It is amazing how many people support and defend an obvioulsy socialistic system when it benifits them. Rationalize it all you want, it is socialism at a small scale.

Don't bitch about the cost of raising kids, that was your choice. The fact remains, those with kids will eat up more resources paid for by tax dollars while paying less into the system. From each according to thier ability, to each according to thier needs. Just a small step on the way to that dream.......

Sorry miss directed bullet. I redirected in my post and noted.

ark-and-spark,

My son is 12 and I assume you are over that and have completed your education.  That means my tax dollars went to help pay for your education.  I take it you are not willing to pay back in kind.  Likewise someday, you just might have a child and I will still be helping, you will be helping, and the next guy in line will be.  

It really bothers me that so many people want to reap the benifits without paying their dues and it's not an age thing.  The minute a guys children graduate from school, some start bitching about paying for the ones still in school.  Life isn't a free ride.

The cost of education to the federal and state budgets is a drop in the bucket to welfare, crime prevention, and defense.  In fact, most states get more federal money for highways than education.

Some of you guys that don't have children either did or will.

The current tax structure with tax breaks for dependents is structured to encourage the family unit and help prevent more people being on welfare.

The breakdown of the family structure in this country is one of the root causes of increased federal dependence for aid and crime.

Looking at todays society just maybe the break ought to be bigger.

Tj

Define flat rate?

Dollars, you have my vote!

Percent of net income, you have my vote!

Percent of gross income, it would have to depend on what percent for too much and it will drive our sick economy even further down.

This will never fly with the poor and the really rich for if you cap out you are in the 35% income tax bracket.  Most middle class <$100,000/yr income, with smart tax ivestments today, with kids and two houses can knock that down to around 12-15 percent.  A flat gross 10%, would have those at the bottom and the top paying double with no difference to the middle. It won't sell.


Personally, the whole income tax system SUCKS and even in our short history a recent thing established as a temporary tax to pay for war that never went away.  We use to get our tax dollars by taxing imports.  Instead now we allow them in duty free putting more Americans on welfare so that we who work pay more taxes.

You can call it a credit, and exemption, whatever you want.

What it boils down to is that some people who the goverment feels are less able to pay, pay less, but usually recive a greater amount of governemnt services.

You can say it is a tax credit for those with kids instead of saying that the childless pay more, but in the end the facts are simple, those without kids pay more and subsidise to a little degree those with kids.

You can say its credits, exemptions, whatever you want. Thats how the governemnt wants you to think. If they just slapped a no kid penelty on evryone who had none of $400 you would call it socialism, but guess what....... the end result is the same no matter what you call it. Some pay for the benifits that they do not use, and once they begin to use them they don't pay any more.

And yes, it is socialism. They are just tricking you into calling it a "credit".

No, and the Earned Income Credit is even worse.
You get more money back than you paid in by just having kids (a single mother usually)
Socialism at it's finest.

Yep, 10% would be fair and many of the middle class would come out ahead of the game especially those not in dept.  The rich and poor would have a fit, but fair it is.

[lol][lol][lol][lol][lol][lol][lol][lol]

I just got the news paper and it hit me what this thread is really about or what inspired it.  It's Bush's new tax cut program which has a child credit in it which means a $400 check back to all those with children in a certain tax bracket.

I'll give you guys another statistic, in comparrisson a much higher percentage of married people with children vote than single people!  That might have something to do with it.

You do not speak for all of us, and do not act as though you do.But you no doubt have benifted from the system in place in previous years that also gave tax breaks for raising kids
Interesting thing to base it on. Untill you can sit down and figure to the dime exatly how much taxpayer $$$ your kids consumed, and figure how much $$$ you put in MINUS what you and your wife consumed of the taxpayer funded stuff, you have no idea if you actually footed the bill. But unless you paid well above the average rate of taxes, and sent your kids to private school, I can almost guaruntee that you did not foot the entire bill. But if it makes you feel better to think you did go ahead.
Why? Simply because he disagrees with you. You are the one throwing around insults here, all he did was argue his point. But if you don't have facts to back up your side, I guess name calling is all that is left.......
If they use my money or his to do it, they most certainly are.
You make some wild assumptions, based on what info? One again attacking the messenger because you can't fight the message effectivly.
Hard statistics about the volunteering part? Lets see em. Otherwise you are talking out of your ass. Over half the firefighters at my volunteer fire department are childless, and 80% or better started volunteering there before they had kids. In fact, wanting more time to spend with thier kids is one reason many quit. And if they need these tax "credits" so badly, how can they all afford to give money to "noble causes"?

So lets have your source for that "fact" about only those with children volunteering. We are waiting.

A whole three paragraphs based on attacking the messenger because you can't really attack the message. Wow, you should work on a democratic campaign staff. Pure emotion, assumtion, and personal attack in this post, but nothing of real substance.

VolgaDeutsch55, I don't dislike you, I pity you and everyone else caught up inthe idea that somehow socialism, on any scale, is ok as long as it benifits them or if for some "public good". Some people go through life really believing that the government is the best answer to thier problems, but those who realize that they and they alone are truely responsible for thier own well being will truely be free.


And yes, I am raising three stepchildren and not getting a dime in tax credit, nor will I attempt to.

Damn, CLP, I read your post and kept thinking this guy might as well have children for he lives just as boring an existence as those of us that do. You shattered my perception of being single.  I always thought/hoped it would be much more fun with not a care in the world. [:D]

BTW, I drive a sports car and go fast as hell!

Work according to your abilities, get paid according to your needs comrade.

I would support higher taxes on couples that breed in order to pay for their families impacts on society - medical care (free condoms and abortions), school costs, additional police and fire requirements.

If it works for firearms and bullets, if we're going to tax these objects for the actions of their owners, then we need to be taxing the parents of the kids that commit crimes too. Since we don't know how many crimes go un-reported or un-detected we'll just tax them all - just like we don't know which bullet or firearm will be used in a crime.

[;)]

It's a wacky upside down world. I just thank God that we no longer pay wefare ladies to have additional babies.

Back when I was a single E-6 I had a married E-3 working for me. He was taking home twice what I was making plus one dollar.

The military paid his rent (rent plus utilities) and then gave him VHA and COLA. His COLA in Japan was a few hundred dollars, mine was $20. I couldn't figured that out to save my life as I spent everything I earned in Japan the same as him yet he made five times what I did in cost of living adjustment.

While I lived in a 6x2x2 steel box and shared a bathroom with 50 others he lived in a two bedroom apartment.

Things have gotten a bit better and single BAQ is offered to E-5's and above - it use to be E-7 and above only but the extra $300 or so bucks isn't like married which is about three or four times that. Most places you can't even get a room for $300 let alone a studio apartment.