That would be great for the guy - but what about the taxpayer and the child? So if the man doesn't want to support his child who do you think should? Me? Me the taxpayer? Gimme a break.
I said "if you subsidize something, you get more of it."
That would imply that if a woman makes a baby without a husband, she's on her own. No government subsidies either, capische?
I guess you prefer encouraging unwed motherhood.