Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The simplest cure for poverty is less poor people. Why we're not carpet bombing the impoverished with free birth control and incentives for not reproducing is beyond me. Nixon offered a $20k living wage in the late 60s as a substitute for all social welfare programs (I'm simplifying, but that was the thrust). I believe the GOP rejected it as wildly liberal. It's time to bring it back. Literally pay the abject poor not to reproduce. Why not?
Alternatively, if these right wing freaks must counsel women on alternatives to abortion, why not also offer them an economic incentive to put the child up for adoption to a family that wants and can afford it? Offer the impoverished and pregnant $5,000.00 to give the child up.
The idea is to get as few children being born into poverty as possible. Why not try a new angle?
|
What you're talking about is the negative income tax Milton Friedman first came up with and Nixon adopted. It's one of the smartest ideas the man ever had.
It didn't pay people not to have babies; it just didn't provide a system that paid more to a mother who had more children. If you truly want to provide an economic incentive for putting children up for adoption, which is really nothing more than trafficking in children, why not just let the mothers put them up for auction on Ebay, and charge a withholding tax on the proceeds?
