Pants-of-dog wrote:Is this an argument?
Because it seems like you are merely saying that I would be a hypocrite if I did not agree. That is not an argument.
If you think it's irrational to design a welfare system geared towards fulfilling goals such as getting kids vaccinated, sending them to and succeeding in schools and having them comply with the law, then why would you support laws that force people to do just that?
Why is it irrational to use the carrot instead of just the stick, even more so since the stick alone seems to be insufficient? Why is it irrational to compensate or reward parents for taking on the private costs of taking care of their children like the law effectively forces them to?
Pants-of-dog wrote:This is a different argument altogether.
Indeed, it's a different sort of concern. But since you seem to believe there are no development goals public policy should be concerned about, then it's worth considering as well.