Re: [Totally OT] Re: Hmmm. A question. Was [Re: Debian is losing its users]
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Nate Duehr shared this with us all:
<snip>
>--} By your standard, less than 2% of the entire world's population should
>--} > ever consider parenthood, and those would be the richest 2% on the
>--} > planet.
>--} >
>--} > Unless you're at least a multi-millionaire (considering numbers these
>--} > days, I'd say worth $3-5 million), you've just qualified yourself as
>--} > an
>--} > unfit Father.
>--}
>--} Not going to dive into the fray about overpopulation and people having
>--} children who can't afford to raise them... but I will comment that
>--} having finished my 2007 taxes here recently, and as a (by choice) non-
>--} parent, I find our society "rewarding" parents by giving a tax break
>--} for each child to be quite distasteful.
>--}
>--} I have no problems paying my fair share of taxes, but lowering both
>--} taxable income and this year -- offering a higher rebate as an
>--} "economic stimulus" package-- for people who decided to have or keep
>--} children, is fiscally irresponsible, as it rewards the wrong
>--} behavior. I guess I wouldn't spend that money more readily on capital
>--} goods that would truly help the economy? Yeah right. What world is
>--} this again? The parents with four kids will spend it on higher fuel
>--} costs for soccer mom to rush children from event to event.
>--}
>--} As a DINK family (Dual-Income, No Kids and yes, we're a "family" too,
>--} even if we're treated like second-class "family" citizens by almost
>--} every government, religious, and societal group), who probably will be
>--} for our entire lives, we know we're in the minority, and screwed --
>--} when it comes to pointing out to our so-called "representative"
>--} government that handing back more money to someone because they have
>--} children, and/or offering them a lower taxable income number every
>--} year than ours at the same real income level, is blatantly wrong.
>--}
>--} --
>--} Nate Duehr
>--} nate@natetech.com
I suppose by that standard you imagine that children have no worth at all? I
can't really agree. As one who was a child once, I think children are an
extremely valuable asset to a species in the now as well as the future.
So I assume that government feels the same way and is willing to ensure that
people keep having children?
Neanderthal man had children because of sex drive, modern families often want
things other than children because their sex drive can be satisfied without
the obvious result. It is a choice, so each must make their own.
Interesting, and there will always be controversy and views in both
directions.
Charlie
--
Registered Linux User:- 329524
***********************************************
After the ecstasy, the laundry. -----ZEN SAYING
***********************************************
Debian, just the best way to create magic
_______________________________________________
Reply to: