My opinion is no. If I have no children, or grown children not in school, why should I have to pay for them? Why not have a tax deduction for people with no children?
Because all of society benefits from a well-educated population. Duh.
Sure, why not? And because I’ve never been attacked by a foreign government I don’t have to pay taxes for defense, and I’ve never had a fire, so what the hell do I pay fire department taxes for, and I’ve never called the cops in my life, so what’s all that about?
I mean, you went to school, right? And the people performing services for you now and who will perform services for you in the future went to school as well, right? When you end up in a hospital are you looking forward to medical care provided by illiterates? Isn’t it a good thing that the people designing your automobiles and buildings and power plants have some education? If you’d like to abandon society and live on your own in solitary splendor you might have some moral justification for opting out, but as long as you seem happy to derive the benefits which accrue to you as a member of society, you have an obligation to support society in turn.
Exactly. Where do you think your doctors and lawyers and teachers come from? You’re helping to pay for the foundation of their learning.
Because it is in the interest of the entire community that children receive an education and grow up to become responsible, taxpaying adults. And that they are kept off the streets until then. Don’t think of it as a tax, think of it as either an investment or as insurance that the little thugs won’t be breaking into your house while you are at work.
Should people who don’t set their house on fire pay taxes for fire departments?
Erm, I see Bill Door said that already…
.
Thats debatable. Someone with a good education could argue that he does NOT benefit because of less opportunities from increased competition.
Also, I believe that almost all of the benefit goes to the person being educated, and any tiny benefit I may receive is more than offset by the money that comes out of my pocket.
I am not so much asking about what good comes from education, as I am questioning the fairness of supporting someone else’s offspring.
I see the role of the public school to better society (I’m not sure it is really effective at that but…), so yes.
But people who pay out of their pocket to either home school or private school their kids should get a refund in the amount they have saved the public schools for not having their student enrolled.
Oh fercrissakes… :rolleyes:…You’re not supporting someone else’s offspring; you’re contributing to society. Your society. Now…when you cease taking advantage of anything society offers, and that includes using roads, healthcare, infrastructure or safety practices in agriculture, then I think you’ve earned a pass.
I understand your logic here, however, I might need the fire department one day, and would certainly benefit from saving my house. Any benefit from someone else being well educated is tiny in comparison.
I’m not suggesting we don’t have education-just that the parents of those being educated (or the student themselves if an adult) pay for it themselves.
Then they wouldn’t be able to afford it. You’d pay the ghetto tax where your house is robbed regularly because no one feels any social obligations.
That is an argument that someone who gets one benefit (the generic “educated population”) should pay half as much as someone who gets two benefits (the generic “educated population” and the specific service of educating their own child), one-third as much as someone who gets three benefits (the generic EP and the specific education of their own two children), etc.
I don’t own a car. Should I pay taxes that fund road construction?
The government funds a lot of things that I don’t personally benefit from. I, however, am not greedy enough to complain about this; I understand that it’s a part of the social compact that not all of the government’s actions will benefit me personally.
If we take your argument to its logical extreme, then everyone should get the same value out of government services as they contribute as taxes – but then, why have taxes at all? You set a standard that’s impossible for the government to meet, and one that they shouldn’t be trying to meet.
If you think you should pay road taxes despite not owning a car, then by all means buy lots of gasoline and dispose of it in some environmentally friendly manner.
I’m not sure thats true but even if it is, why is that my problem? Perhaps people who can’t afford children should not have them.
Look at someone who has 9 kids. I have to pay for all of them. How does this benefit me? We don’t have a need for 9 more critters. The suggestion is that if I don’t help to pay, all these kids will not end up to be lawyers, doctors, etc. But so what? Society needs uneducated, unskilled workers just as much as it needs well educated professionals.
No you should not. People who do drive should pay for it with gas tax, registration/license fees etc. And by not having a car, you are reward by saving taxes for not polluting the environment and contributing to the demand problem of gasoline.
Bad choice for an argument, since roads are financed largely by fuel taxes-- ie, they are meant to payed for by the people who use them.
Why does one have to be “greedy” to complain about this? It’s a reasonable argument to make that people should pay for the decisions they make, and having kids is conscious decision. Just because you disagree with an argument doesn’t make the person making that argument “greedy”.
A Libertarian would say: OK, fine with me.
What is your argument then?
But you DO benefit from it. It doesn’t matter if the individual citizen doesn’t own a car. He benefits because the rest of society uses roadways to get to work; or the ambulance hauls the non-driver to the hospital; or the police use it to serve and protect a neighborhood.
You keep using the words “pay for” and “support” as if you’ve actually taken on responsibility for the outcome of anything. If you don’t want to be part of American society, feel free to bail. But as long as you’re taking advantage of the benefits derived from taxes (and that includes education, whether you want to admit it or not), you have to pay. Simple.
Assuming that you derive no benefit whatsoever from the roads. Which pretty much means that you are completely self sustaining.
Where does your clothing come from? Your food? Power supply? Medical treatments? Building materials? Computer? TV? Mail? Not a one of them transported via roadways? Ever? In your entire life?
Doubtful.