Who Pays for the Next Generation of Singapore?
Singapore has spent years asking:
Why are Singaporeans having so few children?
Perhaps we should also ask:
What happens when fewer people bear the cost of raising the next generation, while all of society eventually depends on that generation?
Singapore’s demographic direction is clear. Fertility is very low, people are living longer, and the population is ageing rapidly.
That means tomorrow’s smaller working-age population will have to support a much larger elderly population.
Usually, we discuss this in terms of manpower, healthcare, immigration and economic growth.
But there may also be a question of intergenerational fairness.
The family was once our first welfare system
For most of human history, families operated through a simple cycle.
Parents raised children when they could not support themselves.
Those children grew up, contributed to society, formed families of their own and often helped care for ageing parents.
It was never perfect, but the basic arrangement was clear:
One generation raised the next, and the next generation helped sustain the one before it.
Modern societies have changed that arrangement.
Healthcare, long-term care, nursing homes, social services and financial assistance are increasingly shared among individuals, families, charities and government.
That is not necessarily a bad thing.
But it creates an interesting imbalance.
We increasingly treat ageing as a collective responsibility.
Yet raising the next generation remains largely a private responsibility.
Not everyone without children chose that path
This distinction matters.
Some people face infertility, health problems, relationship circumstances or simply never meet the right partner.
But Singapore’s fertility decline is not explained by medical reasons alone.
Official surveys have consistently found that cost, stress, work-family pressures and changing priorities all influence decisions about marriage and children.
So while not everyone is childless by choice, choice is clearly part of the broader picture.
And individual choices can still have collective consequences.
Raising children is private. Their contribution is not.
Parents bear much of the cost of raising children.
But when those children grow up, their contribution is shared across society.
Their work supports more than their own families.
That means raising children creates both a private benefit and a wider social benefit.
The family bears much of the cost.
Society eventually shares in the return.
Compare two ordinary households
Imagine two similar middle-income couples.
One has two children.
The other does not.
The couple with children spends a substantial amount of money and time raising them.
The couple without children avoids much of that cost and may save or invest more.
They may also pay somewhat more tax over time.
But in a relatively low-tax economy like Singapore, it is not obvious that these extra taxes fully offset the financial and non-financial investment made by the family raising two future adults.
That is an empirical question worth studying properly.
The key is to compare typical households, not extremes.
Not billionaires against struggling families.
But households around the middle of society.
Then both households grow old
Decades later, both couples are elderly.
The parents may have adult children who can help.
There is no guarantee. But the option exists.
And that support may have little to do with money.
Who accompanies Mum to the doctor?
Who notices Dad is becoming confused?
Who spots the scam?
Who helps with insurance, CPF or medical decisions?
Who takes over when cognitive ability declines?
The childless couple may actually have more money.
But ageing creates needs that money alone does not completely solve.
The real shortage may be people, not money
Singapore can build more nursing homes.
Subsidise eldercare.
Use more technology.
Import labour.
Automate services.
But ultimately, ageing requires people.
Doctors.
Nurses.
Caregivers.
Social workers.
Administrators.
Family members.
Even if some workers come from overseas, somebody raised them somewhere.
A society cannot escape the need for another generation.
And that generation may carry a heavier load
Tomorrow’s smaller generation may be expected to:
support their own children;
help their ageing parents;
finance healthcare and eldercare through taxes;
provide the workforce for an ageing economy;
serve in public institutions and national defence;
and support elderly people who have little family help.
That is a significant burden for a shrinking group.
And many of them will come from families that spent decades raising them at substantial private cost.
Others in the preceding generation did not incur that cost.
Yet everyone will ultimately depend on them.
That is where the fairness question begins.
Does this mean people without children are freeloaders?
No.
That would be far too simplistic.
Some had no choice.
Some will finance their own retirement.
Some will contribute greatly through work, taxes or other forms of service.
Some parents will still require substantial public assistance.
The point is not to judge individuals.
The point is to ask whether our system properly recognises the contribution made by those who raise the next generation.
Perhaps we are accounting for parenthood too narrowly
We tend to treat raising children as a private lifestyle choice.
You wanted children, so you pay for them.
There is logic in that.
But the picture may be incomplete.
Education also produces private benefits.
Yet society subsidises it because an educated population benefits everyone.
Could raising the next generation be viewed partly the same way?
Parents receive private benefits from having children.
Love.
Family.
Meaning.
Companionship.
But that does not erase the wider public value of raising future citizens.
Perhaps this is the real fertility question
Singapore has focused on making parenthood easier through childcare support, parental leave and financial incentives.
That matters.
But perhaps we should also ask:
Are we recognising the full contribution made by those who actually raise the next generation?
Their money.
Their time.
Their opportunity costs.
Their unpaid care.
And ultimately, the future citizens that society will depend on.
Perhaps Singapore’s fertility problem is not only about encouraging more births.
It may also be about reconsidering the social contract between generations.
Because eventually, the question may not simply be:
Who will look after me when I am old?
It may be:
Who paid to raise the people we are all expecting to look after us?
Sources:
Comments