The other day I was asking why we reward people who have children with tax breaks instead of rewarding people who DON'T have children with tax breaks. After all, when you start shitting out kids you start shitting out people who are going to spend a lifetime sucking up resources, both natural and governmental - why are we rewarding this instead of the opposite?
And now Vox has article revealing that for some reason or another America just fucking hates people who live alone:
The refusal to build a real safety net for people who aren’t partnered means that some people may feel pressure to do anything to be and stay partnered, even if it means enduring psychological or physical abuse. It also means that single people deal with all the same things that anyone without a safety net deals with: They often stay in bad jobs, they take fewer entrepreneurial risks, they’re less likely to follow opportunities that people with a spousal safety net could. They simply don’t have the stability that makes it not just possible but also conceivable to do so much else. It seems clear, if we want to actually support “liberty” or lift people out of poverty, or even make it easier for people to have traditional (or nontraditional!) families, then we need to reconsider the way we organize tax policy and public benefits.
No comments:
Post a Comment