Children or Migrants as Public Goods

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6345658
AutoresPaul Bou‐habib (0000-0002-6244-4921, University of Essex), Paul Bou-Habib (University of Essex), Serena Olsaretti (0000-0001-6775-8551, Department of Law, ICREA-Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain, autor de correspondencia)
Año2024
Volumen72
Número4
Páginas1313-1331
Fecha de publicación2024-11-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaPolitical Studies (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0032-3217 • E-ISSN: 1467-9248
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/00323217231199556
OpenAlexW3189047822
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas53

Why, and to what extent, must taxpayers share the costs of raising children with parents? The most influential argument over this question has been the public goods argument: Taxpayers must share costs with parents because and to the extent that child-rearing contributes toward public goods by helping to develop valuable human capital. However, political theorists have not examined the public goods argument in a context in which replacement migration is available: If replacement migration can provide valuable human capital more efficiently than child-rearing, can the public goods argument still justify a taxpayer obligation to share the costs of child-rearing? This article argues that there are importantly different versions of the public goods argument, and that on a plausible version of that argument, it can withstand the replacement migration challenge under most circumstances

Argument (complex analysis · Business · Context (archaeology · Economics · Human capital · Law and economics · Market economy · Microeconomics · Obligation · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Public economics · Public good · Taxpayer · Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Political Philosophy and Ethics