Should people without kids pay more in Taxes?

[auditor0007]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Of course they should pay more. They aren't having any kids to help fund their social security and medicare accounts for when they retire, so they need to pay more. Due to the fact that people are having fewer kids, some countries are actually paying couples to have children just for this reason. I have become convinced that conservatives just lack the brains to think about the big picture. They can only see things in 30 second segments and are easily brainwashed into believing the dumbest of things.

 

[thereisnospoon]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Of course they should pay more. They aren't having any kids to help fund their social security and medicare accounts for when they retire, so they need to pay more. Due to the fact that people are having fewer kids, some countries are actually paying couples to have children just for this reason. I have become convinced that conservatives just lack the brains to think about the big picture. They can only see things in 30 second segments and are easily brainwashed into believing the dumbest of things.

You and closed (minded) don't know what you are arguing for.
You see the word "tax", visions of 8,000 square foot homes and expensive cars roll through your heads, triggering a reaction that has you spitting chewed nails and then go "yep, a tax, I like it".
The thing is like all capitalists, once those taxes effect your bank account, you're writing your elected officials in protest.

 

[Noomi]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

 

[AntiParty]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Should Corporations without kids pay less in taxes?


Currently, top corporations pay less than 0. They even pay -3 or more.

It's sad the people pay but the Lobbyists of Big Corp pay 0 or less. Why are Corporations more special than the people? It use to be, "We the People" not "We the Corporations"

If you think Corporations are people and think money is speech you are everything wrong with America.

 

[Grandma]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

Choice isn't a consideration here, nor should it be. This thread is all about backwards thinking

THERE IS NO PLACE ON TAX FORMS THAT ASK HOW MANY CHILDREN YOU HAVE.

That's right, the tax forms have you list dependents, which can be kids, your great grandpa, your deadbeat cousin, anyone living under your roof for whom you pay more than 50% of support.

And childless couples and singles don't "pay more," they don't get as many dependent deductions.

Those of you not paying to support anyone but yourselves have no idea how hard it can be to make ends meet when you have to support others.

In other words, you aren't qualified to complain about not getting undeserved breaks.

 

[AntiParty]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Of course they should pay more. They aren't having any kids to help fund their social security and medicare accounts for when they retire, so they need to pay more. Due to the fact that people are having fewer kids, some countries are actually paying couples to have children just for this reason. I have become convinced that conservatives just lack the brains to think about the big picture. They can only see things in 30 second segments and are easily brainwashed into believing the dumbest of things.

You and closed (minded) don't know what you are arguing for.
You see the word "tax", visions of 8,000 square foot homes and expensive cars roll through your heads, triggering a reaction that has you spitting chewed nails and then go "yep, a tax, I like it".
The thing is like all capitalists, once those taxes effect your bank account, you're writing your elected officials in protest.

Your perspective is absolutely ignorant. I study all parties and no one focuses on taxing the rich more. The Left you are talking about simply knows that the Rich dodge taxation by hiding money in tax havens. Even Corporation 1%ers buy politicians straight up in order to pay zero taxes.

You have a lot to learn about politics. But I'm guessing you are the Fox News standard turd. Pay a moron to convince other morons that they are correct about politics. One moron get's rich, the other morons fight to get poor because they think it will get them to the middle class.

 

[Esmeralda]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

Choice isn't a consideration here, nor should it be. This thread is all about backwards thinking

THERE IS NO PLACE ON TAX FORMS THAT ASK HOW MANY CHILDREN YOU HAVE.

That's right, the tax forms have you list dependents, which can be kids, your great grandpa, your deadbeat cousin, anyone living under your roof for whom you pay more than 50% of support.

And childless couples and singles don't "pay more," they don't get as many dependent deductions.Those of you not paying to support anyone but yourselves have no idea how hard it can be to make ends meet when you have to support others.

In other words, you aren't qualified to complain about not getting undeserved breaks.

Are you kidding? Of course singles pay more because they do not get the deductions people with dependents get. The fact is that most dependent deductions are about having children, not about having an elderly parent as a dependent. People SHOULD NOT BE REWARDED FOR HAVING CHILDREN. The world is over populated as it is. People should be rewarded for not having children or for adopting orphans in need of a home.

That's the bottom line. If you choose to have biological children or to participate in the infant adoption market, you pay for them all the way: don't expect those who have no children to pay for your personal lifestyle choices. Don't punish people for not adding to the world's over population.

 

[alan1]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Simple solution.
Take the total national budget, divide it by the total number of people in the US, and that's each persons share. Parent's pay their kids share. That way, everybody pays their fair share. The greedy government teetsuckers won't think that is fair.

 

[Anonymous1776]

The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair.

Having a child shouldn't earn someone a tax cut. In fact, those who have kids and send them to public school should pay more taxes, as they are using government services that those without children don't use. We all need to pay our fair share, right?

Taxes should only be imposed to fund the necessary functions of government, not to influence behavior, like child rearing.

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

I take it you are one who benefits personally and/or directly. In any case, if you would like to give your money to a particular cause without receiving anything in return, start a charity. That's not the function of government in a free society.

 

[auditor0007]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Of course they should pay more. They aren't having any kids to help fund their social security and medicare accounts for when they retire, so they need to pay more. Due to the fact that people are having fewer kids, some countries are actually paying couples to have children just for this reason. I have become convinced that conservatives just lack the brains to think about the big picture. They can only see things in 30 second segments and are easily brainwashed into believing the dumbest of things.

You and closed (minded) don't know what you are arguing for.
You see the word "tax", visions of 8,000 square foot homes and expensive cars roll through your heads, triggering a reaction that has you spitting chewed nails and then go "yep, a tax, I like it".
The thing is like all capitalists, once those taxes effect your bank account, you're writing your elected officials in protest.

First of all, you know nothing about what I believe. Second of all, your response does not relate to the op at all. My response was to the op which asked whether single people should pay more in taxes than those with kids. The point is whether it is fair for people with kids to be able to get deductions for those kids when single people don't have those deductions available. Again, you guys cannot see the big picture even when it is staring you in the face.

 

[auditor0007]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

It's not a question of paying more in taxes. Those with kids get to reduce more of their income by claiming their kids and receiving deductions in income for having and raising those kids. If we want to drop the deductions for all kids, then we can be assured that people will have even fewer kids and it will put an even greater strain on SS and Medicare.

 

[bripat9643]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

It's not a question of paying more in taxes. Those with kids get to reduce more of their income by claiming their kids and receiving deductions in income for having and raising those kids. If we want to drop the deductions for all kids, then we can be assured that people will have even fewer kids and it will put an even greater strain on SS and Medicare.

The way to fix that problem is convert Social Security to a system of individual investment accounts. Then there will be real money in everyone's account instead of worthless I.O.U.s

 

[auditor0007]

This was the bullshit question on Fox News this morning. The "me me me" crowd was making the point that single people shouldnt have to pay "more" in taxes than people without kids. Because people with kids receive more tax breaks than those without Fox News says that that isnt fair. They say that single people are treated unfairly because they contribute to the success of the next generation. THE HORROR!

I say its bullshit. If we live in a society we all pitch in to things that we dont get to use or benefit from personally and or directly. Stop being a stingy callous fuck

Should Corporations without kids pay less in taxes?


Currently, top corporations pay less than 0. They even pay -3 or more.

It's sad the people pay but the Lobbyists of Big Corp pay 0 or less. Why are Corporations more special than the people? It use to be, "We the People" not "We the Corporations"

If you think Corporations are people and think money is speech you are everything wrong with America.

But we have to reduce the corporate rate because it is too high. Our entire system is so fucked up it doesn't even make sense anymore. We have people making $50,000 per year or less supporting lower taxes for corporations when many of them already pay next to nothing in taxes. While the corporate tax rate is quite high, no corporation actually pays anywhere close to the actual rate.

 

[auditor0007]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

Choice isn't a consideration here, nor should it be. This thread is all about backwards thinking

THERE IS NO PLACE ON TAX FORMS THAT ASK HOW MANY CHILDREN YOU HAVE.

That's right, the tax forms have you list dependents, which can be kids, your great grandpa, your deadbeat cousin, anyone living under your roof for whom you pay more than 50% of support.

And childless couples and singles don't "pay more," they don't get as many dependent deductions.Those of you not paying to support anyone but yourselves have no idea how hard it can be to make ends meet when you have to support others.

In other words, you aren't qualified to complain about not getting undeserved breaks.

Are you kidding? Of course singles pay more because they do not get the deductions people with dependents get. The fact is that most dependent deductions are about having children, not about having an elderly parent as a dependent. People SHOULD NOT BE REWARDED FOR HAVING CHILDREN. The world is over populated as it is. People should be rewarded for not having children or for adopting orphans in need of a home.

That's the bottom line. If you choose to have biological children or to participate in the infant adoption market, you pay for them all the way: don't expect those who have no children to pay for your personal lifestyle choices. Don't punish people for not adding to the world's over population.

If everyone stopped having kids, who would support us when we get too old to work? You see, the young fund SS and Medicare. It is the same in countries throughout the world. Countries like Japan are having a terrible time because young people are having fewer and fewer kids. It has gotten so bad that the Japanese government is paying couples as much as $15,000 just to have one child. If we do not give tax breaks for kids, then we will find ourselves in the same situation.

 

[bripat9643]

Choice isn't a consideration here, nor should it be. This thread is all about backwards thinking

THERE IS NO PLACE ON TAX FORMS THAT ASK HOW MANY CHILDREN YOU HAVE.

That's right, the tax forms have you list dependents, which can be kids, your great grandpa, your deadbeat cousin, anyone living under your roof for whom you pay more than 50% of support.

And childless couples and singles don't "pay more," they don't get as many dependent deductions.Those of you not paying to support anyone but yourselves have no idea how hard it can be to make ends meet when you have to support others.

In other words, you aren't qualified to complain about not getting undeserved breaks.

Are you kidding? Of course singles pay more because they do not get the deductions people with dependents get. The fact is that most dependent deductions are about having children, not about having an elderly parent as a dependent. People SHOULD NOT BE REWARDED FOR HAVING CHILDREN. The world is over populated as it is. People should be rewarded for not having children or for adopting orphans in need of a home.

That's the bottom line. If you choose to have biological children or to participate in the infant adoption market, you pay for them all the way: don't expect those who have no children to pay for your personal lifestyle choices. Don't punish people for not adding to the world's over population.

If everyone stopped having kids, who would support us when we get too old to work? You see, the young fund SS and Medicare. It is the same in countries throughout the world. Countries like Japan are having a terrible time because young people are having fewer and fewer kids. It has gotten so bad that the Japanese government is paying couples as much as $15,000 just to have one child. If we do not give tax breaks for kids, then we will find ourselves in the same situation.

If a tax deduction would stop you from having kids, then you probably aren't the kind of person who should be having kids.

 

[Anonymous1776]

If everyone stopped having kids, who would support us when we get too old to work?

You support yourself with an individual account.

You see, the young fund SS and Medicare. It is the same in countries throughout the world. Countries like Japan are having a terrible time because young people are having fewer and fewer kids. It has gotten so bad that the Japanese government is paying couples as much as $15,000 just to have one child. If we do not give tax breaks for kids, then we will find ourselves in the same situation.

Yeah, pyramid schemes don't work. However, individual retirement and health accounts do. That's what we all need to move to.

 

[Esmeralda]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

It's not a question of paying more in taxes. Those with kids get to reduce more of their income by claiming their kids and receiving deductions in income for having and raising those kids. If we want to drop the deductions for all kids, then we can be assured that people will have even fewer kids and it will put an even greater strain on SS and Medicare.

People shouldn't be having kids in order to garner a tax deduction. Also, people don't need to have biological children to be parents and have a family. There are millions of orphans around the world who need parents and are being ignored by people who want to reproduce themselves: narcissism. Adopted children will grow up and contribute to the social security system just as well as biological children. I am not saying people shouldn't have biological children, only that they should not be rewarded for doing so by getting tax deduction people w/o children don't get.

 

[Politico]

That......

 

[Unkotare]

This is okay for the people who don't want kids, and choose not to have them. Bu what about the people who did want kids, but couldn't? Why should they pay more in taxes for something that wasn't their choice?

It's not a question of paying more in taxes. Those with kids get to reduce more of their income by claiming their kids and receiving deductions in income for having and raising those kids. If we want to drop the deductions for all kids, then we can be assured that people will have even fewer kids and it will put an even greater strain on SS and Medicare.

People shouldn't be having kids in order to garner a tax deduction. Also, people don't need to have biological children to be parents and have a family. There are millions of orphans around the world who need parents and are being ignored by people who want to reproduce themselves: narcissism. Adopted children will grow up and contribute to the social security system just as well as biological children. I am not saying people shouldn't have biological children, only that they should not be rewarded for doing so by getting tax deduction people w/o children don't get.

That post was illogical in several ways.

 

[Unkotare]

The world is over populated as it is.

Again, NO, it is not.