There already are tax and welfare benefits to having children, and indeed it does incentivize having them when you really can&#x27;t afford them. It doesn&#x27;t seem sustainable long term, but we&#x27;ll see. I don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s a problem with basic income any more than the current system. The bigger issue I find with basic income is that proposals typically don&#x27;t include any mention of price control on the seller side and purchase control on the buyer side. Poor people are often trapped there because every local actor selling them stuff is trying to maximize rent extraction, and they continually buy things that are expensive and bad for them (case in point the recent cigarette article). Landlords get a lot of money from rent extraction, since they&#x27;re paid in rent directly. It&#x27;s even worse with universal, unconditional basic income. If as a landlord I hear everyone in my apartment complex is now getting an unconditional basic income of $20k&#x2F;yr, guess what, next year rent prices are going up by around $20k, with lowered adjustments to account for other actors (like local food suppliers) also competing for this extra $20k&#x2F;person&#x2F;yr. This is basically the same thing that has happened to student loans. Without <i>authoritarian</i> measures to restrict economic freedom, which in addition to being <i>authoritarian</i> must also be <i>good</i> measures so as to not backfire as every other centrally planned economy has, basic income has no real chance at a large scale. In America in particular, <i>authoritarian</i> anything is a no-go.