Should we stop the Child tax credit/write off with 2 kids?

Question

We need to stop the population growth and this would offer incentive to not have a bunch of kids that one can't provide for. It would also help raise tax dollars. China only allows one child. We should start limiting to just two.

Answer 1

Yes.

Overpopulation is the reason for economic instability and should be limit to two children per household.

Why?

A.) A household with two children or more is more costly for the parent. This will enforce them to work full time jobs because they need to provide money for daycare.

B.) People with more than two children have to provide groceries, unnecessary toys along with accessories, and clothing. Kids nowadays over-indulge in food, play too much video games, and talk up a storm on cellphones unnecessarily bringing in big bills.

C.) Households with two children and above, especially with single parents conjures up hardship and counseling. During this day and age of sexual immorality, some sexually active teenagers have unwanted pregnancies. Because the parent is going to support another child, they will have to provide for a third or fourth child. This is another issue too with tax write offs.

I can state more in why we should stop write offs on more than two kids per household. Because parents cannot afford to keep up with their spending, they are using government assistance to take care of their woes. It's just too bad that the people who need it most is getting the short end of the stick. Overpopulation is the reason for the world's demise, including China.

Answer 2

You could make an argument for limiting the child tax credit to 2 kids. The EIC is already limited that way. Making the change for the child tax credit would require Congress to change the law.

I sure wouldn't want to become like China and limit the number of children people could have. Tax policy is totally separate from that concept.

Answer 3

Zig,
In response to you answer on yahoo. I agree with most of what you are saying, however if you think that fair tax will work you are wrong. First it won’t eliminate the IRS, who will enforce the fair tax? Won’t fair tax put an undue burden on business that have to collect it? Won’t the only people whose taxes will go down be the rich and everyone else’s go up?

If you think I’m wrong just take the amount on line 44 of 1040, line 28 of 1040A, or line 11 on 1040EZ and divide it by your adjusted gross income. If the percentage is less than 23% fair tax is a bad deal for you. According to the instructions in 1040 ES you would have to make over $31,850 if single or $63,700 if married to pay more than fair tax and this is the amount of your taxable income not the gross income, the true answer will require a higher income. while it is possible to pay less in taxes, rich people do it all the time; just start saving and investing so your income comes from tax exempt interest, qualified dividends, capital gains, and rental property.

IRS only enforces the law that congress writes, they aren’t a bunch of monsters; most are hard working people who only want to do what is right just like you. Your beef isn’t with IRS it’s with congress. If you think taxes are too high, the best way I know to correct that is to make congress live just like you do. What we really need is a balanced budget amendment where congress can’t spend more than they take in taxes, and require social security to make investments in the stock market instead of only buying government bonds. If that happened congress wouldn’t be able to spend money they don’t have and tax rates for every one would eventually fall.

Answer 4

China has already started lifting its restrictions on that. They are starting to realize that 1 child per family makes populations drop. Where will we be in 50 years when there are not enough young people around to take care of us. People, and animals all need to reproduce in order to keep their species alive. Putting restrictions on peoples lives is dangerous, you start with something like limiting children and soon we'll lose our freedom of choice for everything. Do you want to live in a communist/fascist country? I'm sure we could find another Hitler for the US. This is just the stupidest thing I've ever heard, If you dont want children dont have them, but dont expect everyone to share your opinions.

Answer 5

Limiting the amount of Kids People can have is unconstitutional. Your idea of only giving tax credit for 2 is a good one. We should do the same with Welfare.

Answer 6

There should be no limit on the number of children you can have. However, I think we should require anyone who wants to have a child to take a test and get a license just like driving a car.

Answer 7

Why do we need to stop the population growth???

This is absurd. Our country has to let millions of illegals in because we don't have enough people to do the work (so they say.)

If you limit the population, who's going to pay into that evil social security system that we're stuck in?

No no my friend. Let's eliminate the IRS! That should be the true question. Its absurd how complicated and vague our tax laws are!

Fair Tax!

Answer for Charlie & Angie below: I appreciate your open dialog. Thanks for no name calling and low stuff. Seriously. The 23% really isn't that. Yes that sounds screwy. Let me try to explain. When you buy a product, some widget, you're paying with income that has already been taxed at say 10% by state and fed + another 15% of social security, putting it at a real tax rate of around 25% (Your situation may be different....)

Real quick: everybody pays 15% of their income into social security. You pay 7.5% and your employer pays 7.5% so that's 15%.

That widget has hidden taxes in it. Hidden taxes like the income taxes and social security taxes of the person who built it, the income taxes of the person who inspected it, the income tax of the person who shipped it, the income taxes of the employees in the retail store, etc....These are hidden taxes in that product. So after the 23% tax is applied, the product will cost what it used to cost in the "system" that we're in now.

Does that make sense? Or did I just screw that all up? The fair tax book by Neal Boortz does a good job explaining it.

Take care!

Answer 8

I thoroughly agree that "authorities", inspite of u . s . a ., would desire to have extra stringent rules on reward using having babies. As one individual stated, "in the event that they'd't take care of to pay for to boost a newborn, then have not got one". right here interior america of a, the elderly, veterans and disabled are discriminated. each and each month whilst they acquire their social protection examine, they are pressured to settle on between ingesting, heating abode, or taking medicine that they desperately choose. you would be surprised at each and every of the thoughts I even have been instructed via nurses which had sufferers that ate CAT food so as that they'd purchase their medicine. that's totally ridiculous!!! those human beings have the two labored difficult til retirement, ailment pressured them to bypass away their careers or have suffered an harm whilst preserving our u . s . a . for the duration of warfare. yet monetary tips for them is placed on the returned burner whilst those having babies, so as that they'd acquire vast quantities of monetary tips, is depleting each and every of the monetary tips funds. I even have an "EX" chum that has a infant each and every 3 years (would not remember who the daddy is!!!) so she and the infant has unfastened wellness preserve 3 years. whilst she is likewise receiving newborn help and adequate monetary tips so she would be in a position to stay abode all day and sit down on her butt. the completed concern interior america of a are the those that are scamming the gadget and receiving dissimilar those monetary funds! those human beings stay extra perfect than center class workers, that bust their butt working every day so as that they'd attempt to make ends meet. SO MY answer is definitely definite!!!