"We do not keep and will not keep the population in Poland, and 1 of the main "demotivators" of parenthood is the housing situation. The 2+1 model leads to a decrease in population size, and the 2+2 model only leads to a simple replacement of generations" - wrote the author of the letter. He stresses that the reason for the decline in fertility is primarily the housing situation of a immense number of Poles. "In my opinion, to make the 2+2 model more popular, parents should be able to have an flat that will suit the needs of the household for now and for the future. Many parents in Poland or Europe, including me, do not imagine that the kid does not have his own room. However, in the current socio-political situation, I do not see any action to improve the availability of large housing for possible families 2+2. It's the opposite. Housing prices are increasing faster than wages, and already the possibilities of buying apartments are severely limited by current prices" - our reader notes.
RECLAMA
See the video by Artur Špilka honestly about Mom: erstwhile Dad hanged himself, she was left alone with 3 children. There was nothing to eat.
The apartments are besides tiny and besides tight. A Sad reflection That Draws Alone
Poland lacks adequate housing. The ones that are are not adequate and frequently have besides small surface area.
The average household in Poland cannot afford to buy an M4 flat that would let to rise 2 children in good conditions. Firstly, the prices of these apartments are horrendous and inaccessible, secondly, the number of premises built with this layout is negligible. We are so dealing with possibly 'development' families against the wall: on the 1 hand, it does not aid those families who should be most afraid with maintaining the population and, on the another hand, the opponents are developers whose offer is concentrated on smaller-area apartments that make greater profits from square meters
- writes Mr James. In the following part of the letter he adds that he does not believe that developers will abruptly be pro-social and will meet the expectations of parents who would like to decision to a larger apartment.
Because the fact that children share a area with their siblings and parents sleep on the couch in the surviving area is not an isolated case, but rather common practice. This is mentioned by 1 of Eurostat’s studies, reporting that about 36 percent of the children and teenagers share peace with their siblings or parents. This is not an perfect solution - especially if we halt reasoning about a fewer years old kids and start reasoning about teenagers.
"In accordance with the standard adopted in the investigation of the European Statistical Office, the household should have at their disposal a surviving area and additionally an appropriate number of bedrooms for household members. This means, for example, a separate bedroom for both parents and adults already surviving with parents" - we read on the portal economist.pl. And here's the problem, due to the fact that not everyone can afford to buy a bigger apartment. This evidently has long-term consequences. Young people, alternatively of reasoning about another child, quit plans to grow their family, due to the fact that as they admit, "they don't want to live on a pile."
800 plus won't solve low fertility.
Program 500 plus, then changed to 800 plus was formed as a tool to combat the fall in fertility. The thought was good. Parents were to receive additional money for all kid in the family. Politicians hoped that the guaranteed transfer to the account would convince them to grow families (the more children, the more support). In 2016, the Law and Justice Government argued that the benefit would reflect the demographic trend, and forecasts expected that nearly 382,000 children would be born in 2024. But it did not. The inheritance, alternatively of growing, is dropping dramatically.
The conclusion comes to itself. Further social programs and another advantages do not convince young people to have children. Similarly, Mr Jakub, who in a letter to our reaction argues that the state, while caring for the welfare of its citizens, should direct its resources in a completely different direction.
The thought has late been that alternatively of a benefit of 800 plus paid for 18 years in instalments, families should be given a large amount at once. I propose that we go this way, but let's give a choice: possibly not cash, but allowing the home to be converted into bigger, even for a condition (less or more) of this amount offered? delight note that the State would have a much better situation and the anticipation of flexible action if it had a housing resource, i.e. if the policy of building housing for rent but remaining in a state resource had actually been launched even 2 or 5 years ago
- resumes in bitter words our reader.
And you? What do you think of that idea? Do you think that the problem in low fertility lies in a hard housing situation in Poland? Let me know what you think. Write: [email protected]. Your stories are crucial to me. Guarantees anonymity!
