Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should you pay more taxes if you don't have kids?
MSN Money ^ | 4/8/2014 | Krystal Steinmetz

Posted on 04/14/2014 1:35:52 AM PDT by South40

A Slate columnist argues that childless Americans should pony up some more cash for taxes and that parents should get a bigger break.

Nonparents should pay higher taxes so that lower- and middle-income parents can receive a much-deserved tax break. That's the proposal of conservative Slate.com columnist Reihan Salam.

"The willingness of parents to bear and nurture children saves us from becoming an economically moribund nation of hateful curmudgeons. The least we can do is offer them a bigger tax break," Salam, who is childless, said.

(Excerpt) Read more at money.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 04/14/2014 1:35:52 AM PDT by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: South40

Nope.


2 posted on 04/14/2014 1:37:50 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Social engineering through tax rates is nowhere in the Constitution, and FedGov has no business doing it. Tax law should serve the purpose of collecting revenue - only. [Note: I personally would benefit a lot from this proposal, but cronyism is wrong, even when it’s an overreach in my favor.]


3 posted on 04/14/2014 1:42:34 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40
"conservative Slate.com columnist . . ,

Conservative? Slate.com?

Thats on oxymoron.

4 posted on 04/14/2014 1:46:08 AM PDT by saywhatagain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40
I would actually argue the opposite as it relates to property taxes. I pay $7200 per year in property taxes (NJ), 65% of which goes to fund the local schools. I have no kids. If anything; I should probably get a property tax reduction on the amount of my tax bill that funds the schools.

It seems that the main point of the article is to label the writer as "conservative". I originally read the article on the BBC site and it was simply a conservative-bashing screed. A lot of "dog-whistle" phrases as the left likes to put it.

5 posted on 04/14/2014 2:10:30 AM PDT by American Infidel (Instead of vilifying success, try to emulate it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

MONEY(taxes) is heroin to government giving it to them(it) is a negative procedure..

COLD Turkey is the only recourse..
If givernment is NOT suffering...... YOU ARE!..


6 posted on 04/14/2014 2:19:19 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Krystal needs to look at her 1040 form, specifically lines 42, 48, and 51.


7 posted on 04/14/2014 2:23:43 AM PDT by Fresh Wind (The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40
conservative Slate.com columnist Reihan Salam

No such thing.
8 posted on 04/14/2014 2:38:49 AM PDT by 98ZJ USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

There should be a tax break for raising kids


9 posted on 04/14/2014 2:52:27 AM PDT by Java4Jay (The evils of government are directly proportional to the tolerance of the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

I would argue the OPPOSITE.

Your “carbon Footprint” is smaller (throw that in their faces). Everything you do is fractionally smaller than those who have families.....yet they are looking for more money from them.


10 posted on 04/14/2014 2:57:10 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.-Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Java4Jay
There should be a tax break for raising kids

There already is.

In 2013, you can claim a $3,900 exemption for each qualifying child.
11 posted on 04/14/2014 2:58:57 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.-Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...
Thanks South40, sidebar: Chances of getting audited by IRS lowest in years.
12 posted on 04/14/2014 3:17:21 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: South40

No, those without children should receive a partial refund of property taxes.


13 posted on 04/14/2014 3:23:23 AM PDT by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Everyone should pay higher taxes so that Mrs. Obama can enjoy another much-deserved vacation!!


14 posted on 04/14/2014 3:25:02 AM PDT by greedo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

In the long term, a country that doesn’t keep itself populated (and populated by its original people) simply dies off and is repopulated by whatever fills the vacuum.

And long term is not that long, as Europe as we know it, will be gone in less than 3 generations - us a generation or two later.

If people are cool with that, I feel sorry for them. If they have kids and are cool with leaving that future to them, they are about as selfish as I can imagine.


15 posted on 04/14/2014 3:38:51 AM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Don’t we already do something like this and it’s resulted in single parents and folks who really can’t afford them popping them out over and over to get more welfare checks?


16 posted on 04/14/2014 3:39:05 AM PDT by RWB Patriot ("My ability is a value that must be earned and I don't recognize anyone's need as a claim on me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Infidel

“I pay $7200 per year in property taxes (NJ), 65% of which goes to fund the local schools. I have no kids. If anything; I should probably get a property tax reduction on the amount of my tax bill that funds the schools.”

This is killing the housing market here in NJ amd radically changing the state demographically. People who don’t plan on having children don’t want to buy a house with those high school taxes, while those who would need a house for their children can’t pay the high taxes so they look elsewhere. Those taxes were bearable when NJ had good jobs, but now they are a deterrent to companies and individuals who head to greener pastures elsewhere.

When Jon Corzine was governor he admitted that we’d lost population without the illegals in the state (and we lost an electoral vote); it has only gotten worse since then. The state is ending up with large populations of “replacement Americans” (Hispanics & Asians), the permanent underclass, and the government worker class to administer them.

Programs to “freeze” property taxes for seniors are failing because they are being frozen at high rates already; if your taxes were frozen you’d still pay $600 per month in property taxes alone. How many retirees can do that? I like Christie’s cap of 2% increases, but that brings different problems where nothing can be paid for. Our government retiree class is bankrupting the state, and much of your $7,200 is being used to pay people who retired a long time ago.


17 posted on 04/14/2014 3:57:33 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: oblomov

“No, those without children should receive a partial refund of property taxes.”

I understand the logic but it could never happen logisitically; if our schools were paid for by the parents using them teachers would be earning $10,000 per year. I have no objection to that, but the teachers’ unions are the ones fighting to ensure that EVERYONE is contributing to their till.


18 posted on 04/14/2014 4:01:29 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: South40

“WELFARE MOMS FOR JUSTICE!”

We are already paying deadbeat welfare vermin to have babies and they ain’t white! Hell, they are spitting babies out like wet watermelon seeds now and just think how many they will spit out if they get the incentive to produce more.

I’ve lived long enough to see the demise of our nation into a cesspool of leeches the those who have absolutely no intention in integrating into our society nor being responsible for their own actions.

With Obama, we are at the tipping point and it would not surprise me (if I live a few years longer) if they rounded up whites (especially males) and put them in internment camps so the GREAT SOCIETY could advance without obstruction.


19 posted on 04/14/2014 4:02:02 AM PDT by DH (Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

We already do. We don’t have the extra individual deductions. We don’t have tax breaks for day care or health care.


20 posted on 04/14/2014 4:08:16 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

“Nonparents should pay higher taxes so that lower- and middle-income parents can receive a much-deserved tax break. That’s the proposal of conservative Slate.com columnist Reihan Salam.”

Lower and middle income parents already pay less. How about dependent deductions, child care credits, and the best of all the earned income credit. For households qualifying these can add up to $8,000 ~ $10,000 of tax returns. Not only do many of these folks not pay any net federal taxes (50% don’t) about half of those 50% actually pay net negative taxes! meaning as an example if FICA withholdings should be $2,000 an individual meeting the right criteria could receive back after filing an IRS check for perhaps $10,000 or more. Not bad, huh?


21 posted on 04/14/2014 4:12:11 AM PDT by snoringbear (E.oGovernment is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Leave it to dhimmicrats to always want to raise taxes; it’s all one way w/ them.


22 posted on 04/14/2014 4:53:51 AM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

all of society benefits from producing educated citizens, so all of society needs to contribute to funding public education- this is what our nation decided a long time ago, so that ship has sailed

The problem has become the tax burden dumped on property owners as if they were all “rich” or willing to pay anything levied on them, to save their homes. Eventually there just are not enough bucks. This needs to change


23 posted on 04/14/2014 4:57:46 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: saywhatagain

Bingo!


24 posted on 04/14/2014 5:00:56 AM PDT by Flick Lives ("I can't believe it's not Fascism!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: oblomov

and those who don’t drive, use public transportation, or use the libraries or parks should get a partial tax refund, too - why pay for tax-funded service for things they don’t personally use?


25 posted on 04/14/2014 5:01:08 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: snoringbear

Flat tax-with no REfunds going to people who didn’t fund it in the first place. Why they give refunds who didn’t pay any taxes in the first place is insane.


26 posted on 04/14/2014 5:05:39 AM PDT by growingpains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2
if our schools were paid for by the parents using them teachers would be earning $10,000 per year

My son's school is paid for by the parents, and the teachers make a lot more than $10,000. Probably less than at public schools, but not much less. Plus, I still pay for everyone else's kids' school, too.

27 posted on 04/14/2014 5:06:43 AM PDT by tnlibertarian (Beat Lamar! And, if that doesn't work, let's defeat him in the primary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: growingpains

“Flat tax-with no REfunds going to people who didn’t fund it in the first place. Why they give refunds who didn’t pay any taxes in the first place is insane.”

Agree for sure. I’m a proponent of the flat tax as well. In fact, I would be willing to support the elimination of all deductions, credits, and other forms of tax avoidance. However, having said that, I am a pragmatic person. So, for starters I’m willing to compromise. So to get it through congress, I would support a two tiered tax, say 10% for those earning under $40k/yr and 15% for those earning more. I would also support continuation of homeowners tax deduction as this bad become sacred and the public would not support its elimination - if eliminated it would be a deal breaker I think.


28 posted on 04/14/2014 5:34:30 AM PDT by snoringbear (E.oGovernment is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: snoringbear

You can’t start having deductions and tiers. It just gets to what we have now eventually. It should be an 8% flat tax for everyone. Including businesses. If you make 1000 you owe $80. If you make 100k you owe 8k. God asks for 10%. No way we should be expected to give as much to any government.


29 posted on 04/14/2014 5:55:48 AM PDT by kjam22 (my music video "If My People" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74b20RjILy4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kjam22

“You can’t start having deductions and tiers. It just gets to what we have now eventually. It should be an 8% flat tax for everyone. Including businesses. If you make 1000 you owe $80. If you make 100k you owe 8k. God asks for 10%. No way we should be expected to give as much to any government.”

I agree with you in theory. However, I don’t believe your scheme would ever get through both Houses, regardless of which party may be in power. I’m merely suggesting that we take what we can get, prove that a flatter tax concept is better than current scheme, then take another bite out of the apple so to speak :)


30 posted on 04/14/2014 6:12:32 AM PDT by snoringbear (E.oGovernment is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: South40

In some ways, people without children already pay higher taxes. They pay property taxes for schools without putting children in them. They don’t get child tax credits.


31 posted on 04/14/2014 6:39:24 AM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Java4Jay
There should be a tax break for raising kids

stop having kids if you can't afford them.

32 posted on 04/14/2014 6:44:14 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

I have failed to see any output of ‘educated’ citizenry vs. $$ and spent in the name of that endeavor.

And, though, that Social ideal of ‘community education’ (it takes a village B.S.) may have sailed, does not make it set it stone for eternity.

One, like all other things in life, should pay for services rendered. No use = no pay.


33 posted on 04/14/2014 7:44:45 AM PDT by i_robot73 (Give me one example and I will show where gov't is the root of the problem(s).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: snoringbear; growingpains

Sorry, but a Flat Tax is not the solution. Already, even with two tiers, you’ve opened the door for the 100-yr creep again.

National Sales Tax is the way to go: EVERYONE pays, voluntary, anonymous (consumer > biz > State > Fed), etc. For all its warts, the Fair Tax for me.


34 posted on 04/14/2014 7:51:07 AM PDT by i_robot73 (Give me one example and I will show where gov't is the root of the problem(s).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
Peace, Pollster1,

Social engineering through tax rates is nowhere in the Constitution, and FedGov has no business doing it. Tax law should serve the purpose of collecting revenue - only. [Note: I personally would benefit a lot from this proposal, but cronyism is wrong, even when it’s an overreach in my favor.]

Thank you for elucidating this so succinctly. I have four children, but concur with you that taxes are only for the purpose of collecting the monies needed to perform the Article 1, Section 8 powers granted in the Constitution.


James R. McClure Jr.
Jeffersonian Anti-Federalist Democrat candidate for IN09

35 posted on 04/14/2014 9:06:55 AM PDT by James R. McClure Jr.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

It’s not about the taxation, it’s about the spending...Let’s attack the spending first.


36 posted on 04/14/2014 9:09:48 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: i_robot73

“Sorry, but a Flat Tax is not the solution. Already, even with two tiers, you’ve opened the door for the 100-yr creep again.”

“National Sales Tax is the way to go: EVERYONE pays, voluntary, anonymous (consumer > biz > State > Fed), etc. For all its warts, the Fair Tax for me.”

Well, I’m not wed to any specific taxation scheme. But, I do know that whatever should be chosen, it should be wider and flatter for sure. In fact, I think every adult should feel the sting of the tax-man, even if it’s only $100. Btw, all tax plans are susceptible to your “100 year creep”. For instance, a national sales tax could have adders such as a luxury tax on high end autos, boats, RV’s, etc. Or, a sin tax on whatever the government decides is harmful, red meat, liquor, gasoline, sodas, candy bars, you name it. The solution to your creep is ever vigilence by the electorate. But, sadly, not even that is a guarantee as we are now at or near the tipping point where there are more takers than makers, or more riding in the wagon than pulling the wagon, choose your metaphor.


37 posted on 04/14/2014 9:53:26 AM PDT by snoringbear (E.oGovernment is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

“all of society benefits from producing educated citizens, so all of society needs to contribute to funding public education- this is what our nation decided a long time ago, so that ship has sailed”

That argument for it died when “puclic education” stopped educating children. Here in NJ, between a property tax cap (similar to California’s) and a freeze for seniors, a shrinking amount of money is available for the teachers’ workfare program anyway.

“The problem has become the tax burden dumped on property owners as if they were all “rich” or willing to pay anything levied on them, to save their homes. Eventually there just are not enough bucks. This needs to change”

Here in NJ it is changing; taxpayers (individual and corporate) are fleeing, leaving illegals, the permanent underclass, and the shrinking government workforce (due to budgetary constraints) to “administer” them.


38 posted on 04/15/2014 4:13:59 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tnlibertarian

Here in NJ our private schools (religious or otherwise) are closing because nobody can pay $7K+ for the public school system in taxes and on top of that pay a private school tuition. One of my wife’s friends went from making $15K teaching in a private school to $33K in a public school in the course of a year; only a well-off person could afford to teach in a private school.

Without vouchers that would allow parents to use their education tax money for private education, most of those schools will be closed within a few short years. The teachers’ unions have successfully prevented vouchers from being implemented, and as long as they are the de facto owners of the Democratic Party that won’t change.


39 posted on 04/15/2014 4:17:45 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

“stop having kids if you can’t afford them.”

Be careful what you wish for; plenty of Americans are heeding your advice, and it is leading to a permanent Dem majority. The “replacement Americans” replacing the missing children of those who “can’t afford to have kids” aren’t FReepers.


40 posted on 04/15/2014 4:22:13 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DH

“it would not surprise me (if I live a few years longer) if they rounded up whites (especially males) and put them in internment camps so the GREAT SOCIETY could advance without obstruction.”

They don’t have to; they’re disappearing on their own due to birthrates.


41 posted on 04/15/2014 4:23:21 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

I get it. It’s better to have a bunch of hypocrites calling themselves conservatives screaming to get government out of their lives while gleefully asking for their welfare handouts so they can out breed the other welfare recipients. Glad I finally got that straight.


42 posted on 04/15/2014 4:37:47 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

No, it is just that with everyone’s expectations nobody can “afford” children. Keeping waiting for the right time; your child can be the only English-speaker in his/her class at school...


43 posted on 04/15/2014 2:33:47 PM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

Have all the kids you want. Just don’t go thinking that doing so entitles you to take a rock out of your backpack and stuff it into mine.


44 posted on 04/15/2014 4:33:32 PM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

“Have all the kids you want. Just don’t go thinking that doing so entitles you to take a rock out of your backpack and stuff it into mine.”

No worries; I’ve assured my children that people of your mindset will never be rocks in their backpacks. You can carry your own, including when you are older.


45 posted on 04/16/2014 4:07:57 AM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

My issue isn’t with your kids, but nice way to use them as a bullet stop for your collectivist argument. My issue is with you wanting me to subsidize your choices.


46 posted on 04/16/2014 9:43:12 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

My kids aren’t bullet-stoppers for anyone; just don’t expect them to give a hoot when some Third World behemoth repeated cleans your bedpan with your face in your old age. Choices have consequences.


47 posted on 04/16/2014 1:57:07 PM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

How big of a check should I cut you? Seriously, I would like to know the price you want from me so you can whelp out a litter for the purpose of out breeding some other racial group. Put a dollar amount out of how much I owe you so you can choose to start a family. Don’t hide behind government taxing power and the catch-all “...for the children” bullshit. You want to have people put a gun to my head and the heads of others to subsidize you so you can have kids. Let’s just cut out the middle man and tell me what you think I owe you.


48 posted on 04/16/2014 2:09:20 PM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

Keep your money; my kids and I will keep our freedom of any obligation to you.


49 posted on 04/16/2014 2:16:03 PM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic warfare against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: American Infidel

I once asked the two spinster sisters living next to me growing up if it bothered them to pay taxes for the schools.

They said “Oh no! If I want the future of America to be as good as it was for me, I want you kids to get good educations, etc.”

Made sense to me then. Now, when I see the waste involved, I have willed myself to vote NO on any school budget increases. With all of the fancy open architecture, pavilions and stuff at the 2-year old local high school, they are already saying they are “out-of-room” and need to add on! (Not to mention the sculptures, the award winning home-econ area with four complete, state of the art industrial stainless steel kitchens, four assistant principals, etc.)


50 posted on 04/16/2014 2:20:53 PM PDT by 21twelve (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts 2013 is 1933 REBORN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson