I’m proposing that the United States should look into giving tax benefits to those that have one child?

Question

I’m proposing that the United States should look into giving tax benefits to those that have one child for a college paper. And not give tax breaks to those who decide to overpopulate our cities, destroy our education system, and act as if it’s their right for us to support their children. The aim would be to make it socially unacceptable to have more then two children. Instead of implementing cruel policies of forced sterilizations and such, although government sponsored sterilizations and birth control wouldn’t be a bad idea. I’m having trouble finding a primary source I was thinking about using China’s popular one child act, which I would criticize but also encourage some of it at the same time. The only problem is, I can’t find the actual document any help? No I am not looking for anyone to argue my point of view its not even properly established at the moment so please don’t bother all those wanting to yell fascist.

Answer 1

It would not work because you have some fundamentalist Christians who are big supporters of the GOP would be directly impacted by such a proposal. For example there is a family called the Duggars who in their community, they are the rule NOT the exception. They were featured on the Discovery channel as having had 16 children- all my natural childbirth- no adoptions.
You also have those people who have taken in children that no one wanted, such as those who adopt hard to place children such as HIV carriers, severely mentally and physically disabled children- a couple featured on a cable channel who have 22 children. Two the other gave birth to the others all adopted and all have something different about them They too would be penalized which would not be fair.
While there are some people who "hatch" up children to feed off the system, it would be hard to determine if that is the case to therefore penalize them There would be no way to say which family deserved to penalized vs. those who should not be.

Answer 2

China is over populated and they only want to give birth to boy children because when they get old, they live with there boy children and are supported by them. That why they implemented the "one child act". This is the United States and it will never be socially unacceptable to have more than two children. Government paying for birth control would be a good idea since there are many poor people who can't afford it and have babies supported by welfare and many insurance companies would rather pay for you to have a baby than to cover birth control. It is ridiculous. My husband and I have four children and we sure don't get anything from the government. We both work, insure our kids and pay full price for there school lunches. And we don't get much of a tax break. We make too much money. The less you make and the less children you have, the bigger the break. Unless you make hundreds of thousands or in the millions. Most of the people who get a fat tax break are the rich who are too involved in there money to have children. But if you are in the low income tax bracket and have children, you get unearned income credit and you only get that for up to two children. If we only made enough to qualify for that tax break, we couldn't survive. We're in the middle so we honestly don't get much of a tax break. You should really do some more checking of the facts.

Answer 3

It relies upon on what style of give way...If it somewhat is a head on melancholy or in undemanding terms a hiccup of a recession. the two way, the Philippines (like a number of different united states of america) is heavily based at america. look what happened while the plain recession hit the Dow, while it fell, the pse fell...demanding, so a ways shares could not recuperate because of the fact of all of the inner and exterior aspects. The exterior aspects are heavily stimulated with the aid of the states, case in point, assuming it reaches an element of melancholy, it would end importation of the two products and immigrants, to that end we loose our greatest procuring and advertising significant different and between the main important aspects of the remitances that now variety a significant area of the economic gadget... i think of we'd be heading nowhere so rapidly we does not even word that our economic gadget had already collapsed... I recommend we've not even recovered totally because of the fact the 1997 economic disaster...(i think of) the united statescollapse might carry a give way of the international economic gadget... If the united statesmonetary gadget might give way...it particularly is

Answer 4

Having more children is far better than having less children for nearly every situation.

One exception that comes to mind is that if you struggle to support yourself, it is selfish to think that you can support & take responsiblity for another life.

The 3rd world countries on our planet are having babies at nearly a 3:1 ration verses 2nd & 1st world countries.

This is destroying the balance that had been nearly perfect during the early 20th century.

Answer 5

My wonderful wife fled China to escape that kind of tyranny, the type that emphasis es the intellectual superiority of the elites over the mindless stupidity of the workers and other assorted little guys like me.
Thank God for that!
Try taking up residence in Beijing, you'll love it!

Answer 6

We do. And we give those same credits to the second child and third child.

So are you proposing in taking away the credits for any more than one child (no dependant credits/deductions?)

Answer 7

One word answer. Unconstitutional.

Answer 8

This is not China