Why does the ageing Netherlands want to save a few tonnes of artificial insemination, while we are far below the replacement number with our birth rate? Paying a premium seems more logical to me.

I’m in Dubio.On the one hand, I understand that people like children, and I find it regrettable for them if they do not do so naturally. I myself have been adopted and I wish these people the best.

But on the other hand, this question makes false demographic and political assumptions.

  • Demographically: More children is not an advantage.

Overcrowding is the greatest danger to the earth at this time. A numerous generation, the baby boomers, is also retiring. Then we can expect to have an average of 20 years to live (although as far as I am concerned they are welcome as long as they want). A child born at the moment is therefore a child in the time when we have a large generation of pensioners. Children, like pensioners, are maintained by the working population. Every child that comes with it now is more to take care of over the next 20 years. You have to fight the amount of elderly and children together against the workforce. This is called the demographic pressure.

  • Politics: The premium is paid by the government, by tax money.
  • No right has been reduced at all, but money is saved on the new plan. Why does the Government in this country need to facilitate and pay for everything people want? Look, for example, I find good care too important to leave Ddmarkt, but so many things would not be necessary to make society work and many people have nothing to do about it and yet it costs us claws with money. This money goes out of the pockets of people who are opposed to this. Do we, as a population, all have to pay for the child’s desire, despite the above overcrowding and increasing demographic pressure? I wonder.

    So no, the falling birth rate is not an immediate problem and in the new plan nothing is “discouraged” or combated.It is ensured that opponents of this goal, which society as a whole does not necessarily favour, do not have to pay for the child’s desire of individuals. I find it difficult to put me here emphatically 芒 鈧?艙before I understand the emotional charge, but personally I would have no problem with it. You are free to make donations to people who want to apply KI.

    The Netherlands has rather too many people than too few people.A decrease in the population would reduce housing distress and file pressures. There is also some room for nature and open areas. Back from 17 to 12 million would be a blessing for the country.

    The ageing population can be overcome and a temporary phenomenon.In 20 years, most of the grey wave is dead and buried. At the moment, society is already able to maintain around 1 million non-employed persons (unemployed, incapacitated, students, housewives/men, rentiers, etc.) between 20 and 67 years. In itself, it does not matter if part of these non-employed persons will be older than 67 years and whose benefits are suddenly called AOW. In addition, more and more work will be done by machines. Fewer hands are therefore needed to maintain production.

    There is already a premium.People, women, just don’t want children, point. Some people have very weird Ideas about how society works.

    The neighbours of the Netherlands have decided to save on the care of the Mentally Handicapped鈩?over half a century ago.Aktion T4. The population was not happy.

    Leave a Reply