3 ms·

Where did you get that number from? You get $4800 here just for being unemployed and on welfare; and it goes up with each kid up to 4. Plus, free lunches. Plus,

Where did you get that number from? You get $4800 here just for being unemployed and on welfare; and it goes up with each kid up to 4. Plus, free lunches. Plus, a new political push to make childcare supplements people received during the pandemic permanent. People without children already supplement education with property tax they shouldn't be paying. Why in the hell should the childless be supporting your breeding habits?

jimbob45 4y ago
https://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/tax-deductions-and-credits-2/family/tax-benefits-for-having-dependents-12835/ https://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/tax-deductions-and-credits-... I got that number here. It has a bit of a range depending on income and a few other factors. The number appears to be low no matter what your factors end up being, though. The childless support those with children because everyone recognizes that we have to reproduce to keep society running. If nobody has children, then our standard of living plummets, among other consequences. Thus, we subsidize kids for those who choose to have them.
- chatterhead 4y ago
  Ok, that's federal. How is that the same as state provided welfare benefits? That's essentially a negative income tax (Milton Friedman) and is in addition to state benefits provided. At least, I don't see where there is an exclusion for those who receive such benefits. Reminds me of when ODB snagged his welfare payment. People far removed from poverty really don't understand how cash based system-scamming the poor really are. https://rockthebells.com/articles/odb-food-stamps-mtv/ https://rockthebells.com/articles/odb-food-stamps-mtv/
fallingfrog 4y ago
Why should people who are young and healthy support people on social security? Why should adults not just turn children loose in the streets? They're not doing anything useful. Why should the insurance premiums of healthy people pay for those who have cancer? Because we live in a society, there is a social contract, and we are not evolved to be solitary animals, that's why. There are a myriad of ways that we scratch each other's backs. You live in a world in which there are other people and you have parents to thank for it. Go live on a desert island if you really want to see what life is like without children.
- notch656a 4y ago
  Obviously if something is a good idea, then that's the evidence we need to force others to fund it at gunpoint of the tax man.
  - fallingfrog 4y ago
    Without taxes, there would be no capitalism, no roads, no electrical grid, nothing remotely resembling civilization. You are welcome to go find a desert island to live on if the idea of having any kind of responsibility to your fellow human beings is so repugnant. At any rate, the amount of profit a capitalist business owner skims off their employees labor is much greater than the amount those workers pay in taxes. The idea that the business owner should be allowed to benefit from the labor and effort of an educated, healthy workforce and a functioning infrastructure and financial system while giving nothing in return is not even worth discussing. It sounds to me like you're just upset that you don't get to be a freeloader. You owe society for what it gives you.
    - notch656a 4y ago
      Obviously the definition of freeloader is not wanting to use violence to extract money from others. Clearly there is no way to build a road exclusively with voluntary transactions.

jimbob45 4y ago

https://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/tax-deductions-and-credits-2/family/tax-benefits-for-having-dependents-12835/ https://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/tax-deductions-and-credits-... I got that number here. It has a bit of a range depending on income and a few other factors. The number appears to be low no matter what your factors end up being, though. The childless support those with children because everyone recognizes that we have to reproduce to keep society running. If nobody has children, then our standard of living plummets, among other consequences. Thus, we subsidize kids for those who choose to have them.

chatterhead 4y ago
Ok, that's federal. How is that the same as state provided welfare benefits? That's essentially a negative income tax (Milton Friedman) and is in addition to state benefits provided. At least, I don't see where there is an exclusion for those who receive such benefits. Reminds me of when ODB snagged his welfare payment. People far removed from poverty really don't understand how cash based system-scamming the poor really are. https://rockthebells.com/articles/odb-food-stamps-mtv/ https://rockthebells.com/articles/odb-food-stamps-mtv/

fallingfrog 4y ago

Why should people who are young and healthy support people on social security? Why should adults not just turn children loose in the streets? They're not doing anything useful. Why should the insurance premiums of healthy people pay for those who have cancer? Because we live in a society, there is a social contract, and we are not evolved to be solitary animals, that's why. There are a myriad of ways that we scratch each other's backs. You live in a world in which there are other people and you have parents to thank for it. Go live on a desert island if you really want to see what life is like without children.

notch656a 4y ago
Obviously if something is a good idea, then that's the evidence we need to force others to fund it at gunpoint of the tax man.
- fallingfrog 4y ago
  Without taxes, there would be no capitalism, no roads, no electrical grid, nothing remotely resembling civilization. You are welcome to go find a desert island to live on if the idea of having any kind of responsibility to your fellow human beings is so repugnant. At any rate, the amount of profit a capitalist business owner skims off their employees labor is much greater than the amount those workers pay in taxes. The idea that the business owner should be allowed to benefit from the labor and effort of an educated, healthy workforce and a functioning infrastructure and financial system while giving nothing in return is not even worth discussing. It sounds to me like you're just upset that you don't get to be a freeloader. You owe society for what it gives you.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    Obviously the definition of freeloader is not wanting to use violence to extract money from others. Clearly there is no way to build a road exclusively with voluntary transactions.