It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should the US tax people for procreation?

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


No need to tax people.

All we need to do is stop paying them to have kids.


I would agree with that. However, if they still have kids, these kids are doomed to starvation and death, according to you, right?


Assuming there are still people who want to adopt children, I don't think they would be doomed to starvation.


(a) That's an assumption
(b) Of course violence will need to be used in many cases to separate kids from their mothers and dads. I thought you didn't like violence.




posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Congratulations on being the exception to the statistics.

There is a mountain of data showing abstinance only education is a complete fail.
I can source a bunch of websites from neutral research that proves this, or you can google it...


I'm not a proponent of "abstinence only" education, I'm a proponent of strongly encouraging abstinence in a very no-nonsense way (which is not being done at this time) - ie. "Sure you can wear a condom but they can fail and you're a moron to risk having kids with someone you don't love, before either of you are ready." If that was the manner in which the message was delivered I think it would be much more effective.


Originally posted by SaturnFX
The only thing that is going to work is introduction of birth control methods. the continuing growth of teen pregnancy and sex...in the face of abstinance only education...demonstrates this.


We've never had more birth control options than we have today. The issue is NOT a lack of birth control methods, the issue is a lack of strong, no-nonsense guidance from adults.
edit on 17-12-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)


I tell all parents what I have told my children, and it works, if you get someone knocked up(for my son) or if you get knocked up(for my daughters) I will insert my foot in your anus and it won't be pretty. It's worked for me, The problem is a lot of parents are not that involved in their children's lives, even for just the talking...that's the major problem. I am there for the talking and I am there for the nearly NSA style spy action, too (And no children as long as their under your ROOF, have absolutely NO expectation of privacy!)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   
no, we should have a stupidity tax. just tax the stupid people!



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by tonypazzohome
no, we should have a stupidity tax. just tax the stupid people!


Please start with sending a check to US Treasury.
Every little helps, you know.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
They may as well tax people for having kids! I'm actually surprised that they don't already! LMAO
$50.00 a month for one child, $90.00 for two a month! That way they can say they give a discount to multiple children families and look like the hero's that we all know that they are! LOL



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I'm against taxing people for children. The opposite should be true - we should discount those who have more than two children (thereby increasing the population). The U.S. is not in any resource jeopardy - nowhere close. We are, however, about to run into a fairly serious problem - regardless of how the dynamics play out - the Baby Boomers are going to pass on into the sunset, but not before we need to support them (be it through government programs or not). These are people who were, first, working - and, now, not just -not- working, but drawing pensions.

The birth rate among the middle class is rather low - the lower classes below poverty level have some of the highest birth-rates. Lifestyles are hereditary, to be blunt, in all of the good and bad it stands to bring.

So, the answer would be to make it unprofitable to have children, but to reward those who choose to have families with lower taxes (somehow). Right now - there are two ways to make it work. You can get knocked up below the poverty level, and crank out kids for more booze money. Child Services is not likely to get involved. Or - you can have a family and get marginal tax breaks with moderate income.

You shouldn't be rewarded for procreating beyond your means - but shouldn't be punished for having kids.




top topics
 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join