How effective is the monetary carrot dangled to get citizens
-
After the speech where PM Goh mentioned the monetary carrot to persuade couples to have kids.How many of you think that is an effective approach and could the $$$ not be better spent subsidising couples undergoing fertility treatment who are willing to have kids,but can't,rather then pass the $$$ to couples who are willing to have kids just for the monetary reward?hehee
------------------
Makan begins with a drool, grows with a chomp, ends with a burp.When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.
~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
Well well, let's see...... this carrot is not a small sum......$500 + up to $1000 and $1000 + up to $2000 for one family would indicate a possible hundreds of millions of bucks to be spent on this golden carrot. To a new family, it looks like a good deal, but then again, after careful consideration, maybe it might not be afterall.
The main reason would come from the cost of bringing up a child. With costs summing up from all the different aspects of life..... bringing up a child is not simply a matter of a few thousand bucks annually. Surely a kid doesn't cost so little every year. And how about the social costs (I'm sorry I can't join you guys, I have to look after the baby), the responsibilities, the stress (planning for the baby's future, education, safety, blah blah blah), so it is a tough job. Many recognise this too, that's why the low rates. My mum always tells me this, it is easy to give birth to a child, but difficult to cultivate and nurture this child. If I have a baby, I would want the best for him, best growing environment, best schools. Just like what my mum is doing successfully for me (thanks mum).
So if there is a change of emphasis on the government's part, I am sure there will be more marked change.
------------------
Style is knowing who you are, what you want to say, and not giving a damn. - Gore Vidal -
it is not easy to raise a child...esp in this century...
every child is a responsibility...dun expect the govt to "raise" this child for you (as in the tariff)...the govt throw u money to encourage u to GIVE BIRTH...not to RAISE the child...(give bith so easy...anyone oso can give birth...but wat abt the raising the child -- tts where the prob lies)
look...diapers...gu ni hun...education fees...clothings...food...blah blah blah...
a mere $500 to $1000 enuff?..
i urge couples to think over carefully...to weigh the pros and cons (according to their abilities and not govt's "bait"..) b4 deciding whether to have more children than they can handle...
juz woke up...cant think properly...post later when i m more sane...
------------------
~~EviL AngeL~~
and her power -- [Frozen Flames] -
Don't think the scheme is attractive. Having kids is not just about monetary reward, and even if it is, the cost of having a child doesnt stop when the kid is 6. In fact, after 6, that's when the kids start school, and that's when the costs start to rise. Do you think that our govt will instead indirectly be imparting to singaporeans the attitude that money solves problems?
-
i just thank God that my parents didn't want the best for me, that money may or may not have entered the equation when i was conceived for i was number 5. just imagine if my mother had told my father "but what about the other four kids? don't you want the best for them? an extra mouth to feed, that's going to stretch our resources so ever thin, let's abort it darling." or if money had been a huge consideration and my mother had gone for steriization after having child no. 4, well, there will be no colette here today and there will be no ...
YOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO darling pacman dearest,
miss you.
and it's the weekend again. oh yeahhhhhhh ...
yours,
colette
back to the topic, sometimes i think couples have to ask themselves what they want out of a marriage, i do admit that raising a kid in sunny Singapore is no joke but all a kid wants is to be given a chance to be born, it may not want the best in the life that the parents can give it but rather a fighting chance to experience life.
have to go now, will have time to think and add more tonight. -
To really encourage people to have babies, the government should strive to create the best environment for young parents. Frankly, money alone may not be enough and moreover it feels like people are getting paid to give birth. People need to be convinced that
1. Their children will be born to a life worth living. A writer to ST forums commented that he has reservation about bringing children into a world where stress begins at age 5.
2. There will be allowances given to parents to spend more time taking care of their children.
3. There are good child care facilities. In France, most people do not have nanny or maid to take care of young children. The children stay in school until 5 and the parents can pick them up after work. Longer time in school does not mean that it will be more stressful.
However take care not to heave too much responsibility onto the state. I always think that it is Asian trait not to have welfare system so I don't think that more money is flowing in. Also, if the people need money dangled in front of them to have babies, and later to get married and one may suspect, to have healthy bodies, isn't the society becoming more and more materialistic and tiresome? -
I question the intelligence of the move as this might increase the population but it will create a social problem. If the parent have a child but is not willing to put in the effect to educate the child then we might be faced with higher petty crime. 20 years from now will our peaceful country be as peaceful?I question the intelligence of the move as this might increase the population but it will create a social problem. If the parent have a child but is not willing to put in the effect to educate the child then we might be faced with higher petty crime. 20 years from now will our peaceful country be as peaceful?
-
education shd not be a prob...
remember?
all children will have 6 years of compulsory education from year 2003...
------------------
~~EviL AngeL~~
and her power -- [Frozen Flames] -
fireice: not only that, it shouldn't be as stressful as it is now. telling parents that education is obligatory _does_ not do anything to their procreative instinct, soed it?
-
i don't understand, if children borne 30 to 40 years ago can survive the education system without the intense private tutoring, pressure to get into a top school and yet turned out alright, some even more than alright - look at that Creative guy - why are the present generation of parents so kiasu on education? not only must their children pass, they must pass with flying colours. all too often, they're so stressed out by securing good grades that the joy of learning something for its own sake is lost and they've no passion for the subjects they take, until they're much older and given a chance to shake off their parents' control. isn't imparting values such as compassion, empathy, kindness, integrity, honesty, etc, etc more important and long lasting than the pursuit of straight As in their studies?
stress is as you make it, life can be less stressful, just be less competitive in things that don't really matter, do you really need the latest gadgets, the latest cars, a private home, etc, etc? obviously if it's within your means to acquire such stuff, then go right ahead but if you've to scrimp and save and live like a pauper while you present a wealthy front, whatÂ’s the point?
the bottom line i think is that these days, both guys and gals value their career too much that sometimes, it takes precedence over their private lives, but at the end of the day, what is more important? having a happy personal life surrounded by family and friends or having a sterling career and tons of money in the bank and yet left staring at a life without soul?
having children demands a long term commitment which i think few people our generation is willing to sacrifice, for having a child means that one has to grow up and take responsibility for someone else and that can cramp oneÂ’s style a little if one aspires to live the fast and high life, monetary considerations aside. -
colette: i can easily tell you that between happy life surrounded by loving family and incredible amount of wealth spent in loneliness, I'll pick to be happy, with family. But it's never that simple, taxes may rise, some children may fall sick and what will you give to have the money to bring them back to good health with the best medical care available? In fact, there's no need to rush to the extremes, I often wonder, while standing in a crowded, creeping bus, how great it will feel to whiz by in one of those sports car.
The stress faced by children nowadays can't be blamed solely on their parents. The sort of life that the older generation were born into and how they had achieved what they have now is different from ours. Even then though there's a common trait, you have to be better than somebody else. If everyone in your generation is getting at least secondary education, then by hook or by crook you have to be better than that, don't you?
Not everyone can be entrepreneur, some will be happier being a clerk for the rest of their lives and even clerks don't come with just an O level cert nowadays.
If children therefore ought to go to schools, maybe something can be done to make schooling less painful. Instead of learning about this bird and that bird and what their characteristics are, children can be brought to nature reserves so they'll see them for themselves. The extra time spent on these excursions can get them off parents' hair for a longer time and at the same time, giving children knowledge without stressing them.
..something like that... -
well having childrens is not about tghe money but the a lifetime commitement and love. If couples have kids just for the sake of money, well we gonna to have lots of abandon kids along the ways when their badies grow up and start getting michevious causing lots of headache, parents will start thinking is he worth it....!!
-
Well, guys do have some hope and faith in singaporeans will ya....
firstly, people will NOT have kids for the sake of the money...as someone mentioned earlier, the amount really isn't that much. On the other hand, with the support of the govt, couples who need just that little financial boost to bring into the world a child will take the opportunity to have children. The main aim of the govt isn't confined to making pple give birth, but the targetting of young dink couples who are in the opening chords of their career and marriage.
It is precisely that children are indeed an impt consideration that's why birth rates are plummeting. The common idealogy is that babies and children shld only come into the picture once there is financial stability in order to be good, responsible parents.Money should definitely be of consideration,for how else are you going to feed your children and provide for them?The subsidies might thus come in handy for a couple sitting on the fence.When the child is 6 and subsidies stop, it is true that the child doesn't cease to be a burden.But after 6 years,it is assumed that couples would have had enough savings and a stable income by then to raise a child comfortably without subsidies. Do remember the targets are young dink couples starting out.
Furthermore, this isn't a trivial off the mill policy. It is one undertaken with much thought and deliberation.One has to remember that Singapore is an ageing population, and should this trend continue into the future, Singapore will lose its competitiveness with the lack of new challenging minds. Before long,the retirement age will be 70, and you would have an army full of greyheads. It is thus imperative that a society may regenerate and replace itself b4 it gets wiped out thru compromising of social and economic security.
Finally, while I do not condone the " Go forth and multiply" principle, I feel that Singaporeans are indeed mature and rational enough to decide what is best for themselves.The carrot is there, but you needn't eat it if you don't want to. Ultimately, the govt can only do that much, the rest is up to us citizens. One shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth.