You are too kind for this forum
. I am used to people that jump at me with all they've got.
Saylor: Tax That!
- Thread starter The_Krakenite
- Start date
You are too kind for this forum
. I am used to people that jump at me with all they've got.You have not heard me when I have a strong opinion on something. ;-)
You are too kind for this forum
,,Bachelor Tax
Before recent shifts toward a more liberal attitude about marriage in this country, the state of Missouri tried to encourage single men to tie the knot as quickly as possible — by taxing them. In 1821, Missouri passed this so-called “bachelor tax,” charging $1 annually to single men between the age of 21 and 50. The bachelor tax is no longer enforced.''
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/25-most-outlandish-taxes-since-010029017.html
Some states/politicians had talks about bringing it back.
Word.
virtually every society believes that having children is a good thing. They want to encourage people to have children.
second, a strong public education system is good for society. A smarter population allows for more productivity and more less social inequality. The most productive countries have strong public education systems.
Societies set up a tax structure partly to support the values it wants to promote.
None of that was debated or questioned. In fact you just stated the status quo.
It still is grossly unfair to those who choose not to have children. In many developed societies among the younger generation the percentage of childless individuals is growing. Perhaps a rethink how pensions are funded should be considered. Hong Kong for example lets it's residents self-fund with Co-payments from employers. Nobody grifts by putting their fingers in others' pots. Of course must some societies promote children given their current pension system, what other choice do they have to have the pot funded by as many new lemmings as possible. And if a society has too few pension and tax payers but too high administrative expenses perhaps it is high noon to scale back governmental expenses and services. But we always hear of growth. A city and country must always grow along with its services and debt and taxation system. As an independent thinker I question such mindset.
All that does not make it fair. Children are a free choice. Why force others to pay for yours?
It still is grossly unfair to those who choose not to have children. In many developed societies among the younger generation the percentage of childless individuals is growing. Perhaps a rethink how pensions are funded should be considered. Hong Kong for example lets it's residents self-fund with Co-payments from employers. Nobody grifts by putting their fingers in others' pots. Of course must some societies promote children given their current pension system, what other choice do they have to have the pot funded by as many new lemmings as possible. And if a society has too few pension and tax payers but too high administrative expenses perhaps it is high noon to scale back governmental expenses and services. But we always hear of growth. A city and country must always grow along with its services and debt and taxation system. As an independent thinker I question such mindset.
All that does not make it fair. Children are a free choice. Why force others to pay for yours?
Last edited:
That’s how taxes work. It’s socializing expenses. Every tax is unfair to someone. That’s not a standard to determine if a tax is a good idea.
Not sure what pensions have to do with child tax credits.
Not sure what pensions have to do with child tax credits.
Unfairness should not be a reason to consider whether a tax on someone, who does not deserve to be taxed, should be assessed or not? What else should then give us second thoughts if not unfairness?
Nobody talked about child tax credits, you just came up with that. The way pension systems are set up in many western societies require a steady inflow of young tax pension funders, those who only cause pension pot inflows. That's the connection. But I am sure you know that.
It is so because it is. I question that.
Nobody talked about child tax credits, you just came up with that. The way pension systems are set up in many western societies require a steady inflow of young tax pension funders, those who only cause pension pot inflows. That's the connection. But I am sure you know that.
It is so because it is. I question that.
Tax credits are a form of negative taxation. It’s all the same.
Population growth isn’t just for pensions. population growth supports growing economies.
Socialized education and services for children is one key factor to building a strong society. That’s why every wealthy nation provides it to its citizens. Childless people benefit from public education - one they likely partook of it themselves and two educated kids are less likely to murder them. School taxes are largely local in the US, people without kids can move to locales that don’t have good school systems but for some reason they don’t want to…. Why is that?
Poor societies do not provide good education to children and everyone suffers except the super rich who can insulate themselves.
I’m sorry if you are barren or impotent and can’t have kids.
Population growth isn’t just for pensions. population growth supports growing economies.
Socialized education and services for children is one key factor to building a strong society. That’s why every wealthy nation provides it to its citizens. Childless people benefit from public education - one they likely partook of it themselves and two educated kids are less likely to murder them. School taxes are largely local in the US, people without kids can move to locales that don’t have good school systems but for some reason they don’t want to…. Why is that?
Poor societies do not provide good education to children and everyone suffers except the super rich who can insulate themselves.
I’m sorry if you are barren or impotent and can’t have kids.
Collective mind, makes you/anyone a better person.You are too kind for this forum
Meanwhile,
TikTok : Hold my beer
We could throw 50% more money at our public education system and I suspect the results would be the same. It all comes down to the family structure. Stupid lazy parents have stupid lazy kids. All the money in the world won't fix that.
The US spends more on education than any other country, but students lag behind academically. Here's how much other countries spend and how well their students perform.
Mack DeGeurin
- The US spends over $700 billion on public education, yet it lags behind most other industrialized countries in key measurements of academic success.
- The curriculums, teaching styles, and class structure of schools differ widely all around the world.
- INSIDER analyzed US government data to see which countries spend the most money on their students and looked at how well each of those countries fares in internationally recognized test scores.
- Visit INSIDER's homepage for more stories.
In 2017, the US spent $12,800 per student on public education, which is the second-highest amount spent per student of any country in the world. But when it comes to total spending, the comparison isn't remotely close. According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, the US spent over $700 billion on public education in 2017 alone. To put that in perspective, you could add up the total GDP of Finland and Vietnam and you still wouldn't hit the amount the US spends on education.
But despite all that spending, the US has struggled. Pew Research from 2017 found the US ranked 38th in math and 24th in science when compared against 71 other countries. Only two decades prior, the US's education system ranked 6th internationally.