Posted on 04/14/2014 1:35:52 AM PDT by South40
A Slate columnist argues that childless Americans should pony up some more cash for taxes and that parents should get a bigger break.
Nonparents should pay higher taxes so that lower- and middle-income parents can receive a much-deserved tax break. That's the proposal of conservative Slate.com columnist Reihan Salam.
"The willingness of parents to bear and nurture children saves us from becoming an economically moribund nation of hateful curmudgeons. The least we can do is offer them a bigger tax break," Salam, who is childless, said.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.msn.com ...
Nope.
Social engineering through tax rates is nowhere in the Constitution, and FedGov has no business doing it. Tax law should serve the purpose of collecting revenue - only. [Note: I personally would benefit a lot from this proposal, but cronyism is wrong, even when it’s an overreach in my favor.]
Conservative? Slate.com?
Thats on oxymoron.
It seems that the main point of the article is to label the writer as "conservative". I originally read the article on the BBC site and it was simply a conservative-bashing screed. A lot of "dog-whistle" phrases as the left likes to put it.
MONEY(taxes) is heroin to government giving it to them(it) is a negative procedure..
COLD Turkey is the only recourse..
If givernment is NOT suffering...... YOU ARE!..
Krystal needs to look at her 1040 form, specifically lines 42, 48, and 51.
There should be a tax break for raising kids
I would argue the OPPOSITE.
Your “carbon Footprint” is smaller (throw that in their faces). Everything you do is fractionally smaller than those who have families.....yet they are looking for more money from them.
No, those without children should receive a partial refund of property taxes.
Everyone should pay higher taxes so that Mrs. Obama can enjoy another much-deserved vacation!!
…
In the long term, a country that doesn’t keep itself populated (and populated by its original people) simply dies off and is repopulated by whatever fills the vacuum.
And long term is not that long, as Europe as we know it, will be gone in less than 3 generations - us a generation or two later.
If people are cool with that, I feel sorry for them. If they have kids and are cool with leaving that future to them, they are about as selfish as I can imagine.
Don’t we already do something like this and it’s resulted in single parents and folks who really can’t afford them popping them out over and over to get more welfare checks?
“I pay $7200 per year in property taxes (NJ), 65% of which goes to fund the local schools. I have no kids. If anything; I should probably get a property tax reduction on the amount of my tax bill that funds the schools.”
This is killing the housing market here in NJ amd radically changing the state demographically. People who don’t plan on having children don’t want to buy a house with those high school taxes, while those who would need a house for their children can’t pay the high taxes so they look elsewhere. Those taxes were bearable when NJ had good jobs, but now they are a deterrent to companies and individuals who head to greener pastures elsewhere.
When Jon Corzine was governor he admitted that we’d lost population without the illegals in the state (and we lost an electoral vote); it has only gotten worse since then. The state is ending up with large populations of “replacement Americans” (Hispanics & Asians), the permanent underclass, and the government worker class to administer them.
Programs to “freeze” property taxes for seniors are failing because they are being frozen at high rates already; if your taxes were frozen you’d still pay $600 per month in property taxes alone. How many retirees can do that? I like Christie’s cap of 2% increases, but that brings different problems where nothing can be paid for. Our government retiree class is bankrupting the state, and much of your $7,200 is being used to pay people who retired a long time ago.
“No, those without children should receive a partial refund of property taxes.”
I understand the logic but it could never happen logisitically; if our schools were paid for by the parents using them teachers would be earning $10,000 per year. I have no objection to that, but the teachers’ unions are the ones fighting to ensure that EVERYONE is contributing to their till.
“WELFARE MOMS FOR JUSTICE!”
We are already paying deadbeat welfare vermin to have babies and they ain’t white! Hell, they are spitting babies out like wet watermelon seeds now and just think how many they will spit out if they get the incentive to produce more.
I’ve lived long enough to see the demise of our nation into a cesspool of leeches the those who have absolutely no intention in integrating into our society nor being responsible for their own actions.
With Obama, we are at the tipping point and it would not surprise me (if I live a few years longer) if they rounded up whites (especially males) and put them in internment camps so the GREAT SOCIETY could advance without obstruction.
We already do. We don’t have the extra individual deductions. We don’t have tax breaks for day care or health care.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.