by By Anne Morse and Steven Mosher
$217,000
is a large chunk of change. You could buy a mining ghost town in California, a
new Bentley, or the designer wedding dress of Princess Marie-Chantal for that
amount of money. $217,000 also happens to be the net financial benefit to
society if you become a parent, according to a recent study by Lee et al.
Economists,
who have a penchant for coining arcane jargon, call this 217K the net fiscal
externality of becoming a parent. By
externality they mean the public benefit (or cost) of a private transaction.
Most
people pay far more attention to whether or not their actions benefit
themselves than to whether these benefit society as a whole. The question, “What’s in it for me?” swamps
all other concerns. An economist would
say that most people ignore the externalities of their actions.
So
it is with becoming a parent. Many
couples, before deciding to conceive a child, ask themselves what they will
gain or lose by becoming parents. Other
couples simply trust in God to send them the right number of children. Neither
group is much concerned about whether, by becoming parents, they are benefiting
society as a whole, although they would both assert that there is such a
benefit.
The
Left tends to worry a lot more about the externalities of bringing children
into the world. Of course, those who see babies as little more than nasty
little carbon emitters are generally convinced that the costs to society of
becoming a parent far outweigh the benefits.
Many remain childless.
Lee
et al decided to crunch the numbers and see if parenthood benefited society or
not. They asked the question: “By the
end of his or her life, does becoming a parent contribute more to the public
than it takes away?”
The
researchers calculated that childless individuals added $328,000 to the common
good over their lifetime, whereas a parent adds a whopping $545,000. So society
receives $217,000 in benefits when an individual decides to become a parent.
Note
that the study focused on “the transition to parenthood, that is, the costs and
benefits of leaving childlessness and becoming a parent.” It did not go on to consider the benefits to
society of a second, third, or higher order child, which would presumably be
substantial.
Anticipating
criticism from the environmentalists, the authors even tried to calculate the
“environmental costs” of childbearing.
At PRI, we are generally suspicious of “greenhouse costs per person,”
since we believe the net impact of global warming—if it occurs—is not
man-made. Still, they concluded that
childbearing remains a net positive to society even after deducting such
“costs.”
Although
we at PRI are very excited by this study, we do not suggest that parenthood
ought to be forced on those who are unwilling or unready to be parents. People have a natural right to determine for
themselves the number and spacing of their children.
But
we do want to shout from the rooftops that those persons who decide to become
parents are doing the rest of us a tremendous favor, and their sacrifice ought
to be recognized and rewarded by the larger society. We propose that couples who decide to have
children should be sheltered from income and social security taxes. That is to say, some of the externality that
they confer on the rest of society ought to be returned to them. This is simple justice.
Finally,
economists can measure dollars and cents, but they can’t measure love. The “value” of selflessly giving oneself to
another person who is completely dependent upon you far defies
calculation. The most that economists
can do is measure the side effects of such sacrificial love, such as increased
motivation or increased investment in the future. Because sacrificial love is
such a precious commodity, even its side effects are valuable—to the tune of
$217,000.
The
pro-life Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human rights
abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending
counter-productive social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of
"overpopulation." Find us at pop.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment