Tax childless adults

[Acidburn]

Hi all

Just saw the below article on LBC news:

www.lbc.co.uk/news/childless-tax-birthrate-uk-cost-of-living-paul-morland/

AIBU to think that this insane?

I love it when people say that "we need more people to prop up the existing people" as if it's some sort of slam dunk argument to which there are no comebacks.

Generally, MN agrees that pyramid schemes don’t work.

My Dad's in a care home, he has dementia. He's paying for his care out of his savings. What we're increasingly short of is staff - if only the Europeans hadn't been driven out, eh?

This is so backwards!
Where have you got the idea having kids is selfish?
All chilfree/childless people, women in particularly, get told is that they are being selfish.

It’s the parents who have put them on the pedastal and think everyone should thank them for having kids.

What a bonkers idea. There are far too many people having children left right and centre, that they cannot or will not care for properly. How about a tax on that seeing as the state has to bear the cost. Even if the birthrate in western countries is declining, it is not in other countries so even though the demographics may change, there is no chance of humans dying out, how foolish of anyone to think otherwise.

I love it when people say that "we need more people to prop up the existing people" as if it's some sort of slam dunk argument to which there are no comebacks.

Indeed. Not to mention, we already have a housing shortage. These babies will grow up, and don't usually want to bunk with their siblings when they're trying to bring girlfriends/boyfriends round.
Or are we going to force the elderly from their homes/to downsize? I mean, it's only fair isn't it? After all, these young workers will be paying for their pensions/care, so it's only right they should give up their homes to 'keep the balance'. (I am, of course, being sarcastic).

It's an astonishingly stupid argument, isn;'t it?

Oh hush - stop being so fucking snide. People are allowed to say anonymously on a forum they regret having children. NORMALLY they are met with understanding and empathy.

Besides, that's not what this poster said.

If they want more young people to have children they need:

Better paid jobs across the board
Better statutory maternity leave pay
Better childcare provision (not this offer that doesn’t cover everything so there’s top up charges)

and to sort out the inflation crisis,
the cost of house to wages ratio, and the growing disparity between the very rich and average wages.

So basically the opposite of where this country is heading.

So, you get a telegram from the Queen/King when you have a third child. But if you are on or end up having to claim certain benefits, you won't get any financial assistance for that third child. Makes sense.

It's like the overturning of Roe v Wade- the state wants you to have the child, but once it's born, off you fuck little child, we don't care about you any longer.

Women, know your place. We are just walking incubators.

Whats so dreadful about immigration? There is already an excess of young people in some countries, whats the problem with moving them to the UK where they can care for our old people and stock our supermarket shelves.

What we need is an incentive for people to live healthier lifestyles so they are not needing care for such a long time.

I see so many people in their 50s/60s with chronic conditions caused by lifestyle. Not everyone, before people jump on me, but the majority.

I've already paid over 20k for IVF thanks, unless I get a refund I think I did my bit to try to get pregnant

One of the reasons for the abortion rate shooting up, specifically in the 30+ women who already have children demographic was due to austerity and limiting child benefits to 2 children. The government have specifically driven down the birth rate, not childless/child free people

I already pay taxes for childcare subsidies., maternity fees etc etc. In fact I am likely already taxed more than parents because I will never take time out, work part time etc because of children

I actually have no issue with tax going up to subsidise childcare, I think its ridiculous that parents are placed in a situation where you need two incomes to survive but fill time child care costs as much if not more than one of those incomes in many places, I just don't see why my deformed uterus means I have to pay more for it

My uterus has a congenital abnormality. We could just as easily decide to tax all people with autism higher amounts, because autism can be genetic and their children might need more 121 time at school so the tax could go towards school care. Or blind people could contribute a higher tax towards public transport etc.

But fuck you the people who are saying its not a silver bullet but an idea or not to get emotional about it. I will get as emotional as I fucking want about the fact I am devastated I can't have children and now some prick has decided that means I need to be taxed more.

I'm pretty sure those same people would be up in arms if the article has suggested parents get taxed more because their children cost the state more.

The already pressing issue of an ageing population and how to care for the elderly was always going to be exacerbated by Brexit.

We are no longer the country of choice for thousands and thousands of people around the world who would normally love to come here to work and maybe start a family.
God, this country is in such a mess

The majority? Source for that claim, please.

Britain, or more accurately certain parts of England, is arguably over populated as it is. Would a fall in population really be so bad?

Besides, despite being unethical, these kind of schemes simply don't work. A higher tax rate is still not going to come anywhere near the cost of having kids. And that's just the financial cost.

Just popping on to say that I agree with all of this apart from overpopulation. That's actually a myth. There is plenty of space and resources for everyone in the world. In fact, the entire global population could fit inside the state of Texas with a population density lower than that of NYC.

Sorry to be that person!

Maybe I could have the £31,000 I have spent on failed IVF deducted from my tax bill 🙄🙄🙄🙄

It might incentivise me to leave the country for somewhere more progressive when I'm not seen as a vessel

Maybe that's part of the goal, isn't it. To send us elsewhere to lighten the pressure as we age. Keep just the fertile and/or willing.

What about those who CANT have children?

WTF IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE/GOVTS THESE DAYS?

There are what? Nearly 8 billion people in the world?
We have more than enough people. There is zero shortage of human beings.

What we have is a logistics issue.

How do we get people where we need them? How do we get people trained for the jobs that need doing? How do we tackle the raging racism and xenophobia that is the 'secret' reason people are so against free global movement and people and skill sharing?

Children don't have to be born in a country to grow up and live and work in that country and contribute.

My ds is 14, so far in lost earnings and in direct costs I estimate he has cost me £120,000.

I don't begrudge him a penny but if I hadn't wanted a child, no form of tax would have changed that. What a stupid idea. I'd have emigrated first.

Inducing people to have an extra child through free childcare, less expensive homes, decent schools, flexible working etc, would be much more effective.

Hadn't thought of that. I'd need about a billion before I'd have a child.

As a 46 year old childfree woman, this is not the first time I'd heard this.

As well as being insane, has the man looked at population figures lately?

I'd don't know how they'd run this but we'd end up with childfree people trying to earn less. Many of us plan to retire much early than people with children already.

I can see this incentivizing emigration, if anything. I imagine paying this tax would still work out cheaper than having children, so I’m not sure ‘save money, procreate’ is particularly accurate.

Just popping on to say that I agree with all of this apart from overpopulation. That's actually a myth. There is plenty of space and resources for everyone in the world. In fact, the entire global population could fit inside the state of Texas with a population density lower than that of NYC.

Yes, but that's not the way it works, is it?

People aren't evenly spread across the world, sharing 'space and resources' equally. Some countries have large populations and not much by way of space, natural resources or wealth. Other countries have all of the above shared by a small population, Norway being an obvious example.

Many parts of the world are definitely overpopulated. Not a myth at all.

As someone who very nearly faced the prospect of not being able to have children due to infertility (despite wanting them greatly) I find this absolutely disgusting. Whatever will they think of next…