Skip to main content

View Diary: If you don't have kids you have no value to society (301 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't think having children (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    causes anyone to have a net monetary gain under any circumstances. The EITC is designed to help people who need it most & is a very significant element of the social safety net.

    •  It Should Be Replaced (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lorzie, kareylou

      The EITC should be replaced by an increase in the minimum wage, which is child-neutral.

      •  The private sector to the rescue? (0+ / 0-)

        The single mom with two kids who can't get more than a part time hob at 12$/hour thanks you for your generosity.

        •  Would You Like to Fix That Problem? (0+ / 0-)

          We need to focus the national discussion on jobs and wages. By doing that we make the economy healthier and employ more people, including single moms with two kids.

          •  I don't think it's liberal (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Kathy S

            to want to dismantle one of the single greatest pieces of the social safety net we have. Sure, raise the minimum wage, but it won't help the person I just described unless you double it (and even then, if you're replacing the EITC with that policy, you're still effectively cutting her disposable income by thousands of dollars she absolutely cannot afford).

            I have personally prepared returns for people like that single mom I described. Those few thousand dollars are what put food in her children's mouths.

            •  As You Wish (0+ / 0-)

              I don't want to pay for that subsidy. If people want to have children, then they should pay for them out of their own pocket, not mine.

              And, yes, I think the minimum wage should be increased quite significantly. The living wage in many places in the U.S. is well over $15/hour. I can't imagine living in NY, Chicago or San Francisco on $7.25/hour. It should be high enough for people in most areas to pay their essential costs and raise a child.

              There's a reason she can't afford those children. A child costs about $1000/month. For her to go from having no children to having one children implied that she had an extra thousand dollars a month burning a hole in her pocket.

              In any case, if she's so poor that the child would starve we have a program for that. She doesn't need a tax break to make that work.

              Being liberal does not imply signing up for bad public policy. We need to move away from subsidizing childbearing. It's dysfunctional when the population is so high.

    •  except (0+ / 0-)

      without a kid, I don't get that help.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site