It's bullshyt that the US punishes single people like it does.
DINK: Living the Dual Income No Kids Lifestyle
- Thread starter ogc163
- Start date
It's bullshyt that the US punishes single people like it does.
i don't think it's bullshyt. govts should promote marriage and having children. that's a healthy society.
It's not the government's job to incentivize marriage and children. People can make their own life decisions. At the very least people who are single shouldn't have extra burden placed on them by the government.
what is the govt's job? just to spend money with no replacements paying into the pot? if it's in the govt's interest they'll promote it. if AI eliminates the need for half the workforce govts all over will adapt and the replacement birth rate stuff will go to the dustbin of history and no more tax benefits for being married with kids.
GnauzBookOfRhymes
Superstar
There are all kinds of reasons that governments incentivize having children.
The viability of social security and other retirement programs are tied to having enough younger workers paying into the system to support current/future retirees.
A declining population has all kinds of implications for the national economy. Too fewer people mean you can't fill open needs, less ppl contributing to growth/productivity, too many old people and not enough caretakers, less vitality etc.
What extra burden? I thought being single without kids was the cheat code to a happy life
Who the hell has kids and a marriage because the government rewards it? That's a non-factor into those decisions. It's just something people exploit on the other side of the decisions but they would have done those things either way.There are all kinds of reasons that governments incentivize having children.
The viability of social security and other retirement programs are tied to having enough younger workers paying into the system to support current/future retirees.
A declining population has all kinds of implications for the national economy. Too fewer people mean you can't fill open needs, less ppl contributing to growth/productivity, too many old people and not enough caretakers, less vitality etc.
What extra burden? I thought being single without kids was the cheat code to a happy life
Social security could be remedied by removing the cap on wages but you don't see that suggested because rich powerful people will have none of that.
GnauzBookOfRhymes
Superstar
Who buys a home because the government rewards it?
You don't believe government incentives induce private behavior?
I agree regarding social security but that's only part of the equation. Eventually it will have to be means tested. Increasing the tax by itself helps a lot but then it just means they collect bigger checks.
I specifically said get married or have kids. Those are decisions with mostly life long consequences. They don't compare to buying a house.
GnauzBookOfRhymes
Superstar
I think you're framing the question incorrectly. Incentive and reward are not the same. It's not about people doing something bc the government "rewards" the decision, it's about the extent to which government action (or inaction) induces or discourages the behavior.
Things like the child care tax credit, availability of pre-k/head start, good public schools, 529 plans etc all makes a difference when people are thinking about whether they can afford a kid, whether they want more. Those are the biggest and most immediate costs in the early years.
The reason millenials and younger are having less kids isn't only related to marrying/cohabitating later, more women in the workforce or wanting to "live their best lives." It is mostly related to the cost of living and a perception they cannot afford the added costs associated with raising children.
If we reformed parental leave policies towards something that approximates other industrialized nations, or gave direct financial assistance like many other nations have started in effort to boost birth rate, more ppl would take that plunge. Ironically the US did have the $300/month/child credit it was giving to families below income threshold during covid. I think at some point that will be reinstated. There's a lot of research showing that it drove down child poverty rates and had all kinds of other associated benefits.
you don't have an extra burden. you don't qualify for tax breaks, because you aren't spending any money on kids. stop bytchingif you want the "privilege" of everything the government gives to people with kids, then go knock someone up
all this shyt isnt necessary. i dont have or want kids, and i don't sit around envying parents for fukkin tax credits and parental leave
there's nothing remotely burdensome about being single, compared to having kids
GnauzBookOfRhymes
Superstar
if you want the "privilege" of everything the government gives to people with kids, then go knock someone up
all this shyt isnt necessary. i dont have or want kids, and i don't sit around envying parents for fukkin tax credits and parental leave
The kids anti kids debate reminds me of the back and forth I see a lot with biking advocates who think "all cars are ROLLING HOMICIDE MACHINES" and ppl who exclusively drive and think bike lanes are unconstitutional and represent the death of the america we love
