Nothing incentivized nothing non-incentivized
A lot of fun is being had at the expense of a Texas state legislator who proposed a bill cutting ten percent on property tax for each child, hence it gets cited as “have ten kids — no taxes!” I suppose as we go into the reasoning for the proposal, the man is fitted alongside his religious injunction to “be fruitful and multiply”, an injunction I overall reject — and some behavioral economics come to play. But I am not entirely uncertain it does not make sense despite that, and I can skip right past the glib witticisms.
A simple matter. Some big families are to hatched. And, to paraphrase a former First Lady turned US Senator turned Secretary of State turned two time failed presidential candidate, “It takes a village”. The one thing here is that parents who have that big family will have that big family regardless — except maybe at the very tip of the margins — so in that sense neither his reasoning nor the detractors is mornings hold.
The scale of incentive works out to something like arguing against the Libertarian / Conservative argument on progressive taxation — the rich and wealthy don’t quit because larger earnings are taxed at a higher rate. But now I am stuck at one last rub: my defense of two strains coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum converge to the same point.