5000 for diapers and clothes in the first (or any) year? How?
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
1734 points (98.8% liked)
People Twitter
6857 readers
1226 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Napkin math. A box of Huggies size 1 diapers sells at 10.50 for 32 diapers, or roughly 30 cents each. My newborn spoiled a diaper about 7 to 8 times a day on average, it let's easy say 2.50 a day, 356 days or about 912 dollars in diapers for the first year.
That doesn't count wipes, powder, up sizes as they grow. I suppose you could go premier diapers as well, but yeah there's probably an easy 3000 gap on clothes
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Having a kid will cost you much more than 100grand. Giving you 5k to fuck is such an insult.
load more comments
(1 replies)
monkey paw finger curls You get free healthcare coverage and half minimum wage for each child just for existing. However, you and your child must renounce your citizenship, forfeit your passport, and accept indentured servant status until you can buy back your citizenship after repaying the government child support in full.
It really is a bummer to have such a legitimately retarded man just riding this country into the earths crust all Slim Pickens style.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Clinton Floats $5,000 Baby Bond
~ September 28, 2007
It's nice to know these two are still in touch.
load more comments
(8 replies)
With the tariffs that hardly helps.
They'll need a population boost after Trump deny's immigrants entrance into America.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Based on data presented here: https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child
It takes a minimum of $200K USD to raise a child from birth to 18; which works out to ~$1K/mo.
If the Government were serious in wanting to address the aging population issue, the best way to tackle it would be to provide family funding at this level for a family’s first ~3 children.
Would it be expensive? Absolutely it would be in the initial term - but the increase in economic activity would arguably more than cover it in the long run.
Would it lead to inflation? Not if the costs were derived from taxes due to the government (which currently get dodged), rather than through national debt.
Would it lead to a positive outcome for the nation? Arguably yes, but there may also be unintended consequences to the negative. Human greed knows no bounds, after all.
$5k in a Roth IRA in the sp500 at birth is the only way that it is worth anything.
Haha, what's $4k in the sp500 gonna do? I guess having $3k in the sp500 is better than nothing...
load more comments
(3 replies)
My personsl hypothesis is that when couples are living in times of prosperity or growth, they can see a future and can comfortably grow a pension, then they are likely to consider having kids. This also happens to be the time they are getting a share of the wealth society generates.
In recession and uncertain times, couples tend to hold of on getting kids, and if they do get kids, they do it much later in life, when they have saved some money.
Of course couples need free time as well. If both parents need to work full time, it's gonna be a lot less palatable to have kids.
I think the global low fertility is the problem of infinite growth self correcting.
load more comments
(2 replies)