The government has to operate like any other insurance company, otherwise it will become bankrupt. Because it's impossible to gurantee that any straight health person will never have children, i.e you must be a member of the group. Much like car insurance, where you can't promise to never crash your car - you can have a lower premium for not crashing but you can't have no insurance. These are the simple financial facts of insurance.
While individuals do have a choice of whether to procreate (and it's not always a choice), society as a whole does not. Without procreation the economy and society would quickly collapse and the human race would eventually come to and end. So there's tremendous societal benefit to procreation and it should be supported by any government which society chooses to put in place. What you're suggesting would insentivize large numbers of people to not have any children, which is harmful to society and the wider economy. Indeed, without parents, you yourself would not exist.
A world in which you don't have to incur costs for others's children, is a world in which the benefits of those children should arguably be denied to you: no pension, lesser pay because you can't sell to children (or adults once those children are grown up), expensive services because you won't be allowed to use young cheap labor, no universities, larger tax and medical burdens as your own generation becomes older and more sickly, no hip young music or art, no interactions with people more than 25 years younger, no younger workers at your company as it grows, no technologies invented by or provided by those children in their adulthood, etc. Since you didn't contribute to raising the children, it's only fair that you don't get to reap the rewards, right?
The fact is that as a member of society and our economy, you derive a huge financial benefit from other's children which is inescapable. No man is an island.
While individuals do have a choice of whether to procreate (and it's not always a choice), society as a whole does not. Without procreation the economy and society would quickly collapse and the human race would eventually come to and end. So there's tremendous societal benefit to procreation and it should be supported by any government which society chooses to put in place. What you're suggesting would insentivize large numbers of people to not have any children, which is harmful to society and the wider economy. Indeed, without parents, you yourself would not exist.
A world in which you don't have to incur costs for others's children, is a world in which the benefits of those children should arguably be denied to you: no pension, lesser pay because you can't sell to children (or adults once those children are grown up), expensive services because you won't be allowed to use young cheap labor, no universities, larger tax and medical burdens as your own generation becomes older and more sickly, no hip young music or art, no interactions with people more than 25 years younger, no younger workers at your company as it grows, no technologies invented by or provided by those children in their adulthood, etc. Since you didn't contribute to raising the children, it's only fair that you don't get to reap the rewards, right?
The fact is that as a member of society and our economy, you derive a huge financial benefit from other's children which is inescapable. No man is an island.