If my kid has to perform age-appropriate chores to receive that allowance and stands to lose it if he/she doesn't, then I'm not enabling him/her to avoid responsibility.
I disagree
*: they can avoid the responsibility by giving up the reward that comes with it, just as I can quit my job and give up the pay and benefits.
The difference between a job and the child's situation is that, as a member of the household that
generates the chores, the kid has an intrinsic responsibility to do those chores. Part of that is because, regardless of allowance, they are still getting benefit - room, board, love, education, etc. - just from living there.
Another part of it is simply that it's an aspect of householding. When you
** live by yourself, you live as squalidly as you want to, but most people have a maximum squalor threshold. It is to be hoped that if you live with someone else, that threshold comes down, and that it comes down even further if a child is introduced to the home. (Note that, as a parent, I'm aware that
actual squalor is liable to exceed parents' theoretical threshold at times.)
Anyway, part of being a household member is doing your share of the work involved to run it (however that's agreed upon by the parties involved).
No one gets paid for doing it; it's just what has to be done, including by children, when they're old enough.
By tying the allowance to the chores, you give the kid an excuse to opt out of chores whenever they want, at a relatively minor cost (given the benefits they get regardless).
... I think I can see a fork up ahead ...
*I don't disagree with your point about "We can save ourselves if we work hard enough," Scattercat, just the example you chose to illustrate it.
**Not referring to any specific 'you', here.
