Since you seem interested in actually discussing it, I do have a rebuttal though.  I strongly disagree with the following statement in particular: “The rugrats then go into the education system, knowing that they don't have to really learn anything, because they will be given food and housing for their entire lives.” The kids certainly don’t know this “when they go into the education system,” unless you think a 5-year old is capable of understanding our country’s social services.  Maybe by high school or so, but I’d doubt they understand much if at all before that. And not to mention, it’s not like they are “given” a good life.  The “housing” they are given is usually a shoebox in a high crime area with poor-performing schools.  And that’s if they even remain with their family and aren’t placed into the foster care system and forced to change homes often.  It shouldn’t be that hard to be incentivized to break that cycle.  And I think many kids want to.  But they’re not given a fair shot.  The parents still need to give a sh1t and unfortunately many don’t, and I’m not confident taking away their welfare/food stamps/housing vouchers would change that.  Despite what their family is “given,” low-income kids are often not given healthy foods, don’t get to experience typical children’s activities, don’t get enough sleep, potentially face dangerous homes, etc.  Forget about a tutor or even a parent that will do their homework with them.  When it comes to education, it’s undeniable that low-income families have far fewer resources in order to succeed. School vouchers would help but that still requires the parent to put forth some effort.   You’d probably need people to go door to door to help facilitate it.  And once you get more than a handful of poor kids into wealthier schools, you’ll have people like cdub wanting to put a stop to it (he’s already admitted in a previous thread he’s against it). For those that do go into foster care (and maybe even some that don’t), I’m sure it already exists but I almost wonder if there should be more options for some type of boarding school where the kids are provided good housing and food but also tutors and the opportunity to participate in extracurricular activities, maybe even earn some money through part-time work for the older kids.  I guess some may consider something like this to be a jail of sorts, but if it is given the right resources I think it could succeed.  I know some like to say “we spend a ton of money on the poor schools and they’re still crap,” which is often true but I think it still comes down to the environment the kids are in outside of the school being the biggest determining factor.  If you take them out of the environment and give them the proper resources (but only until they graduate high school), I think it could work. I dunno, just spitballing here.   Oh and one thing that would likely help reduce the number of children in these situations is making it more accessible for them to get abortions (of course in addition to providing birth control and education).  Weird that Republicans don’t seem to realize this.