The most striking proposals were for the elimination of medical debt for millions of Americans; the “first-ever” ban on price gouging for groceries and food; a cap on prescription drug costs; a $25,000 subsidy for first-time home buyers; and a child tax credit that would provide $6,000 per child to families for the first year of a baby’s life.

  • greenskye@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    Having done some recent research on the possible effects of an aging population, I think we’re all better off with a stable population rather than either a large or small one. China is for sure going to suffer for their one child policy in a few decades. Pretty much every 1st world country is on track for a painful time as their population ages out. The key is to make changes slowly so we don’t put too much pressure on one generation.

    I agree that humanity as a whole could probably do better with a smaller global population, but even a medium shrinking of population threatens an extreme level of unrest and suffering as too many old people have to be supported by too few working people.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not my point. I’m not comfortable with people who cannot manage their own lives to have children and those are the type that would benefit the most from 6k unfortunately.

      Support the children as need dictates not by some arbitrary amount given to everyone rather than those that actually need it. I feel the same way about college though basically wealth based tuition. Can’t afford it but meet every other qualification then it should be a token rate or free, if you can afford it then you pay more to help the less fortunate.

      The real solution is effective education but that seems a pipe dream at the moment unless someone like NileRed gets a prime time show like Bill Nye to pump everyone up about science.