Marriage and Child-rearing
The topic of marriage in much of the Western world has been focused on who should be able to get married. As the New Physiocrats, taking inspiration from, nature and the ecosystem, we believe this should be left up to the individuals involved to decide, and for nature to run its course.
Just as with businesses in a free market with perfect information, any two partners (regardless of gender) who come together and decide to get married, should be allowed to do so, and rise or fall under the merits of the arrangement. We do note, however, that just as information isn’t perfectly available in the market for goods and services, it is also imperfect in the market for finding a partner.However, with divorce rates exceptionally high, birth rates exceptionally low, and the corruption of family law, we also see something rotten in the institution of marriage, which we see in urgent need of reform. We see mistrust between partners, financial difficulties, financial incentives for divorce, lack of bonding, the sacrifice of family for career, late-age births, short-term thinking, lack of partner interdependence, society undervaluing parenthood, lack of income and income stability, lack of time, urbanization, lack of living space, and marriage decisions being made without adequate information about partners, as being contributing factors to the failure of marriage. Divorce must also be seen through a lens of economic incentives, as spousal support payments in their various forms, function as a redistribution of income. With divorce rates hovering around 50% in the developed world, it can be a tremendous distortion in work incentives, affecting a large segment of the population. The tax of spousal support should instead be replaced with the Three Pillars of economic support. Perhaps we should take some time to reflect on the purpose of marriage and the goals it was meant to achieve.
Marriage (consisting of two-parent households) has long been the foundation for producing the healthy productive members of society in adequate numbers, and with the right education and attributes. In the developed world, it has done so quite successfully until recently. The stable, two-parent household model is still an ideal to reach these goals, yet publicly funded daycare, handouts, and tax breaks for parents have proven inadequate to sufficiently boost birth rates. The New Physiocrats offer the following policy prescription:
• Introduce a marriage phase-in period; the first 22 months of marriage would consist of a period of cohabitation, followed by an 8-week separation period. The marriage could be dissolved without divorce at any point during these periods, and the marriage process would only be complete after completing both phases.
• Ending no-fault divorce after the phase-in period
• Extending National Income Supplement for a stay-at home parent in a married family
• Large increase in available leisure time through the Effort to Restore Our Tim e
• Reform of divorce courts to remove corruption, perverse financial incentives, and poor outcomes for children
• Define the principal goal of marriage to be the rearing of healthy children
• Raise the cultural status of child-rearing and family life
Introducing a phase-in period for marriage would ensure that both partners have the appropriate information they need to decide whether to continue with the marriage. It would reduce the rate of a marriage market failure, by removing risk during a period with a lack of information, or information clouded by emotion. It would also bring more young people into the fold of marriage, making it less risky to marry during a time of significant life changes.
After the phase-in period, marriage would become much more permanent, with more asset fusion, and without the possibility of no-fault divorce; thereby providing assurances for the married partners, and encouraging them to work through any difficulties they may face.
Grounds for divorce would remain conventional (abuse, adultery, desertion, addiction, imprisonment, alienation, lack of intimacy, etc.).In many places, divorce courts have become an avenue for corruption to enrich lawyers (and sometimes judges), pitting parents against each other, all to the detriment of the children. Just as the principal goal of marriage would be child-rearing under the Physiocratic platform, the interests of the children would be placed as a top priority in the event of divorce, including 50-50 custody. Only publicly employed lawyers should be used in divorce proceedings, and perhaps the use of a jury as well. The removal of alimony would eliminate excess involvement of cash in the divorce process.
If the partner then decides to become a homemaker after the phase-in period, they would be entitled to 50% of the full NIS payment. The payment would rise to 75% after one child, and 100% after two children. A parent should never have to decide between taking care of their children (while furthering their spouse’s career success) and their own financial independence or entrepreneurial desires.
As those who are employed outside the home would also receive the NIS payments, parents would not be penalized for deciding between returning to other lines of work; parents would have complete liberty over their decisions. Furthermore, empowering people with these options would provide much competition to daycare providers, and help keep a lid on their prices.
The NIS payments would also raise the status of child-rearing as an occupation, especially when combined with a public media campaign to emphasize the value of the occupation. A Minister of Demography would be assigned with the task (among others) of facilitating such a cultural change, through promotions and competitions.
NIS payments would also serve as a replacement for alimony in the event of a divorce. NIS payments would be maintained after the marriage for the same length of time (and under the same rules) as the marriage was in effect.
This would maintain income stability without labor market distortions, and would prevent unnecessary suffering. In addition, it would grant homemakers much more independence, or subsidize their transition into retraining or into new lines of work.Child-rearing must be recognized as a true occupation, not only due to the work involved, but also due to the importance of preparing the next generation for the future. It also has a Ricardian element of economic specialization, where if one parent is focused on child-rearing, it allows the other parent to maximize their focus on growing the family income. This would cause available funds for the NIS to automatically rise even more. Finally, there is a certain unfairness in the current system, where being a nanny is recognized as a profession (as it pays a salary), while a homemaker is not, despite providing equivalent or better utility.
Additional measures such as further financial incentives to meet demographic targets might be required in some cases, but culture plays an increasing role as well. By ensuring more equal political-economic influence to rural areas (which tend to have higher birth rates) to stem the rural-urban exodus, the New Physiocratic governing system may aid in this regard as well. As would the ULT policies to maximize the amount of affordable living space. However, a ministry tasked with resolving demographic issues may also require cultural tools such as a media presence to offer more positive voices promoting family life over conspicuous consumption.
The combination of the marriage reform as outlined, with dramatic increases in incomes and free time as a result of the other New Physiocratic policies, would restore marriage as an institution, and better the lives of all participants. The improved funding mechanisms for rural regions (including the Agricultural Bank) and 50-50 sharing of rural-urban parliamentary representation would support the regions that are the biggest contributors to birthrates.
Meanwhile, with living space better distributed and utilized, those concerns would be allayed as well. It would also address information gaps in the marriage market and remove the elements of corruption and perverse incentives which plague marriage today.Reproductive rights must be maintained for women, while the playing field must also be equalized for men. This may mean a bill of procreative rights to ensure equality, in which women are guaranteed rights to their reproduction, while men are not penalized for decisions outside of their control. It may also mean automatic paternity testing upon birth. This would not only ensure fairness and responsibility, but lessen risks for entering marriage contracts, resulting in further benefits to this demographic program.
Immigration policy must use a points system centered on economic and cultural fit. It must also be disconnected from population growth rate targets, so it does not become a crutch to deal with domestic demographic issues. This would ensure that immigrants who arrive are those who are desired as opposed to being a means to plug governments’ fiscal gaps or inflate economic growth figures. As with relying on imports for other essential inputs for production, an overreliance on imported labor can put a country at risk. This must be balanced by taking into account the benefits that immigrants can bring, as well as humanitarian concerns.
Implemented in their entirety, these reforms would address issues of fairness while ensuring control over physical space through a demographic lens.