If you already live in a city, I think you are unlikely to move away to start the family at a cheaper place. You still need to keep a job, and city is where the jobs are.
So the necessary amount of money is:
to buy (not rent) a place to live
in a city
with at least three rooms
(optionally) enough that the wife can stay at home with kids, if necessary
Hm, maybe we could build a lot of new apartments, and sell them for a subsidized price to families with small children. With the condition that they cannot sell the apartment for N years, or they need to pay the subsidy back. Also, build kindergartens near the apartments (maybe even in the same buildings).
I can imagine that building as a solution to low fertility could pick up steam in the coming years in terms of rhetoric but all the same barriers will likely still be in place (NIMBYism, lobbying by landlords, status quo bias etc.)
If you already live in a city, I think you are unlikely to move away to start the family at a cheaper place. You still need to keep a job, and city is where the jobs are.
So the necessary amount of money is:
to buy (not rent) a place to live
in a city
with at least three rooms
(optionally) enough that the wife can stay at home with kids, if necessary
Hm, maybe we could build a lot of new apartments, and sell them for a subsidized price to families with small children. With the condition that they cannot sell the apartment for N years, or they need to pay the subsidy back. Also, build kindergartens near the apartments (maybe even in the same buildings).
I can imagine that building as a solution to low fertility could pick up steam in the coming years in terms of rhetoric but all the same barriers will likely still be in place (NIMBYism, lobbying by landlords, status quo bias etc.)