Demographic problem: financial and moral component
In the previous article I considered issues of moral climate as one of the important parts of the general demographic problem.
The moral climate can be compared to the soil on which a tree grows and the air surrounding it - this is what determines whether the tree will grow or not. In this analogy, the financial component is like sunlight and water - without them, a tree will not grow even in the most favorable soil.
In developed countries it is often clear that economic well-being and abundance do not have a positive effect on demography - that is why I raised questions of the spirit before questions of matter, and I started not with economics, but with the question of the environment.
The moral climate influences people’s desires to do or not do something, sets them in the right or wrong mood and forms a prognosis for the environment - positive or negative.
Economic issues are responsible for the ability of these people to realize their desires in a way that is useful for the state and beneficial for them.
However, after writing this article, I realized that many issues, which I initially presented as purely economic, come to the intersection of economics, morality and mentality. It turned out to be not so easy to separate these factors, as originally intended!
What a person can do in slightly better conditions, he can still do in slightly worse conditions, and here economic factors come closer to subjective ones - he loses the desire to do it. So what follows will be more discussions about the essence of the problem and some outlines on directions for solving it, rather than a cliché about “more money for everyone at once.”
The essence of the problem
The problem, as I see it, is that the birth of a child is a factor that negatively affects a number of values that are familiar in our time.
These are the values of “time” and the values of “space”, as well as the values of “well-being” in the first place. Secondly, these are issues of self-development and long-term personal forecasting.
It is these parts that mostly make up the economic side of “why they don’t give birth.” Let's take a closer look at them.
Time values.
In our era, people have gained a significant amount of free time: developed transport, limited working hours, weekends and vacations, the possibility of flexible earnings and freelancing, household appliances, semi-finished products, etc. - all this essentially saves our time, which we, in turn, prefer to spend , based on your own aesthetic or economic needs. Hobby or part-time job, idle pastime or self-education.
These values are of great importance for modern man - because the global culture, consciously or not, creates, in general, egocentrics.
As you know, a person gets used to good things very easily, but it is much more difficult to wean them off. With the advent of children, free time becomes less, and it is not restructured in the best way.
Of course this is a problem.
Values of space.
The issue of personal space and, in general, “personal, personal” is incredibly relevant for a person and his normal functioning. As, in general, for any living creature. Home and “our territory” in general is a space where we accumulate what is dear to us and relax; this is what is now called the “comfort zone”.
Adequate values of the area available to a person contribute to his development as an individual, because he has space for self-development and hobbies, he rests better and thinks better about something in a calm environment.
And vice versa - in case of overcrowding, everyday conflicts and uncomfortable compromises are inevitable, resonance between different psychotypes forced to coexist affects the accumulation of stress, bad habits, and all this inevitably results in both health problems and success in activities.
The birth of a child inevitably affects the reduction of “personal space” and generally reduces its quality. Not everyone is lucky with calm children, not everyone can endure this period - many marriages break up after the birth of children, and issues related to the decline in the quality of personal space play an important role here.
Welfare values.
A person works mostly to cover his material needs. And although surveys in 2022 (according to Rosstat) show that about 50% of working citizens are satisfied with their salary (among low-skilled workers this figure is 32%), with the birth of a child that part of the income that a person is accustomed to perceive as personal decreases, and, given the considerable prices for food, things and consumables for children, the big question is whether a person will be satisfied with his income after this.
Especially if we are talking about families with more than one child, especially children of different sexes and approximately the same age. This is a real blow to the habits and free resources of still young people who are accustomed to living within a consumer society, consuming, so to speak.
Self-development issues.
In addition to being a time constraint and resource drain, children also break up that free time in ways that are not always predictable. This, in turn, can destroy a person's dreams of hobbies and careers, limit his self-development, delay him or make him less comfortable.
Of course, there are many examples of well-organized people who literally manage to do everything - but we must admit that this is the exception rather than the rule.
Questions of long-range personal forecasting.
Not everyone asks the question: “when the child grows up, where will he live?” Meanwhile, this question can be very unpleasant - both for parents and for the child/children.
I think everyone has examples of “rubber apartments” in which 2-3 generations live, and although such families can be fun and playful, you must understand that overcrowding is never good. Children will grow up and need their own space, and they will also want to start a family.
The question of what we will leave to our children is not an idle question. No one wants to “create poverty,” even if they have the means to survive for the moment and have a confident tomorrow; real estate in our time is a real “potential barrier” that many simply do not have the strength to overcome.
Back to the main question
The problem is broken down into its component parts - all of these are economic factors limiting demographic growth.
In the previous article, many readers noted that one of the main problems of demographic decline is low wages. And it’s true – not without it.
But it is impossible to increase salaries for everyone; this will give a short-term effect, followed by inflation. Issues of wages and living standards must be corrected gradually - and they will be completely corrected by the time society moves from complex stagnation to sustainable growth at full strength.
Then, and only then, on the wave of an economic breakthrough, the growth of the domestic market and production, the growth of foreign and domestic trade. Until then, it is possible to stimulate certain categories of the population and certain professions, but it is impossible to stimulate everyone.
Good salaries should always be backed by a created effective complex - otherwise they are just pieces of paper subject to inflation. Only in the process of creating such a complex will the incomes of the broad masses of the population grow. But this is not something that can be created at once - it would be very nice to write it as a factor: “give people a good salary, and they will give birth.” As beautiful as it is empty.
It’s definitely worth adjusting the salaries of certain categories of the population in a targeted manner, but you shouldn’t overestimate such tools. At the initial stage of emerging from the demographic hole, one should rely more on benefits and services; these are much more targeted tools.
Every time we dissect any problem like this, we simultaneously find points that indicate to us its step-by-step resolution.
The key point of the economic side of demography is not money at all, as many may think.
People can have money today and even tomorrow for a completely comfortable existence. But these funds will not be enough for the prospect of overcoming the potential barrier in a reasonable time - considering this moment, they will prefer a calm and relatively well-fed existence to getting involved in expanding the family. Mortgages, loans, as well as accumulation (in our country there is a habit of treating this negatively), and objective conditions. The lack of truly long-term stability has played a role in shaping generational habits and mentality.
So I will highlight the key point - housing issue. Most of the threads in one way or another lead to the housing question - will the child and parents have their own room while he is growing up, will he have the opportunity to get his own housing when he grows up and wants to start a family, will he have somewhere to live peacefully and without worries in retirement? for older people, will there be personal space for hobbies and relaxation?
The society of egocentric consumers is willingly stimulated by the expansion of living conditions - with this they become motivated to fill the void based on their own aesthetic preferences. All this will require money - and there will be greater motivation to develop and work.
The question of how to solve the problem of providing living space in a key way, significantly reducing this burden on the shoulders of young couples, both in the moment and in the future - I have already raised in his 2020 article. Much water has passed under the bridge since then, but the general principle of a radical solution to the key economic component of the demographic problem, as I see it, has remained unchanged.
If money is allocated monthly to a closed account for children from birth to adulthood, and upon reaching adulthood this money with interest will be enough to purchase from 1/3 to 1/2 of the housing in the region of their residence (options are possible here) - the problem as a whole will be solved.
Because a young family will automatically be able to purchase housing with from 2/3 to its full cost. They will not need to “huddle with their ancestors,” and most importantly, when their child is born, they will know that in due time he will not have to wander.
Until the child grows up, this money will work in the economy; he himself will know that the state values him as a citizen of his country.
Also in that article of mine there is indicated a mechanism for interest-free lifetime rental of housing for young families who are unable to purchase it as property. This will also take the burden off their shoulders of having to pay off a multi-year debilitating mortgage, when questions of family expansion are often also postponed until the age of 35+.
These government support measures will be most real and effective.
In addition to the mechanisms indicated in the article, which have not lost their relevance, both in the task and in the complex, it is also worth taking into account the powerful impetus for the development of the domestic market and consumption, which would be a pleasant bonus to such a policy.
The Devil in Detail
In addition to this key decision, which I wrote about above, there are also smaller ones, but this makes them only a little less significant.
As already noted, the issue of convenience for a parent’s own time is also of utmost importance in our time. It’s not for nothing that in the USA, children are often transported to school by buses - this relieves the parent of the need to waste time before work, which, you see, is not always convenient. It is not at all necessary that by analogy, but probably this issue could be worked out in terms of preschool, school, and educational circles. Because the question is important - when two parents work, any logistics related to children are a known difficulty for them.
Even in the regular section of the child, someone has to take him and pick him up from there at some point. It’s good when people of the older generation can deal with this issue, but taking into account the rising retirement age and the fact that there are not healthy grandparents everywhere, it is also advisable to work on this issue.
Finally, yes, the issue of financial incentives.
But this issue is at the same time the most delicate - its incorrect solution will lead to the fact that many will give birth “for the sake of money,” and among these people there will be dysfunctional families, unable to give their children a future even if they have the means.
In general, the monetary moment is a very specific soil: the distribution of money raises the bar of human demands. This bar is similar to atomic orbitals - a filled niche is a sufficient state, a new orbital started creates a thirst for filling. “Helicopter money” immediately and in large quantities stimulates one-time requests from citizens, under which, in essence, there will be nothing but this money. So you should be extremely careful when distributing money - it is better, if possible, to remove the burden of spending money and time from parents where this can be done rationally and productively.
If the state can organize compensation for clubs, sections, kindergartens, or even ensure that they are free, this is definitely a plus.
If it can compensate and reasonably certify the practice of summer camps, it will make its contribution.
As for direct additional payments, from my point of view, this could be done through an increase in maternity payments for mothers, a fixed additional payment to working fathers (independent of the amount of their earnings) up to the age of children under 7 years old, for example.
Part of the closed funds that should be accrued for each child born (this was written above), or rather, a percentage of this money can and should be used from time to time as bonuses for the success (in education, for example, or creativity) and the activities of the child. A year without C grades, getting some places in school competitions - whatever, 5 thousand for each child’s birthday is unlikely to bankrupt the state.
The amount already accumulated in the account of 500 thousand at a bank deposit rate of 4% gives an annual income of 20 thousand rubles. This is not a lot of money, but 1/4 of this amount can be very pleasant for both the child and his parents, especially those with low incomes.
But the most important thing is, of course, attention and participation. Often this with the “+” sign is sorely lacking from our state.
All this will not disperse inflation - this money will still go into the real economy, something will be bought with it, it will be produced and taxes will be paid on it. On a national scale, this will stimulate production - and create jobs associated with it.
Finale
Economic support measures are not intended to solve all people’s problems and give them a freebie for being fruitful and multiplying. This is precisely a set of measures interconnected and existing both for the benefit of the state and for the benefit of the people.
The state can and should relieve people of some of the burdens that are unbearable for them - especially in those areas where it is difficult for them to cope on their own. By freeing them from even part of this burden, you make their vision of life easier and their outlook on the future more confident. This is an element of the environment where a person’s natural desire to leave offspring will not be crushed by several heavy slabs, the state will become closer to people, the economy will become faster, and most importantly, adolescents emerging from childhood will be able to begin to feel earlier not as a dependent element, but as full members of society .
In the next article, at the end of the series, I will consider demographic problems related to mentality and other factors.
Information