Hacker News Reader

Comment by tbatchelli | Hacker News Reader

How much of this issue is related to having a part of the population think that people having children is solely a private question? "You had children, why should I bear your burden!"

If none of us had children there would d be no economy to support anyone's life in, let's say, 40 years from now.

People making and raising new sane and healthy people should be considered a social and common good, for the sake of all, and should be protected and encouraged. Maybe not too many children, true, but at least enough to keep some semblance of population balance, no?

View on HN

As I understand it, we already subsidise child-rearing through taxation. Single, childless people are taxed at a higher rate. This is fine.

However, this is happening at a smaller, more arbitrary scale. It's not "I support our future through a legally defined contribution", but "my colleague is working 25% less and still gets paid the same, but I need to take PTO to get a haircut".

I think it depends on how you frame it.

1. We should all get equal treatment. Parents enjoys benefits that other employees don't. Their personal life can affect their performance, but that doesn't apply to other employees.

2. We're all in this situation together. To each according to their needs, from each according to their capacity.

I think both are true.

It is complicated, I agree.

Tax cuts don't really make that much of a difference at the end of the day. Loss of job promotions, inability to take the same financial risks, childcare, education, lack of downtime, etc, all I think have a much bigger impact financially.

But it is also understandable to think that it is unfair to make non-parents pick up the slack for those who are parents. Although as a society we already pick up the slack for those who are unable to work.

Again, it is a question of wether we think there is a social good to have some of us raise children to become, hopefully, taxpaying adults, and if this is a common good, then who and how should bear the burden? Only the parents?

Not disputing your other points, but:

> we already subsidise child-rearing through taxation. Single, childless people are taxed at a higher rate

In the US, being married is a tax advantage only if one partner earns much more than the other. Otherwise it's a wash.

In the US, the child tax credit is $2K per child per year. In most cases, this does not come close to covering the costs of raising a child.

So, no, for most people being discussed in the article (generally, dual earners in HCOL US areas), child-rearing is not significantly subsidized through taxation (at least not at the income tax level as you implied).

But having child is your choice.

It's so strange to complain that government doesn't cover the cost of your child. You choose to have your child. I'm sure you plan to support your child.

This is like me complaining that government doesn't subsidize my Tesla.

Having a child is not in the same league as buying a Tesla. That Tesla won’t be a contributing member of society and pay taxes when you retire.

Yes it is a decision. Sometimes selfish, most often foolish, but in all cases needed. And all benefit.

A Tesla is a consumer good, a child is an investment in the future of the society.

I'm childless, I will very likely be childless my whole life but this attitude is both: very naive, very ignorant and very very reductionist.

I'm happy that my taxes here in Sweden pay for child support, childcare and schools that I won't ever use, because that is the basic fabric of this society.

It's an investment that the parents will reap 10000x the benefit compared to everyone else in the society.

Also, it's very rare that people think they are going to bear a child to improve society. Adoption would make much much more sense if that was their goal.

In any case, people want to have children, sure.

Then they complain that having a child is so tough so much hardship (e.g. no vacation ever in this thread, child tax credit is not enough). Then, they turn to society to support them in an unfair way

Almost everyone knows the estimated cost and effort upfront. There are tons of materials and prior experience.

It's like me spending all my cash on Tesla and then complain that society doesnt support me enough.

Yep. If you want to see something scary, go browse reddit.com/r/childfree

It's an entire community of people that feel like heroes for not having children, and despise the thought of even having to come into contact with a child. It carries a similar religious fervor to veganism but it doesn't actually help anyone or anything.

I'm not advocating for the mindset there, but can't you see a justification of why that might be? I think reasonable people can debate whether or not overpopulation is the main contributor to the environmental disaster upon us that is an existential crises for humans on this planet. Under that perspective, wouldn't those who chose not to have children, while it was an unpopular option, be the heroes?

It is underpopulation, not overpopulation that will be a problem soon (and already is in some parts of the world).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com