Child tax credit

[Cain71]

This subject kills me, the rules were voted on by the dimwits in congress and we the people like to complain about others taking advantage of rules. You can not blame people for finding a loop hole in the tax code,as you can not blame the rich for getting their high priced attorneys and tax perpares to find them loop holes to make more money or get out of some legal fix. Here's the deal,if you don't like the tax code call your congress idiot and complain,if you dont like the idiot in office make it your life mission to get them out. Complaining about what is a happening around you with out atleast trying to better the situation is what got us in this mess. People are to blame for what we are and what we have become and what will continue to unfold. I was raised with the concept of accountability,you are responcible for your actions,this has been lost. Children have seen what you can get for free by watching individuals,use and abuse the system,and what you get is that without controls on that system is another generation doing it. There is not a problem with getting a hand up,but there is a problem with the continual hand out. If you want to see a real change get proactive,call, squal and complain to those you have elected and to those thatyou may not have voted for but still have to represent you...

 

[IUGradStudent]

Any government has a vested interest in seeing that the people in their country have children. Without children, the society will die off in the long-run. Take a look at how things are going in Russia, Italy, Spain, Japan, etc. Scary demographics happening there. Here is a nice primer from Mark Steyn: Extra - WSJ.com

The fact is, $1,000/child is nowhere near the social benefit that comes from that child. Of course I am aware that there are lots of other programs out there -- school lunch, health care, etc. Of course. But, again, future citizens, "future taxpayers" if you prefer, will benefit the state more in the long run.

A number of you argue that these children will likely not pay taxes, and hence will constitute a net drain on the country. Some of them will pay income taxes, and some will not, but all of them will pay sales taxes, FICA taxes, etc., and many will pay property taxes. So, even if there is zero income tax liability, these kids will still be paying a lot of tax.

Also, think about the logic of per-capita GDP. The idea there is that each person, on average, produces that much in terms of goods and services. Hence, it stands to reason that if we add in a bunch more people, presuming they are relatively average, they will each create that much more production. Hence, the overall production of the country will go up. It is no accident that China and India a surging economic powers and that China and India have very large populations compared to the rest of the world. As an economic matter, having a ton of people is a good thing for a country.

 

[mrjarrell]

The fact is that those "future taxpayers" WILL pay taxes. It's mandatory that they do. Oh, they might break even or not pay much, if anything, of the income tax but no-one is off the hook for SS. Medicare/Medicaid. Everyone who works pays those entitlement taxes. And there's no refund at the end of the year. Many also pay non-refundable locality taxes, as well, even if they don't live in the city or town. The republican inspired, passed and raised tax credits are just there for social modification purposes.

 

[hornadylnl]

in 2003, the fed spent over $7,100 for every man woman and child. That number has to have exploded in the last 7 years. We already know that 47% of families are paying no federel income tax. Out of the 53% of working families left, how many pay more than $7,100 a year in total taxes? Can't be very many. So what is the likelihood that increased numbers of children will be a net positive instead of a drain? Keep in mind that the federal spending burden for a family of 6 is over $42,000.

Any government has a vested interest in seeing that the people in their country have children. Without children, the society will die off in the long-run. Take a look at how things are going in Russia, Italy, Spain, Japan, etc. Scary demographics happening there. Here is a nice primer from Mark Steyn: Extra - WSJ.com

The fact is, $1,000/child is nowhere near the social benefit that comes from that child. Of course I am aware that there are lots of other programs out there -- school lunch, health care, etc. Of course. But, again, future citizens, "future taxpayers" if you prefer, will benefit the state more in the long run.

A number of you argue that these children will likely not pay taxes, and hence will constitute a net drain on the country. Some of them will pay income taxes, and some will not, but all of them will pay sales taxes, FICA taxes, etc., and many will pay property taxes. So, even if there is zero income tax liability, these kids will still be paying a lot of tax.

Also, think about the logic of per-capita GDP. The idea there is that each person, on average, produces that much in terms of goods and services. Hence, it stands to reason that if we add in a bunch more people, presuming they are relatively average, they will each create that much more production. Hence, the overall production of the country will go up. It is no accident that China and India a surging economic powers and that China and India have very large populations compared to the rest of the world. As an economic matter, having a ton of people is a good thing for a country.

 

[smoking357]

Without children, the society will die off in the long-run.

So? Is this not the market speaking? If the world sucks for humans, so badly that parents do not want to inflict this world on their children, then let us become extinct and leave this all to the squirrels. It's not necessary that we exist. Further, if we're to be Kantian about this, then every child must be seen as an end in himself, not as a means to some greater social end you've imagined.

The fact is, $1,000/child is nowhere near the social benefit that comes from that child. Of course I am aware that there are lots of other programs out there -- school lunch, health care, etc. Of course. But, again, future citizens, "future taxpayers" if you prefer, will benefit the state more in the long run.

Also, think about the logic of per-capita GDP. The idea there is that each person, on average, produces that much in terms of goods and services. Hence, it stands to reason that if we add in a bunch more people, presuming they are relatively average, they will each create that much more production. Hence, the overall production of the country will go up. It is no accident that China and India a surging economic powers and that China and India have very large populations compared to the rest of the world. As an economic matter, having a ton of people is a good thing for a country.

See above. You posit an inherent immorality.