Shouldn't there be a big tax break for those who do not have children?

Question

People without children do not use the public education system, other than their childhood which was taxed of their parents ( and is fair because the PARENTS should be responsible).... those without children who also earn their way without welfare consequently leave those resources intact, and should only pay taxes for what is neccessary to non-parents... highways, military defense and government employee wages to keep our country safe (Police, Fire, Administrative). We need to reward those without children with a tax incentive to promote restraint...thus lessening the burden of an overcrowded, resource-draining population exploding at the seams. Your opinions on a tax break for non-parents.?

When I say promote restraint...I mean Restraint from pregnancy, not sex...do what you want, just don't tax Me for it!

Also, some people want to say I'm crazy for suggesting a tax break for non-parents, so maybe you should help pay for my cigarrettes...oh wait, you don't smoke! So why should I have to pay for kids when I don't have any?

Answer 1

Only regarding the taxes for public schools. Also, when someone's children are grown and out of the public school system, the public school tax should no longer be due from them.

We also need to penalize those who have lots of children recklessly. They, more than any, are a burden on the tax system, since many of the children and their parents end up using public funds in the form of welfare, health clinics, jails, and social services program.

If ya can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em.

Answer 2

No,
Should I get a tax break if my house never gets broken into? Should I get a tax break if I never call the fire dept? Or if I never use the community rec center, or never visit the library?

What your stating is that your not using the service the tax is paying for so why should you have to pay for it?

Should you get a refund if you never have to use your insurance policy?

NO? These operations work on a law of numbers. Which means we are all a community working together to provide a service for the common good. One of these services is the public education system.

If you think your taxes are high, why don't you take out the law of large numbers? Put a price on all of the community services that you use or would have to pay for yourself if there was not a government agency to do so?

Answer 3

It wouldn't be public education then would it? It is a public burden for all to share like with fire, police, military, etc.

You are lumping all parents into one basket as irresponsible. The majority of parents are responsible and pay taxes just like you do.

I don't use or have family that uses the welfare system, but I pay my part for it. I don't drive down the same roads you do, but my tax dollars go to build new and repair old ones you drive on. I don't have access to every politician, yet my tax dollars go to their salaries. I don't have access to public health care because I make too much money, but my tax dollars pay for others who do.

Where did all of those public servants get their primary education? What about colleges? They get funding from federal, state and local tax dollars to offset expenses. What if your situation changed in the future, you somehow became a parent and needed to enroll a child into school. You would expect the "public school system" to accommodate you, right?How would you feel if they told you, "Sorry, you didn't pay taxes for this so you can't use the system?" Would that be fair to you?

Answer 4

good points.. but then I haven't had a fire at my house, should I still have to pay for the fire department?

Rewarding those without children to reward restraint? Are you kidding me?? That's just ridiculous! I have to ask.. are you a virgin? If you are, then you DESERVE a tax break.. of not, then you haven't exercised restraint and you're no longer entitled.

Schools, fire, police, military etc. etc. etc. are all governmental services and it's all part of living in our country. Tax shelters and deductions are all getting scarcer and scarcer. The credit for having children is no where NEAR what it cost to have and support a child...

Your credit will have to be the ability to go on vacation, go out to eat, drive the kind of car you wish and live in the relative freedom that a parent of children cannot enjoy. You can drive a two-seater and not have to worry about fitting the rugrats in the back.. enjoy that.

Answer 5

True, people without children get really screwed in this regard. No couple I know has ever yet asked my permission to have children, yet I keep having to subsidize them! Bastards!

On the other hand, despite your biases against population, it is very much in any modern society's interest to encourage families to have children, at least 2 per family or more. Overpopulation is emphatically NOT a problem in any reasonably developed nation, whereas aging demographics and shrinking populations are going to be THE huge problem of the 21st century for Europe, Russia, Japan, and China, and perhaps the whole world.

Answer 6

Yes, diminishing natural resources is a big issue. The most effective and fair means of allocating those resources is with a free market. A free market means no government interference. I'll give up my "tax break" just as soon as we also end free health clinics, welfare, food stamps, free lunch, and all of the OTHER government aide given to parents to keep breeding.

Answer 7

If non parents should not help support children then it is reasonable that they should not use the services of these children in later years. The logical way to prevent the use of such services is to exile or otherwise dispose of non parents when they cease to be productive members of society thus lessening the burden of an overcrowded, resource-draining population.

Answer 8

These are not good ideas.

In economics, we have something called public goods. It is very easy to argue that children are a public good. Even though I do not have children myself, I have a strong incentive to make sure that the ones in my country are well educated and in good health. Those children will be the doctors, dentists, social workers, and whatever in a few years. Their well being are important to my well being.

So, no, I think you are short-sighted.

Answer 9

Well, this theory should work...let's just see?
Ok so we reward people for having no children, we all like rewards yes? So ok, no one has any more kids and everyone gets rewarded...gee, no kids = no need for schools, or teachers, or anything related to children...including...wait for it....NO FUTURE!!
Sooner or later under your brilliant theory, if everyone follows it, we end up with NO PEOPLE...perfect, if your an insect.
Lmao, I love hearing these half baked theories, funnier than Comedy Channel on a good night

Answer 10

Well gee, let's see, wether or not they are your children , they are the future. Unless you want a future with a whole bunch of stupid adults running the country cause people like you didn't want to pay for it.

It's a fact of life.