According to Google, "In Malta, abortion is illegal except in cases where the pregnant woman's life is at risk. Malta is the only European Union country with a complete ban on abortion, though the law has been amended to allow for terminations in situations where the woman's life is in danger." Its birth rate is 1.15. Here's another example: "Poland has a very restrictive abortion law, with abortion only being legal to preserve the pregnant person's health, or in cases of rape or incest." Its birth rate is 1.26. Replacement level is 2.1.
According to Google, "In 2024, there were an estimated 1,038,000 abortions provided by clinicians in states without total bans." It's said abortion bans would increase the birth rate. But, why does Malta have such a low birth rate? Perhaps people will just use contraception more or have less sex if they don't want children.
Besides even if abortion bans do increase the birth rate, why shouldn't it be even higher?
According to Google, "In 2024, there were approximately 3.62 million births in the United States." I made a proposal for funding commercial surrogacy which would produce 8.67 to 26 milion children in one year if we use American surrogates if we stop Social Security and Medicare. An alternative to that can be big baby bonuses of $100,000 to $300,000. There would be about 5 to 22 million more new births than otherwise in a year(subtract 3.62 milion from 8.67 and 26 million). The government is very rich and has the power to increase the birth rate.
That's the theory, but less children might be made than that. That means we can increase the incentive even more. But the proposal is a lot of money as it is. And that's just for one child. You'll become very rich. The only downside to this is that many women will want to do this, and won't see a reason to do commercial surrogacy since they'll be paid much if they make their own children. I prefer my original idea.
Singapore seems to have the biggest baby bonus, "As for Singapore, the government boosted its baby bonus scheme, giving out as much as S$10,000 ($11,200) in cash for first and second children. It increases to S$13,000 ($14,600) for your third and subsequent children." Its birth rate is 1.04. What I'm advocating is something ten times that.
According to Google, "In 2024, there were an estimated 1,038,000 abortions provided by clinicians in states without total bans." It's said abortion bans would increase the birth rate. But, why does Malta have such a low birth rate? Perhaps people will just use contraception more or have less sex if they don't want children.
Besides even if abortion bans do increase the birth rate, why shouldn't it be even higher?
According to Google, "In 2024, there were approximately 3.62 million births in the United States." I made a proposal for funding commercial surrogacy which would produce 8.67 to 26 milion children in one year if we use American surrogates if we stop Social Security and Medicare. An alternative to that can be big baby bonuses of $100,000 to $300,000. There would be about 5 to 22 million more new births than otherwise in a year(subtract 3.62 milion from 8.67 and 26 million). The government is very rich and has the power to increase the birth rate.
That's the theory, but less children might be made than that. That means we can increase the incentive even more. But the proposal is a lot of money as it is. And that's just for one child. You'll become very rich. The only downside to this is that many women will want to do this, and won't see a reason to do commercial surrogacy since they'll be paid much if they make their own children. I prefer my original idea.
Singapore seems to have the biggest baby bonus, "As for Singapore, the government boosted its baby bonus scheme, giving out as much as S$10,000 ($11,200) in cash for first and second children. It increases to S$13,000 ($14,600) for your third and subsequent children." Its birth rate is 1.04. What I'm advocating is something ten times that.
