Reddit wouldn't let me use the words taxpayer funded contraception when asking this question for some reason. I suppose that says a lot about their opinion on the matter.

"less people means more resources and better education for those who needed"

While you are right in saying that , the question I have for you is this: When you say that taxpayer funded contraception could help people with low income to prevent pregnancies, are you not in fact saying we have some sort of imaginary obligation to fund the sex lives of those with a low income? How is that the average taxpayer's problem? Should the taxpayer not tell them to abstain from sexual intercourse so as to not drain the taxpayer's pocket? Even one cent is too much for this if you ask me.