European countries should encourage people to have more children by cutting taxes

•

How would you fund childcare and development? If the country is low on funds and it would take at least 20 years for the investment to realise, how would you be able manage the funds needed to maintain this policy?

•

How would you look after the kids? This assumes you want a healthy population of functioning adults as opposed to delinquents (for one prison population numbers can imply issues with rising crime as well as funding to control prisoners). Without going into too much depth, a functioning family unit, using appropriate parenting techniques will require time, training, and money - inputs that the typical family in the UK lack across the board.

•

Do you have the institutions to train and educate the kids you need on the things they need to know? And even if you do, do you have the appropriate curriculum that would help prepare them for the adult world? There's probably 101 issues with the education sector in my opinion that would affect how they go about it.

•

Even if you have the institutions to education and train the new generation, is there sufficient demand for workers in the future to accommodate them? It's nice to have a large educated workforce, but if they don't have the job opportunities that they need they might as well end up as a generation of unemployed but highly educated bums (a rising problem in a number of countries). Even then, you need to address what jobs and which jobs should be created; do you want more factory workers? More accountants? More IT people? How would these individual jobs fare with the new generation? Not everyone is suitable to be an entrepreneur, engineer, translator, factory worker, chef, etc. The growth of new jobs also isn't proportional across sectors and roles either e.g. you can have demand for 100 jobs, but 90 of them can be in hairdressing and a couple in other roles, and within the 90 only 2 can be for managers. Whilst it's theoretically stated that the market will naturally fall into equilibrium under a laissez faire assumption, this doesn't really pan out that well in practice and you would also get market failures that often need addressing.

•

Supposing that you do have sufficient jobs for an educated workforce and the institutions that prepare them, would their salaries be high enough to sustain a good standard of living and hopefully raise further families to come? If you haven't noticed, a number of rich countries do have problems with sustaining a good standard of living based on unsustainably low salaries that won't meet good enough standards of living to raise families amongst the younger members of the working population

•

Other essentials include housing, food, water, and energy; what are being done to address these?

•

Governments in the EU and UK are having difficulties balancing their books. Lowering taxes and increasing benefits might not necessarily be the best idea (albeit a very good idea for most people) if they can't keep themselves afloat.

•

Issues with laissez-faire policies - I am not a fan of the "everything will work themselves out" philosophy. For one, there is rising concern about trickle down economics (essentially saying it doesn't work), but I am not up for a government becoming fascist and micromanaging everything down to the T. So cutting children related taxes and increasing child related benefits might not necessarily translate to better economic outcomes. The other issues mentioned above kind of point this out, even if the economics do pan out.

•

People don't necessarily want more children just because it's cheaper or more economical to do so. I have not come across a woman who feels like getting knocked up just because it's cheaper to have kids than it used to be. I'm pretty certain that's not how people think. Do you have kids yourself? Do you know how much it takes to raise one kid, let alone 2, 3, 4...?

•

Relationships are not straightforward and you can't put it into a formula. If you know anything about the current dating market in the UK and most places in the world, you can't encourage people to just become a couple just by making it cheaper. There are psychological, social, and cultural dynamics that are going on and it's not something that you can just solve with mere money, policies, and laws.

•

How would it stimulate GDP growth exactly? In the past 20-40 years in the EU for example, nominal GDP has somewhat increased, but less so real GDP (in my opinion). In other words, is the GDP rising due to rising prices as opposed to rising productivity? If the contribution of rising GDP is through prices alone, do you need that many workers? Should this be the norm? Why?

•

If you want to stimulate GDP, what exactly should be stimulated? Which industries should hire more workers? Which industries should grow? Should most of the new jobs come from the public sector for example (I think most people would tell you no)? What are the needs of these industries? How should you address them?

•

Then you have issues of where should most of these new kids be brought up and where should most of these new jobs should be located. Currently in the UK, it's a low cheaper to live up North, but most of the jobs and industries are down south where it's a lot more expensive. How would you reconcile the 2? Should people relocate across the country when they become of age? Why? If they should, would that affect the communal and social dynamics for the existing population in these areas and for the new generation of kids?

•

Then you the timing aspect of this. When do you want the GDP to substantially increase by? Should this be timed according to approaching industrial trends? Why? What philosophical, sociological, psychological, and ethical issues arise from this?

•

Then you would know GDP is a really imperfect measure of economic welfare for the country and its citizens, assuming this is what you are referring to. Should GDP be the sole measure of economic wellbeing? What about inequality indices? What about the nonquantitative measures and issues? How about happiness?

•

Then you get philosophical issues regarding the policy. Is it ethical to promote population increase in the name of increasing GDP? Are people essentially reduced down to numbers and how much money they bring to the country? What about the sentimental value of individual persons?

•

Of course, implementing a policy to cut taxes and increase benefits will have knock on effects on the economy and country. What are those effects, other than those mentioned above? What other future concerns are not mentioned and we should have contingency plans for? How effective would those contingency plans be if adverse effects from the policy materialise?