> Cheaper / free childcare, better parental leave policies, and cheaper cost of living so that people who want to be stay at home parents can have that option.
As GP states, heavily pushing subsidies has not been shown to work.
The one thing we know works is restricting access to birth control - I'd bet good money that ups the birth rate in no time. Leave as an exercise for the reader whether it is a good idea xD
> heavily pushing subsidies has not been shown to work
Subsidies only come into affect after you have children. They can not work alone society has a much greater affect. They work wonders at making parenting possible while being part of the work force. You only get the subsidies when you have children, the question is how you are supposed to feel secure enough to have children.
For talking heads/opinion you have, I would say, two choices:
- Retired people with historic experience. The longer since they were actively involved in the sector, the less useful they will be of course. There is also going to be something of a demographics bias here.
- Currently employed people, and given their primary skillset is "Defense industry expertise" I'm going to posit that they always have a commercial role in the defense industry. Maybe there's some subset with a non-commercial role or a purely political role... but both of those have their own implications too
The problem isn't that they work in the defense industry, but that the information is not disclosed.
If somebody who has a commercial role in not one, but _two_ different defense companies, arguing for increase in defense spending is merely presented as a "retired officer" there is a huge information that is being omitted.
It's like having somebody arguing about banking regulations and presenting them as "award winning economist" or "former ministry of finances" and omitting the fact that he works in the banking sector now.
> Might not be as strong or fast [..] knows how to do it smartly.
Friend of mine worked in Prisons for a while, and has a way of telling the difference between people with a lot of muscle and people who know how leverage their musculature to high effect.
> This is basically required for clueless (and even not so clueless) users.
I can actually confess that this hit me. Almost nothing on my phone has permission to use my camera, including my web browser (why???). I assume this was done in a fit of pique upon discovering that the setting even existed.
Roll on (god knows how many years later) and I cannot get into the gym with the link I was emailed to have my browser read a QR because my browser is just a grey screen. It was only when the member of staff suggested permissions that I realised what was going on.
PE remains a source of complete fascination for me. The game is clearly rigged to produce bad outcomes at a societal level (eg no company loaded up with debt to finance buybacks/dividends and just eps ended up in a better long term financial position) - but we're completely incapable of doing anyhting about it.
> Law Enforcement often gets frustrated at chasing the smarter ones
and gives up, moving on to easier prey - and ideally getting them to plead to the other crimes I can't solve as part of a nice plea deal. Great for the stats.
As GP states, heavily pushing subsidies has not been shown to work.
The one thing we know works is restricting access to birth control - I'd bet good money that ups the birth rate in no time. Leave as an exercise for the reader whether it is a good idea xD
reply