The thread does not re-argue that cash buys timing more reliably than extra children. It names an unresolved split of "fertility requires margin." Housing-cost papers (Dettling and Kearney 2014; Lovenheim and Mumford 2013) give a test: the same house-price shock raises births among owners and cuts them among renters. Singapore's Baby Bonus plus HDB priority, with resident TFR 0.97 then 0.87, is the case where cash and housing access were both built and period fertility still fell through 1.0. Until a tenure-split first-birth series moves, the margin claim is either a housing-ledger mechanism with a test, or a restatement that the binding node is further upstream. Author dispositions stay author-owned.