
four1298
⚠️This User is a Registered Incel
★★★
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2023
- Posts
- 232
Google says, "As women's incomes increase, they may choose to invest more in their own education and careers, leading to delayed childbearing and fewer children overall." Google also says, "Yes, in general, higher income is associated with lower fertility rates." Baby bonuses are a part of income, so baby bonuses reduce the birth rate instead of increasing it as it's believed. If the government actually wanted to increase the birth rate, they'd give money only to childless men so they can attract women. Women are attracted to money. When they're attracted, they have sex and reproduce. Fathers don't need help attracting someone - they've already done it. And most baby bonuses probably go to single mothers who are already able to make children by themselves. It's men who can't make children without the approval of a woman.
I think Roosh proposed something similar - UBI for men(not just childless ones). He didn't mention it would increase the birth rate though. I think he called it Roosh bucks. Does anyone here remember that?
An alternative to this is just to ban women from working. That would mean they don't have an income and it would make them look for a man to depend on.
I think Roosh proposed something similar - UBI for men(not just childless ones). He didn't mention it would increase the birth rate though. I think he called it Roosh bucks. Does anyone here remember that?
An alternative to this is just to ban women from working. That would mean they don't have an income and it would make them look for a man to depend on.
Last edited: