Recommended Posts
QuoteWhat do you use less when you add kids to your family that makes you deserve that deduction, and not a single person?
Oh. So it becomes a "tax burden" when a person does not "pay taxes." A burden is that which is carried; load, i.e. "a horse's burden of rider and pack." Or that which is borne with difficulty; obligation; onus: i.e. "the burden of leadership."
It's an interesting way of looking at burdens. But for my son being my burden, then others would be my burden. Therefore, he is taking away from others what I should be forced to give to them. Thus, my children are a burden on other people because my resources go more to them than others.
Kinda like a dead horse is a burden to a cowboy. If that horse had stayed alive, then the cowboy wouldn't have to carry himself.
Or how telling a person to calling me names is disrespectful.
My, how the meaning of "burden" has been thrown on its head.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
nanook 1
QuoteUntil then things will only get worst.
World wise, per capita, this is the most comfortable time period in human history. I'll take today's "world problems" than the middle ages any day of the week.
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln
Darius11 12
QuoteI'll take today's "world problems" than the middle ages any day of the week.
Personally your right but worldwise?? Technology and health is better but i don;t think its so black and white as one might assume.
As the food and water supply becomes more and more rare one can only fear what will happen and who will get to drink and eat and who will not. We will notice things last as we are generally much richer than most of the planets population.
The Math does not add up. Limited resources
Darius11 12
Does it make sense that a single person should pay more taxes then one with kids????
One single adult is one for one he is a 1 consumer and a 1 producer. A family of 6 has two producers and 6 consumers yet they get a tax break???
The system was set up not on logic or a give and take but to encourage family and marriage.
You can flip it any way you like it but the money has to come from somewhere and it comes from the single people who use less resources but get taxed more. Simple as that on whatever kind of a horse you want.
That’s only on a national level to answer you original questions. on a global level it is ridiculously irresponsible. But most parents get there panties in bunch when you talk to them because you know THERE KIDS ARE SPECIAL. The problem is everyone feels that way and that is why we as a species can’t reach a logical solution.
muff528 3
QuoteThe government subsidies your kids and people who do not use the same resources end up paying for it.
Does it make sense that a single person should pay more taxes then one with kids????
One single adult is one for one he is a 1 consumer and a 1 producer. A family of 6 has two producers and 6 consumers yet they get a tax break???
The system was set up not on logic or a give and take but to encourage family and marriage.
You can flip it any way you like it but the money has to come from somewhere and it comes from the single people who use less resources but get taxed more. Simple as that on whatever kind of a horse you want.
That’s only on a national level to answer you original questions. on a global level it is ridiculously irresponsible. But most parents get there panties in bunch when you talk to them because you know THERE KIDS ARE SPECIAL. The problem is everyone feels that way and that is why we as a species can’t reach a logical solution.
Well, I have to say I had you pegged as a lib. Turns out you're farther to the right than most folks here ...especially, it seems, when it comes to public "subsidies" () for "kid factories".
tkhayes 348
Used to be the population of the world would grow to 750M or so, then get wiped out by plague, back down to 250-300M. Since the industrial revolution, that has changed.
So what will the new '750M' number be? Most articles I read say about 10-11B, so likely in our lifetimes...
it will be interesting to see, and I hope I am one of the survivors.
brenthutch 444
QuoteIt will not change - people naturally have sex, so we reproduce. Add that to our ability to master technology and dominate, in general, all things in the world, we will continue to grow until likely disease or other natural catastrophe.
Used to be the population of the world would grow to 750M or so, then get wiped out by plague, back down to 250-300M. Since the industrial revolution, that has changed.
So what will the new '750M' number be? Most articles I read say about 10-11B, so likely in our lifetimes...
it will be interesting to see, and I hope I am one of the survivors.
The carbon footprint is inversely proportional to the reproductive rate. The more carbon we produce the less we reproduce. Save the planet and burn more coal.
Well, I certainly don't take you serious after that statement.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites