A policy proposal that could make a real difference, in three moves

All this week, we’ll be answering one of those age-old questions that have divided people on our nation’s hallowed soil since our forefathers debated them in Philadelphia at the Second Continental Congress in 1774….

A policy proposal that could make a real difference, in three moves

All this week, we’ll be answering one of those age-old questions that have divided people on our nation’s hallowed soil since our forefathers debated them in Philadelphia at the Second Continental Congress in 1774. Is the problem that America’s procreation rate is too low, or too high?

Our own Zachary Goldfarb, editor in chief of The Washington Post Opinion section, joins the discussion.

The quick version of the answer: We live in a country with too many immigrants and too few people reproducing, and that’s a huge problem. The moral implications of the political debate over where to plant the proverbial lotus, though, are key, says Washington Post conservative columnist Philip Rucker.

Here’s what we’re all agreed on: If birth rates in the United States are too low, and if we don’t, that means fewer people have jobs, kids or grandkids, which means fewer people have health insurance and get paychecks, which means fewer people are employed to send bills to the IRS.

Part of our goal in addressing this issue is to do something for the country’s greatest need right now: The economy. To do that, we need working people to have full-time jobs. Some people need family members to support their home and our country. Others need them just to help pay the bills.

An underlined word in each answer corresponds to one of those ideas.

Leave a Comment