You are again falling for the "universalist" background of current lawmaking. If poor losers are the recipients of our proposed incentive, then we ban them.
"You can't do that!" Yes we can, worse laws have been passed for less.
"You'll be giving money to the middle class! They don't need it!" I don't care. If they are the ones best positioned to have children who'll succeed then they get the bag.
Consider some homeschooling laws in the States. You get a yearly stipend if you homeschool. Can the impoverished single mother take the cash and devote all the time to filling out forms for refunds for lessons, materials, etc.?
No, it's the married middle class woman, often religious, who has enough free time to plan the lessons, deal with the government program for refunds, etc.
"That's not fair for poor people!" I don't care. They get free surgery and I get boned for 200 dollars everytime I go for a yearly checkup despite losing 40% of my income to taxes. Sounds fair to me.
You are again falling for the "universalist" background of current lawmaking. If poor losers are the recipients of our proposed incentive, then we ban them.
"You can't do that!" Yes we can, worse laws have been passed for less.
"You'll be giving money to the middle class! They don't need it!" I don't care. If they are the ones best positioned to have children who'll succeed then they get the bag.
Consider some homeschooling laws in the States. You get a yearly stipend if you homeschool. Can the impoverished single mother take the cash and devote all the time to filling out forms for refunds for lessons, materials, etc.?
No, it's the married middle class woman, often religious, who has enough free time to plan the lessons, deal with the government program for refunds, etc.
"That's not fair for poor people!" I don't care. They get free surgery and I get boned for 200 dollars everytime I go for a yearly checkup despite losing 40% of my income to taxes. Sounds fair to me.