirely. All the incentives in the world will not make me see purpose in bringing a child into this hellscape. A pregnancy puts me at risk of death. Childbirth puts me at risk of death. Men somehow get to just leave their families and start over, but if things get hard women have to figure it out with the burden of a child/ren on top of it. Miss me with all that!

I will carry on in my career, sit in my house that I bought on my own, and live my life full of experiences and hobbies and extended family and friends that I would not be able to have if I were saddled with a child.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Also keep/make abortion legal. There's an increased chance of dying from an irregular pregnancy when abortion is not an option so prospective parents are wary of the consequences of getting pregnant.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago

dying or losing the ability to have children for that matter.

[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

We have tons of people who want to live in the US. Birth rates are not an issue unless you only want white children.

[–] Corvidae@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

8+ billion people in the world, we're stripping earth's resources to support all of them, and governments are paying cash for you have more babies.

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 4 points 1 week ago

Anything but actually create a world worth living in.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 week ago

Im not sure im wild about cash payments. 3 meals a day at public school. would love something like universal snap and add in baby essentials as eligible items. basically I prefer no means testing on safety net things for all of society and then the parents know their kids won't be out in the cold the moment they can't cover them regardless of their ability to work and such. Like I don't want incentive for people to have kids and then mistreat them. I know many will say the amount is not worth it but I have known people who are just that stupid. Woohoo. drinkin money and the baby will be alright by itself for a few hours.

Surely “Lessons for the US” is some kind of oxymoron.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

"Experts..."