Economy
Young Canadians are putting off having a family due to rising cost of living, survey finds
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/df6f3/df6f30dbdbd77f4cd346037dd78f8cb924f29e35" alt=""
From LifeSiteNews
An April study has found that 42% of Gen Z and 39% of Millennials are putting off starting families due to a lack of work-life balance spurred by an increase in the cost of living.
A survey has found that more Canadians are delaying starting a family due to a lack of work-life balance spurred by the rising cost of living.
According to an April 24 Express Employment Professionals-Harris Poll survey, one-third of employed job seekers stated that they are putting off starting a family due to a lack of work-life balance, including 42% of Gen Z and 39% of Millennials.
“The most common thing I hear from candidates who are putting off starting a family is that the cost of living is too high,” Jessica Culo, an Express franchise owner in Edmonton, Alberta stated.
“We definitely hear more and more that candidates are looking for flexibility, and I think employers understand family/work balance is important to employees,” she added.
Two-thirds of respondents further stated that they believe it’s essential that the company they work for prioritizes giving its employees a good work-life balance as they look to start a family. This included 77% of Gen Z and 72% of Millennials.
The survey comes as Canada’s fertility rate hit a record-low of 1.33 children per woman in 2022. According to the data collected by Statistics Canada, the number marks the lowest fertility rate in the past century of record keeping.
Sadly, while 2022 experienced a record-breaking low fertility rate, the same year, 97,211 Canadian babies were killed by abortion.
Canadians’ reluctance or delay to have children comes as young Canadians seem to be beginning to reap the effects of the policies of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government, which has been criticized for its overspending, onerous climate regulations, lax immigration policies, and “woke” politics.
In fact, many have pointed out that considering the rising housing prices, most Canadians under 30 will not be able to purchase a home.
Similarly, while Trudeau sends Canadians’ tax dollars oversees and further taxes their fuel and heating, Canadians are struggling to pay for basic necessities including food, rent, and heating.
A September report by Statistics Canada revealed that food prices are rising faster than the headline inflation rate – the overall inflation rate in the country – as staple food items are increasing at a rate of 10 to 18 percent year-over-year.
While the cost of living has increased the financial burden of Canadians looking to rear children, the nation’s child benefit program does provide some relief for those who have kids.
Under the Canadian Revenue Agency’s benefit, Canadians families are given a monthly stipend depending on their family income and situation. Each province also has a program to help families support their children.
Young Canadians looking to start a family can use the child and family benefits calculator to estimate the benefits which they would receive.
Regardless of the cost of raising children, the Catholic Church unchangeably teaches that it is a grave sin for married couples to frustrate the natural ends of the procreative act through contraceptives, abortion or other means.
Such wisdom has even bled into the mainstream in recent years, with non-Catholic pundits like America’s Tucker Carlson advocating that young people “Get married when you’re too young, have more kids than you can afford, take a job you’re not qualified for, live boldly.”
Artificial Intelligence
Apple bets big on Trump economy with historic $500 billion U.S. investment
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d89ee/d89ee1e7083cdc13854882b21253e3b80372b6e7" alt=""
Diving Deeper:
Apple’s unprecedented $500 billion investment marks what the company calls “an extraordinary new chapter in the history of American innovation.” The tech giant plans to establish an advanced AI server manufacturing facility near Houston and significantly expand research and development across several key states, including Michigan, Texas, California, and Arizona.
Apple CEO Tim Cook highlighted the company’s confidence in the U.S. economy, stating, “We’re proud to build on our long-standing U.S. investments with this $500 billion commitment to our country’s future.” He noted that the expansion of Apple’s Advanced Manufacturing Fund and investments in cutting-edge technology will further solidify the company’s role in American innovation.
President Trump was quick to highlight Apple’s announcement as a testament to his administration’s economic policies. In a Truth Social post Monday morning, he wrote:
“APPLE HAS JUST ANNOUNCED A RECORD 500 BILLION DOLLAR INVESTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE REASON, FAITH IN WHAT WE ARE DOING, WITHOUT WHICH, THEY WOULDN’T BE INVESTING TEN CENTS. THANK YOU TIM COOK AND APPLE!!!”
Trump previously hinted at the investment during a White House meeting Friday, revealing that Cook had committed to investing “hundreds of billions of dollars” in the U.S. economy. “That’s what he told me. Now he has to do it,” Trump quipped.
Apple’s expansion will include 20,000 new jobs, with a strong focus on artificial intelligence, silicon engineering, and machine learning. The company also aims to support workforce development through training programs and partnerships with educational institutions.
With Apple’s announcement, the U.S. economy stands to benefit from a major influx of investment into high-tech manufacturing and innovation—further underscoring the tech industry’s continued growth under Trump’s economic agenda.
Business
Americans Say Government Is Corrupt and Inefficient but Are Lukewarm About DOGE
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cf57b/cf57b23cacde89d25c19693c7ad2036145f7f008" alt=""
Democrats seem willing to tolerate a lot to get a larger government, but Republicans aren’t much better
Americans think government is wasteful when it’s not outright fraudulent and abusive. That should create a welcoming environment for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its mission to cut fat out of federal agencies on the way to (hopefully) reducing the state and balancing the budget. But support for DOGE is lukewarm. Unsurprisingly in these politically fractured times, cost-cutting efforts are a lot more popular with Republicans than Democrats, but polling suggests the division isn’t just one of partisanship. The DOGE is running up against fundamental disagreements over the role of government and the people who staff it—and the price people are willing to pay for a less-obnoxious government.
Corrupt and Inefficient Government, but Iffy Support for DOGE
Last year, Pew Research polling found that 56 percent of Americans say government is “almost always wasteful and inefficient.” The Babbie Centre at Chapman University reported that “nearly 2/3 of Americans fear that our government is run by corrupt officials.” And last month, A.P.-NORC researchers found 70 percent of Americans believe corruption is a major problem in the federal government, 65 percent say the same of inefficiency, and 59 percent see red tape—including regulations and bureaucracy—as a major problem.
Yet DOGE draws just a 39 percent “favorable” rating in the latest The Economist/YouGov poll, a bare three points ahead of “unfavorable” at 36 percent (25 percent picked “don’t know”). A poll this month from Trafalgar Group found 49 percent approving of the cost-cutting efforts of DOGE and Elon Musk, with 44 percent disapproving (7 percent were undecided). That’s more support than opposition in both cases, but you’d expect greater enthusiasm from a public that overwhelmingly considers government to be corrupt and wasteful (with plenty of evidence to support that position).
Part of the explanation, of course, is partisanship. Anything done by officials from one of the major parties is bound to be booed by the opposition, no matter what. As Gallup’s Jeffrey M. Jones pointed out in 2022, “generally speaking, Republicans and Democrats are more inclined to say the government has too much power when the president is from the other party, and less inclined when a president from their own party is in the White House.” That tribalism likely extends to cutting government as well, even if the cuts apply to agencies controlled for the moment by political enemies. Sure enough, both Trafalgar and The Economist/YouGov found far greater support for DOGE among Republicans than among Democrats (independents split the difference).
Democrats Want More Government, Flaws and All
But there are also real differences in attitudes toward the role of the state. The same Pew poll that reported widespread belief in the wastefulness and inefficiency of government also found that 49 percent of respondents “would prefer a smaller government providing fewer services” while 48 percent “would rather have a bigger government providing more services.” And the partisan divide here isn’t just tribal, it’s ideological. Despite fluctuations depending on who is in power, Republicans have overwhelmingly favored a smaller government providing fewer services since polling on the issue began in 1976 (support for bigger government peaked among them at about one-third in 1988 and 2004). Democratic support for larger, more active government grew from 49 percent in 1976 to 74 percent now.
Democrats in the A.P.-NORC poll were just slightly kinder than Republicans in their opinions on government corruption, efficiency, and red tape; majorities agree the federal government is corrupt and inefficient, while a 47 percent plurality says that red tape is a major problem. Given the overwhelming belief that government is corrupt and wasteful, but iffy support for DOGE, it’s fair to conclude that at least some Democrats are willing to put up with those concerns as the price of a larger state.
Partisan disagreement over the role of government also applies to trust in the people who staff the federal bureaucracy. These are the people the Trump administration offered buyouts and seeks to reduce in number, much like the Clinton administration did in the 1990s. Support for reducing the federal workforce depends, to a large extent, on agreement that those workers are part of the problem—or at least that we’d be better off with fewer of them. That’s not a universal opinion.
“Just 38% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents express a great deal or a fair amount of confidence in federal career employees,” Pew Research noted last week. That’s down 10 points from 2018. “In contrast, 72% of Democrats and Democratic leaners say they have confidence in career government employees – 7 points higher than in 2022, but on par with 2018 levels.”
So, if we’re to believe what members of the public tell researchers, majorities of Americans across partisan divides think the federal government is corrupt and inefficient. But a fair number of those who hold this position—Democrats, in particular—are confident that the people employed by the federal government aren’t responsible for that corruption and efficiency. Those problems appear from somewhere, perhaps as a miasma emanating from the swamp that D.C. was in years past. Also, many of those concerned that corruption and inefficiency plague the government are willing to put up with those handicaps so that the corrupt and inefficient government can play a larger role in our lives.
Republicans Also Want Their Expensive Goodies
Of course, consistency and logic aren’t necessarily common features of public opinion. As I’ve noted before, Republicans and Democrats may disagree when it comes to broad philosophical statements about the size and role of government, but when it comes to specifics, there’s more that unites them than divides them. Majorities of partisans of both parties as well as of independents want more federal spending on Social Security, Education, and Medicare, according to A.P.-NORC. A majority of Democrats also want more to be spent on Medicaid and assistance to the poor, while a majority of Republicans similarly want more dedicated to border security and the military.
Social Security is almost a quarter of federal spending all by itself, while Medicare, Medicaid, and other health care are slightly more, by the Cato Institute’s reckoning. National defense is about 13 percent, as is income security, with interest on federal debt right behind. DOGE faces quite an uphill battle to succeed in its mission to slash the size and cost of federal government.
DOGE faces obstacles from Democrats who recognize that the government is corrupt and inefficient but want more of it anyway. It also faces a challenge in Republicans and independents who say they want less government but don’t want to surrender their favorite boondoggles.
Americans are lukewarm about DOGE because they’re torn about its mission. Sure, they have a low opinion of the federal government, but they might be willing to put up with its deep flaws so long as it delivers their goodies.
|
|
|
-
Alberta2 days ago
Snapshots of Alberta and Canadian trade with the US
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Is Our Five-Year Nightmare Finally Over?
-
Opinion2 days ago
Two New Studies Find Fewer Clouds Cause Warmer Temps
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
With Carney On Horizon This Is No Time For Poilievre To Soften His Message
-
Health2 days ago
The FDA is trying to shut down his successful cancer treatments. Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s patients are outraged
-
National2 days ago
Did the Liberals Backdoor Ruby Dhalla to Hand Mark Carney the Crown?
-
Economy2 days ago
Meeting Ottawa’s new housing target will require more than $300 billion in additional financing every year until 2030