As is stands, parents are able to claim their children as dependents on their tax returns, which lowers their overall tax liability and in effect means that the parents either pay less in taxes or receive a higher return at the end of each year.

Until they reach the age at which they can work, children are a drain on society. They receive public schooling and receive the same benefit from public services that adults do, yet they contribute nothing in return. At the point that they reach maturity and are gainfully employed and paying taxes, they become a functioning member of society.

If a parent decides to have a child, they are making a conscious decision to produce another human being. They could choose to get a sterilization surgery, use birth control, or abort the pregnancy (assuming they don’t live in a backwards state that’s banned it). Yet even if they decide to have 15 children, the rest of society has to foot the bill for their poor decisions until the child reaches adulthood.

By increasing taxes on parents instead of reducing them, you not only incentivize safe sex and abortion, but you shift the burden of raising a child solely to the individuals who are responsible for the fact that that child exists.

I am a strong advocate for social programs: Single-payer healthcare, welfare programs, low-income housing, etc, but for adults who in turn contribute what they can. A child should only be supported by the individuals who created it.

  • iarigby@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    This isn’t unpopular, this is plain wrong. You seem to be so blinded by your hate of kids that you forget they’re critically essential for the society to function

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Parents already pay higher taxes on everything they buy for their kids.

      You need one jacket. My fam needs 4. I’m paying 4x the sales tax you are. I drive my kids to school …I pay more gas tax.

      The only place parents get a break is on income and the only reason is because we have to pay for at least 2x the stuff.

      • Lost_Faith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        As someone with no kids, never wanted the crotch goblins, I have no issues with parents getting a break on taxes raising their kids (where I am there is no tax on kids clothes and I am 100% behind this) and my subsidising their education. Besides I, OP, and basically everyone else will need these new adults in the making to take care of us when we are once again, and I am sure will shock OP, will be in the position to need to be looked after again (unless OP came to the world a fully formed adult, I know I wasn’t). Who do they think is going to look after all of us?

        • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Who is going to look after you in particular? Probably no one.

          Sorry bro. Go play video games.

      • FanciestPants@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        There are states in the US where this might be reversed, e.g. they have no sales tax, but higher income tax (Oregon). I’m not suggesting that moving to any of those states would be feasible for most of us, but the tax burden may work a bit different for parents there.

      • corroded@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        If I go to the store for a jacket, you’re right, I only need to buy one. You may need to buy 4, but do you really think that the sales tax you spend on supplies for your children is equivalent to what they cost the taxpayers in public education? Does it offset the increased demand that your children place on the supply chain for food? Does it offset the carbon emissions that 4 more human beings produce for 18 years?

        Maybe your children will grow up to cure cancer one day. Maybe they’ll spend their entire adulthood working a minimum-wage service job. As long as they don’t grow up to become drug addicts or serial killers, they’re still contributing to society in whatever way they can. Until they become adults, though, they’re not a contributing member of society. Nobody forced you to produce 4 children, and the taxpayers should not be forced to support your life choices based on the possibility that they may benefit from them in the future.

    • corroded@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I don’t hate children. They’re brought into the world whether they like it or not, and they should have every chance to succeed as long as they put forth some sort of effort. What I do hate are parents who have a child without any consideration to what they’re doing. No couple should ever have more than 2 children, at least until the population declines. Children should not be punished because of their parents poor reproductive choices. Parents should be punished, not rewarded.