Pay poor women 18+ in age more for NOT having a baby, nor abortion, than for having a child. 10% more than what the woman would have received by having a child. If an unmarried woman with a child gets $1000, the childless woman gets $1100.
This eligibility is lost if a woman gets an abortion. The woman gets 100% benefit for 2 years (age 20), then it goes down 10% per quarter (3 months) for the next 3 years (90, 81, 73, 66 …).
This benefit would be available according to a ranking of the school districts according to those with the most kids whose parents aren’t married. The bottom 30% would get 100% of the benefit. This percentage would go down to 0% as the school district ranking goes up from bottom 30% to 50% – the women living where the school district is at the 40% rank would only get 50% of the benefit. At 49%, only 5% of the benefit.
All gov’t benefits should have some range of decreasing benefits from 100% down to 0%, but gradually, so as to avoid huge marginal benefit cuts. Today there are cases where some benefit is worth over $1000 up to some income level, but over that level the benefit drops to 0%. One is in – 100%, or out – 0%. This is a mistake for all poverty reduction programs, and a big part of the poverty trap.
Tom Grey - Families, Freedom, Responsibility 