Your statement makes the wrong assumption that, without governmental/socialtal support, no one will have children, or at least that no one can afford them without a handout. Where's the responsibility for your actions and the consequences of them in your world?
If you can't support one, don't have one, just like a dog, a ferrarri, or plastic surgery. It's that simple, and it's that easy with forthought. There's no shortage of people, don't fret. If you NEED to be a parent, try adoption or fostering. We can lose 3 billion people(+-) and still have a planetary surplus. Stop the 'we need more children' BS, it's a lie, there are plenty to be had already.
>> ^Yogi:
It comes down to this...does the society believe that having a child is something that should be supported or not? I think it should be...kinda need people to keep a society going, and I'd like them to get a good start on education and medicine and so forth.

So then you retract your statement..." the problem that's destroyed the global economy is unregulated financial BS from the free market, not a preponderance of people taking maternity leave"? You seem to have just agreed that it is too many people taking maternity leave (among other programs) crashing Europe.

>> ^NetRunner:
@newtboy agreed, that's been a problem too.


>> ^newtboy:
Actually, what is taking down the global market right now seems to be the preponderance of people taking more and more from the government tit and giving less and less back. The economies of Europe are crashing because they spent themselves deep into the poor house, then the global market went lower (for many reasons, deregulation included), putting them exponentially deeper in their holes and compounding the problem for all. There is little to no question that's exactly what happened in Greece, and most likely is what's happening to Italy right now, causing the few 'responsible' (by comparison) countries in the union to 'bail them out'.
>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^gorillaman:
Society has a limited capacity to provide for and eductate its youth. Once that threshold is crossed every excess birth makes every other child poorer and dumber. Those of you who support policies that allow for explosive population growth are actively harming children.
The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the modern parent will drag us into poverty and squalor. It's necessary for compassion to be grounded in reason.

You seem to be ignoring the frequent reminders from other people that paid maternity leave is pretty much everywhere in the developed world except here, and yet the problem that's destroyed the global economy is unregulated financial BS from the free market, not a preponderance of people taking maternity leave.
The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the social darwinists is killing us all.

Seeing as we are using the resourses of the planet at a rate of about 1.5 planets production per year, the theory that we need to maintain our replacement rate is insanity, short sighted, and uninformed. We need to reduce the global population (or somehow increase global production capacity) to budget/ballance our need with availability (possibly with some margin for error, preferably on the safe side of ballance). This concept seems to be lost to many, in all facets of life. Maybe the 'greatest generation/baby boomers' should have thought things through when they decided to have 4+ children each in order to avoid even slight population aging, labor shortage, or economic costs. It's just one more instance of the past few generations greed, ignoring the high (possibly insurmountable)cost to others for their own temporary gain.
On a side note, I do love the term 'baby boomer', it unintentionally but correctly describes the explosive situation that overpopulation creates, and correctly blames the 'bomb's creators.
>> ^ravioli:
A society should maintain a 2.1 average children per woman to maintain its replacement rate. It's why many countries have put up incentives to encourage families to go and have 2 and more children. Not doing so leads to population ageing, labor shortage, and more economic costs to society.
Right now, the fertility rate in the US is 2.05, si I can understand why the US doesn't feel pressed to help families procreate.

Actually, what is taking down the global market right now seems to be the preponderance of people taking more and more from the government tit and giving less and less back. The economies of Europe are crashing because they spent themselves deep into the poor house, then the global market went lower (for many reasons, deregulation included), putting them exponentially deeper in their holes and compounding the problem for all. There is little to no question that's exactly what happened in Greece, and most likely is what's happening to Italy right now, causing the few 'responsible' (by comparison) countries in the union to 'bail them out'.

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^gorillaman:
Society has a limited capacity to provide for and eductate its youth. Once that threshold is crossed every excess birth makes every other child poorer and dumber. Those of you who support policies that allow for explosive population growth are actively harming children.
The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the modern parent will drag us into poverty and squalor. It's necessary for compassion to be grounded in reason.

You seem to be ignoring the frequent reminders from other people that paid maternity leave is pretty much everywhere in the developed world except here, and yet the problem that's destroyed the global economy is unregulated financial BS from the free market, not a preponderance of people taking maternity leave.
The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the social darwinists is killing us all.

@gorillaman

Yes. We get it. You're a misanthrope. Woe is the planet for all the stupidity of humanity.

Now back to the main point.

Maternity leave was implemented to ensure that the offspring of workers are healthy and happy.

You know, time and money spent now to ensure the next generation isn't dumber and poorer than the previous.

But you wouldn't understand that concept or give a damn since you're too busy wankin' your angsty misanthropic hipster boner.

Maybe you can help humanity out with the whole "babies are dumb and useless" thing if you..

went back in time and gave your mother an abortion. =]

I can really appreciate the first part of your comment. I think that people have babies at the drop of a hat, and I also think that helping to put a cap on overpopulation (through education, and maybe even tax reform) would help fix a ton of the problems we have, from the economy to the environment, and hunger and a million other things.

But the government guaranteeing 3 months of unpaid leave is not an incentive to have children. And it is certainly not a "racket". If money is a problem for someone who's had a baby, then they're not going to be able to take that time off anyway. Very very few people, especially the ones struggling, are not looking forward to three months without income. A "racket" brings in income. No income = no racket.

The fact of the matter is, it's cruel to expect a person who has just gone through the trauma (whether personal choice or not) of giving birth (not to mention gestating a human for ten months) to return to work immediately or lose their income permanently. The sad part is that we need to make laws like this in the first place. That time people use for recuperating and connecting with their child can be the most important part of their development. So again you arrive at "hurting children", only from this end it's all so an employer can save a few bucks on not having to screen a temp. It's totally ridiculous.

If an employer is not ready to treat their employees like human beings, then maybe they shouldn't have started up a business in the first place.

>> ^gorillaman:

Society has a limited capacity to provide for and eductate its youth. Once that threshold is crossed every excess birth makes every other child poorer and dumber. Those of you who support policies that allow for explosive population growth are actively harming children.
The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the modern parent will drag us into poverty and squalor. It's necessary for compassion to be grounded in reason.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

>> ^gorillaman:

Society has a limited capacity to provide for and eductate its youth. Once that threshold is crossed every excess birth makes every other child poorer and dumber. Those of you who support policies that allow for explosive population growth are actively harming children.
The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the modern parent will drag us into poverty and squalor. It's necessary for compassion to be grounded in reason.


You seem to be ignoring the frequent reminders from other people that paid maternity leave is pretty much everywhere in the developed world except here, and yet the problem that's destroyed the global economy is unregulated financial BS from the free market, not a preponderance of people taking maternity leave.

The short-sighted, entitled attitude of the social darwinists is killing us all.

>> ^heropsycho:

And the government requiring paid materity leave is....survey says... SOCIALIST IN NATURE!


And you're saying that's bad? Nothing wrong with a little socialism.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

Funny how that works eh?
>> ^ChaosEngine:

Wow, the staggering hypocrisy of Kelly just blows my mind. How can she advocate for paid maternity leave on one hand and rail against socialised medicine on the other? Typical of the right wing in america... hate big government until it's paying you money.

It's approximately one year on employment insurance, your employer may choose to be friendly and "top it up" to a certain percentage for a certain number of weeks. If you're a government employee, your salary is topped up to 92% or so for the entire duration (that's a tad over the top IMO but, that's part of the package). And of course, the employment insurance is technically paid by the employee who is on leave (prior to going on leave). And yes, either the woman or the man can take leave but many employers will afford some time to allow the "other" parent some time off.

To those who don't support social programs, you can go fuck yourselves. If you don't want to be paid when you have to take time off to raise a young baby, then don't apply for coverage. Then, send your kids to private school since public school is socially funded. Oh, and if you live in Canada, and don't like socialism, INSIST that you pay for your hospital stay -- but, you won't do that will you? You're just a fucking hypocrite.

>> ^Sagemind:

In Canada - I believe it's 6-9 months (Paid- although at a reduced rate) leave. And either the man or the woman can take the leave - but not both.

A gay couple would never have this problem.

Also, title Megyn Kelly on maternity leave being "a racket" is misleading. I thought she was on maternity leave and she was yelling at everyone.