Yakk

I am all for splitting taxes with your kids -- I just find splitting taxes with your spouse to be a poorly aimed tax break, if your aim is to encourage families.

Splitting taxes with your kids is simple -- you allocate some of your income to raising your kids, and it gets taxed as if your child earned it instead of you.

This actually encourages families.

Because the stable, healthy society that taxes pay for earns the 200,000$ person 200,000$ per year, while that same society only earns the person earning 30,000$ 30,000$ per year.

Without enforced property rights, law and order, transportation infrastructure, trademarks, basic research into technology -- someone earning 200,000$ per year would be fighting for his or her life, or spending almost all of their resources on personal defence. The size of the middle/upper class would be puny (as it was for most of human history), so the odds are they would be earning close to zero money. And the purchasing power of the money they would be earning would be next to nothing, in terms of goods.

If anything, the most sensible tax base for a society is the assets the society protects. Modern economies place one of the most sacred acts of a state is the protection of private property, and enforce it quite strongly. The bias in the net worth of citizens is much higher than the bias in the tax load -- the top 1% of asset owners own a larger percent of assets than the top 1% of tax payers share of tax revenue.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.