Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Well, the idea is that, if you knew you had to pay a tax for having a child, maybe you would give it more thought. Instead of currently, where people have more kids so they can get more money from the government. I would like to correct this. I don't see it as population control but rather, more like fiscal responsibility. Like living within your means.
As for the tax to go to child care, nah, not really. I don't think there is a national childcare system here. I don't see it as empowering the wealthy, it doesn't have much to do with them. They already have a low birth rate even though they can afford to have more children.
|
According to
Stats Canada, in 2005, around 12% of children were living in low-income families (avg. income of $22,800). The average income of two-parent families with children (with two or more earners) was $83,900. For lone-parent families, it was $35,900. So you tell me who this tax will hurt the most. The poorest of people only have 12% of the children as it is.
If anything, tax after one or two children only. Otherwise, this is eugenics. It encourages a privilege of having children to those with the money to afford a tax that may or may not go into caring for children. If you want to fight carbon emissions, you'd be better off increasing the taxes on all the crap that richer people buy. Why further marginalize the poor?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
But if you throw in a tax incentive to adopt or foster, then that could be a good balancer.
|
I'd support such an initiative.