

This is some “people aren’t choosing healthy food, so raise the taxes on sugar” shit.
How about building a society and economy where having children doesn’t feel like an overwhelming detriment to the parent’s and child’s well-being?
I got curious and started Googling. Apparently China has VERY recently created a subsidy for parents, and finally begun creating support for early childhood care centers, which have traditionally been apparently prohibitively expensive due to privatization (In MY “Communist” China?). It’s good to see there is some actual social progress being implement alongside the hair-brained capitalist schemes that only serve to do harm to the poorest classes. But hey, fuck the points if it keeps the economy going, right?




Then I believe you I missed the comparison.
I’m not suggesting that in both cases, a government is doing things to make “bad choices” harder. I’m suggesting that in both cases a government is disproportionately punishing the less wealthy to get what it wants. In neither case does the government gives a shit if you, individually, lead a healthier life or have a child. It wants you to generate more wealth for the country, whether that be by demanding less for health care costs or by producing the next worker drone.
The point in the sugar tax comparison, a real thing that happened in parts of Canada by the way, is that the government should be reducing the costs of the healthy choices, not making the unhealthy choices more expensive, as people were largely turning to unhealthy choices because they were cheaper and do not have the wealth to make better choices. Likewise, if the Chinese government wants to improve the birth rate of its population, they should make childcare more affordable and look to give parents more wealth/time, not attempt to punish them financially for preventing a pregnancy. Punishing a population that is making the choice you don’t want them to make out of necessity isn’t the solution to get them to make the choice you want. “Poor tax” is never a good solution, and that’s what the comparison is: two versions of “poor tax.”