I don't think that is a viable thing because I think it would produce adverse reactions. It'd work out just fine for myself, but not so much for others. If someone is getting paid to stay child-free, does a woman get dinged for being pregnant while the man denies responsibility? Do we have everyone's DNA on file and run the baby's dna for possible matches? Do abortions count as staying child-free or does that deduct from the bonus? Does the child-free money mean that folks with children are doing a lot worse than single folks or childless couples? After all, they are now trying to feed more people yet have less money to work from. How do you handle folks breeding for religious reasons?

I'd much rather go with increased sex and child-rearing education partnered with free access to birth control and health care. Free voluntary sterilisation beginning at around 25, possibly with a one-time monetary payout, depending on how many previous children one has and their age (lower amounts for being older). Nudge folks to have few or zero children.

> Pay people to not breed.

Wealthy people are already much less likely to procreate [1], although I'm not going to act as if that was planned.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/fertility/#the-richer-the-people-...

Paying people lowers the birth rate.

More specifically: Women that are empowered and employed have opportunities other than raising children, and birth rates naturally decline.

No, although that's a thing too.

People with more money have access to birth control and various entertainment options.

There's a lot of people in Texas with a lot of money and they sure as hell don't have easy access to birth control. The state's seemingly doing everything it can to obliterate it. The teenage pregnancy rates in some parts of Texas are similar to developing countries.

You cannot buy condoms in Texas?

You wouldn't buy them unless you thought you needed them, or weren't already told blatant falsehoods about them. The level of medical disinforation in some states is truly staggering, especially those with abstinance-only policies like Texas.

I don't see how that couldn't be trivially tricked.

1) I sign up and get a reasonably high compensation, like 4x basic income 2) While I'm enjoying this period, I build up the skills to get an even more rewarding life situation 3) Move a country and enjoy things even better

Even if it would be permanent treatment for a high compensation over the years, I could freeze my juice and use it whenever I want it.

Where? Who pays?

Right now, we allow immigration. If we continue that but pay people not to breed, then we're just getting rid of Americans. This is called "ethnic cleansing", and is frequently considered to be unacceptable.

You can't legitimately claim we have too many people while letting more arrive.