How could it possibly stay the same when those at the lowest rung are getting additional benefits for having kids? Starting at income '0' they can only go up f

How could it possibly stay the same when those at the lowest rung are getting additional benefits for having kids? Starting at income '0' they can only go up from there. I readily admit the benefits are shit and only profitable if you're basically feeding them gruel and giving them little else, although sadly there are people who do this. If those at '$0' are the most fertile then they're (what initially could be described as paradoxically) going to have more income on average at 1+ kids due to increase in benefits, which necessarily turns things around at the lower end.