this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
138 points (97.9% liked)

World News

51337 readers
2047 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From 1 January, contraceptives will be subject to a 13% VAT rate – part of a carrot-and-stick approach by the government to increase births

China is set to impose a value-added tax (VAT) on condoms and other contraceptives for the first time in three decades, as the country tries to boost its birthrate and modernise its tax laws.

From 1 January, condoms and contraceptives will be subject to a 13% VAT rate – a tax from which the goods have been exempt since China introduced nationwide VAT in 1993.

The measure was buried in a VAT law passed in 2024 in an effort to modernise China’s tax regime. VAT accounts for nearly 40% of China’s total tax revenue.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I think then it would be a good question to ask why families with 1 or 2 kids why they don’t have more.

I’d say the main reasons would be:

  1. Money: Even the most child friendly countries only cover a fraction of the cost of raising a child. As far as I’m aware, they might cover daycare, but that still leaves a ton of chores. And again, the standard might be you want to have a room per child, plus a guest room.
  2. Opportunity Cost: Taking leave will pause your career. Taking two years off in your 20s can really delay career growth, again leading to money issues down the line.
  3. Higher standards for marriage and stability: This might not be directly related to money, but maybe we can blame capitalism ruining everything including dating apps.

So governments might be able to move the needle a bit with these families by providing extra support.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Makes sense. I guess that's why the poorest people have the least children.

Oh, wait:

That's why I was asking for a source. Your theories have no backing in reality. The truth is that people simply don't want to have a lot of kids because it's a chore. Society puts pressure on people to form a family by constant propaganda in popular media and by using peer pressure (once all your friends have kids all they do is stuff for kids. people without children are left out). My guess is poor people have more kids because they don't have family planning education and resources to do it. Once you satisfy the societal need to form a family unit (usually by having one child) there's no more pressure and people stop having children. I'm sure there are many people that would like to have one child by can't afford it (or they think they can't afford it) and government can help them but no matter what you do people will not go back to having 4 or 5 kids. There's no "natural drive" to do it.