4 ms·

Childless people already pay more taxes since they don't have dependents to claim

dcolkitt 5y ago
Child tax deductions don’t even come close to canceling out the lost revenue of a potential future taxpayer over their lifetime. Especially given today’s near zero interest rate environment. Look at it this way, properly incentivizing children would mean that the average couple with two kids would pay zero net taxes over their life. With zero rates a non taxpayer who reproduces at replacement has the same equivalent fiscal value as a childless full taxpayer.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  Helping to support people who have children is a pretty popular policy I think. People like public schools, right? Let's just do that, but more. Punishing people for not having kids is obviously ridiculous.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  But I (happening to have two kids) consume government services now in addition to creating the linked supply and demand for government services that my kids represent. It doesn’t seem like “promising my kids will pick up the tab at replacement rate” is enough to be stable.
  - dcolkitt 5y ago
    Hmm... That's a fair point. The wrinkle is not all government services scale linearly with users. For example, if there were twice as many Americans we probably wouldn't need twice the defense budget.
bpodgursky 5y ago
The child tax credit is completely irrelevant compared to the cost you incur or social benefits you share by having a child.
mc32 5y ago
But they also didn’t produce a taxpayer who would contribute to the pot.
- rchaud 5y ago
  But they also didn't take up a space at a taxpayer-subsidized daycare or kindergarten or state university.
  - mc32 5y ago
    Sure but then they mostly aren’t keeling over three years after retiring.
dantheman 5y ago
They also pay more taxes because they pay for schools and lots of services that those who have children take advantage of.
- voganmother42 5y ago
  And that they themselves took advantage of, even the childless were children

Child tax deductions don’t even come close to canceling out the lost revenue of a potential future taxpayer over their lifetime. Especially given today’s near zero interest rate environment. Look at it this way, properly incentivizing children would mean that the average couple with two kids would pay zero net taxes over their life. With zero rates a non taxpayer who reproduces at replacement has the same equivalent fiscal value as a childless full taxpayer.

bee_rider 5y ago
Helping to support people who have children is a pretty popular policy I think. People like public schools, right? Let's just do that, but more. Punishing people for not having kids is obviously ridiculous.
sokoloff 5y ago
But I (happening to have two kids) consume government services now in addition to creating the linked supply and demand for government services that my kids represent. It doesn’t seem like “promising my kids will pick up the tab at replacement rate” is enough to be stable.
- dcolkitt 5y ago
  Hmm... That's a fair point. The wrinkle is not all government services scale linearly with users. For example, if there were twice as many Americans we probably wouldn't need twice the defense budget.

bpodgursky 5y ago

The child tax credit is completely irrelevant compared to the cost you incur or social benefits you share by having a child.

mc32 5y ago

But they also didn’t produce a taxpayer who would contribute to the pot.

rchaud 5y ago
But they also didn't take up a space at a taxpayer-subsidized daycare or kindergarten or state university.
- mc32 5y ago
  Sure but then they mostly aren’t keeling over three years after retiring.

dantheman 5y ago

They also pay more taxes because they pay for schools and lots of services that those who have children take advantage of.

voganmother42 5y ago
And that they themselves took advantage of, even the childless were children