To make sure you never miss out on your favourite NEW stories, we're happy to send you some reminders
Click 'OK' then 'Allow' to enable notifications
Topics: Donald Trump, Money, US News, Politics, Social Media
Donald Trump has talked of giving the people of the US a variety of incentives to have more babies, but there are a few questions on everyone’s lips.
Trump, who has previously labelled himself the 'fertilisation president', has publicly been in favour of the 'nuclear family' set up for quite some time.
With that mentality, he decided that America needed to change one crucial thing - the amount of kids being born.
Advert
Never mind the fact that the world is already over-populated, Trump is opting for a strong push for new babies and upping the US' birthrates, and there are a couple of reasons why.
Here's everything you need to know about Trump's controversial incentives aimed at encouraging women to have more babies.
According to a March report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the US total fertility rate has declined from 2.1 births per woman since 1990 to 1.62 births per woman in 2023.
Advert
This decline has led to Trump to attempt to tackle the issue, and it's safe to say he has plenty of ideas up his sleeve on how to bribe citizens to expand their families.
In his attempt to also promote his all-American family values, several ideas have been pitched to address the nation's shrinking population.
But why have the figures for births dropped?
Economists Melissa Kearney of University of Maryland, Philip Levine of Wellesley College and Luke Pardue of the Aspen Economic Strategy Group, authors of a 2022 analysis of the birth rate decline in the economics publication Econofact, said that ‘shifting priorities could be the primary driver for the decline in the birth rate since 2007.’
Advert
They wrote: “Young adults have different preferences for having children, aspirations for life and views about parenting norms that are driving the decline in the US birth rates.”
Trump has received and also talked about several incentives to push people into wanting to procreate, but whether they will work is another topic entirely.
The New York Times reports that pitched ideas included a $5,000 'baby bonus' for new mothers, which has been slated online by those who brought up just how much it actually costs to raise kids.
Advert
One Twitter user posted : “Trump "considering" a $5,000 ‘baby bonus’ to encourage "births". Meanwhile it costs on average $10,000 to $18,000 to give birth and baby expenses range from $1,100 to $2,500 monthly. Not including rent, food, insurance, and other necessities. This 'bonus' is a joke.”
In the comments, another user asked: “So who will cover the other $295,000+ to raise a child in the US after the $5,000 baby bonus?”
According to an article by The Guardian, the average cost of raising a child from birth to age 18 in the US is a staggering $237,482.
Advert
Data from a 2023 study took into consideration the cost of milk, nappies, food, education, travel to come up with this figure, so $5,000 doesn’t really touch the sides.
As well as the bonus, another idea that was floated was to implement funding into menstrual cycle education and reserving 30 percent of Fulbright scholarships for people who are married or have children.
This would mean that women would be able to learn more about their cycles, therefore being able to know when they are ovulating and how to conceive.
As for the scholarships, this would open education opportunities for those who otherwise may not have applied…but a lot of parents may not be able to enroll with the cost of childcare so high.
The 'Motherhood Medal' for those with six children or more, and expanded child tax credits were other incentives pitched, with Trump aides already said to be preparing a report which will be released next month recommending ways to make in vitro fertilization more readily available and affordable for all.
This comes after the White House vowed to release the document in a February executive order which would talk about how it would lower the costs of IVF.
With so many plans in the bank, will it actually work?
If we look at just the bonus aspect, it isn’t something that has worked in other nations.
For example, Australia introduced a baby bonus in 2004, which initially provided $3,000 Australian dollars to parents for each birth, which was then increased to $5,000.
While it helped for a moment, Australia's birth rate continued to decline as it went from two children on average to about 1.5 in 2023.
Hungary has also tried to use incentives to convince people to have more children, but its birthrates too have still dropped.
"Baby bonuses have not worked for Hungary. Why would we replicate this here in [the U.S.]?" wrote Gabriella Hoffman, the director of the Center for Energy and Conservation at Independent Women's Forum.
Also, there is the question of how much this incentive will cost the government.
If we tally up the population birthrates per year and timed it by the incentive, it could actually cost the US around $15 billion a year to keep it going.
It’s a costly investment indeed.
The idea has also come up against severe backlash as some likened it to the Handmaid’s Tale, with one social media user writing: "Trump’s baby incentives are giving Handmaid’s Tale.
"$5K first time child credits, IVF expansions, medals for 6+ kids? That’s not support it’s state-sanctioned breeding. If you restrict abortion and reward fertility, you’re not pro-family. You’re pro-control.
"Blessed be the fruit, huh?"
They added in a follow-up comment: "And just to add the concern isn’t about helping families. It’s about who gets the help, and why.
"When support is only for married moms having their first kid, and when a 'Motherhood Medal' is only for women who have six or more kids AND are married that’s not inclusive. That's incentivising a specific kind of motherhood.
"Meanwhile, there’s no push for universal childcare, paid leave, or support for single moms, LGBTQ+ parents, or people who can’t have children. Support should uplift everyone."
It looks like only time will tell whether these so-called incentives will really do anything for birthrates, if they even get put into action in the first place.