[gumby]

> It just moves the problem around so it hits the poorest the hardest.

Could you expand on this? I can’t think of a scenario where that is the case.

> Social security's payout formula should factor in the number offspring.

Ha, how will you track it? I have no offspring in this country (USA) bc they decided things are better elsewhere. But they were born here.

Germany just does it directly: when your kids are little you have to support them (assuming you can); when you are old and decrepit your kids have some responsibility for your wellbeing.

[tivert]

>> It just moves the problem around so it hits the poorest the hardest.

> Could you expand on this? I can’t think of a scenario where that is the case.

Pretty straightforward: there's no unlimited wellspring of young people from poor countries for rich countries to tap, there is a limited amount. Those poor countries also have declining birth rates, they're just a few decades behind on the trend. It's unlikely there are enough poor young people satisfy the labor demands of all the depopulating rich countries.

So the rich countries suck up all the available young "doctors/garbos/crop-harvesters" from the poor countries. That leaves the poor countries with screwed up, unbalanced demographics (without necessarily even fixing the screwed up, unbalanced demographics of the rich countries), and they're in an even worse position to deal with the problem, since they're poor.

So poor African grandma's doctor moves to American to treat rich American Grandma, and African grandma gets to do without.

> Ha, how will you track it?

How does the government track anything? They come up with rules and definitions and bureaucracy, then implement them.

And the types of records needed to implement the idea for 90%+ of cases have been kept for 100+ years.

[crngefest]

It wasn’t you but GP who started this thread stated:

> sub-Saharan African nations (many of which are on food aid) have fertility well above replacement levels

So which is it ? Are they above or below replacement levels?

> How does the government track anything?

While I get where you are aiming at this didn’t work in China and they have arguably the most perfect surveillance state worldwide - I don’t think this is desirable, the tradeoff in freedom and security is just too big.

[tivert]

> So which is it ? Are they above or below replacement levels?

Is is now or is it later? We're dealing with statistics that change over time.

An idea that depends on certain areas having "fertility well above replacement levels," like using immigration to compensate for demographic decline, falls apart when the fertility in those areas drops.

I'll live to see global fertility at sub-replacement levels at current trends: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/WLD/wor....

Then there's the additional problem of do the numbers even add up for that idea to work in the short to medium term. There are a lot of very large places with sub-replacement or near-replacement fertility right now: Europe, China, India, Russia, etc.

And there are even more problems! Everything above is a one-dimensional analysis, which assumes bodies can be moved around frictionlessly to do labor, and the only question is "do you have enough?". IMHO that still points to immigration not being a solution for fertility problems, but add more dimensions, and I think the idea becomes even more unworkable.

>> How does the government track anything?

> While I get where you are aiming at this didn’t work in China...

What didn't work in China?

The US government already reliably tracks births and parentage, and that would only get more reliable if there was a new financial incentive that it be accurate. That's pretty much all that's needed for my idea. Tracking a "certain number of good-faith attempts" at fertility treatments for fairness could be covered by similar processes to those already used by health insurance.