Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 100

Thread: If we legalize gay marridge, who is going to pay for their tax reliefs?

  1. #1
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default If we legalize gay marridge, who is going to pay for their tax reliefs?

    Everyone. Gay marriage isn't just a morality issue, its also a practical one. Exactly what benefit does having two gay people married bring? Little to none. Exactly what benefit does having two straight people married bring? Kids(the future).

    So here's the deal. We should change the law to unincentivize marriage alone, and start giving tax reliefs to marriages that have X amount of children, the more children the more tax relief. Then legalize gay marriage, then if gay people want to adopt, they are helping out society and get the exact same treatment as their counterparts who have the same amount of children. Wham bam thank you mam, equality that is also practical.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  2. #2
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    Everyone. Gay marriage isn't just a morality issue, its also a practical one. Exactly what benefit does having two gay people married bring?
    It allows the couple to have their insurance shared, set up joint accounts available only to married couples, be beneficiaries for one another (or rather, not be denied the ability to be beneficiaries of life insurance), be buried next to one another, and not be denied the ability to visit one another in the hospital or consent to operations if their partner is unable to.

  3. #3
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    For society, it brings nothing, unless they decide to adopt, because all their money is just going towards themselves, and not towards the future(outiside of paying taxes, which everyone does anyways)

    All of those would be solved after we fixed the practicallity issues.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  4. #4
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,078

    Default

    I feel like your trolling again.

    Never the less it is IMMORAL to not allow someone to marry the person that they love, even if it hurts your pocket book. I also seriously doubt it hurts that much, the amount of gay people is small, and gay people still adopt and add to the economy. And finally this makes no sense pertaining to people that are sterile and get married, they also do not have children, yet it is not an issue.

  5. #5
    Vanity of vanities, all is vanity Hicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,391

    Default

    we already do that in the UK

  6. #6
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    For society, it brings nothing, unless they decide to adopt, because all their money is just going towards themselves, and not towards the future(outiside of paying taxes, which everyone does anyways)

    All of those would be solved after we fixed the practicallity issues.
    It does do something for society, which is create two co-dependants; a married couple is much more stable financially than a single, or even "civil partners" who a) are at the whim of the law changing randomly and b) lack all the benefits of married couples as stated previously.

  7. #7
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    Furthermore, the US applies tax breaks to married couples with no children? Where are you getting this from?

  8. #8
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby View Post
    I feel like your trolling again.

    Never the less it is IMMORAL to not allow someone to marry the person that they love, even if it hurts your pocket book. I also seriously doubt it hurts that much, the amount of gay people is small, and gay people still adopt and add to the economy. And finally this makes no sense pertaining to people that are sterile and get married, they also do not have children, yet it is not an issue.
    If you read through my suggestions TO FIX THESE THINGS, it would literally solve every single argument you have against what i am saying
    It would make people who are sterile and married not get tax reliefs, (unless they adopted), it would also give tax reliefs to the gay people who married.

    And no I'm not trolling, i believe this is a good fix, because a lot of people dislike gay marriage on the issue that they have to pay money so that they can get married.
    It might not be a big proponent against legalizing gay marriage, but its at least a plan so that the practicality of it isn't ever a big issue
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  9. #9
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    hey elijah, guess what? MARRIED COUPLES PAY MORE THAN SINGLES IN TAXES. Well, if both are working, anyways, but in this day and age the majority of married couples in the US have two working partners.

  10. #10
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Solly View Post
    Furthermore, the US applies tax breaks to married couples with no children? Where are you getting this from?
    http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...its-30326.html
    Look under tax benefits
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  11. #11
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Solly View Post
    hey elijah, guess what? MARRIED COUPLES PAY MORE THAN SINGLES IN TAXES. Well, if both are working, anyways, but in this day and age the majority of married couples in the US have two working partners.
    Not true, the majority of working couples get a benefit/no reduction from this, and furthermore this has been delt with by law too. As of 1996 (before 2 major laws were enacted HELPING married couples) 51% got a savings from filing jointly, and 44% got more taxes for filing jointly, meaning 56% BACK THEN BEFORE the extra helpings were allowed, were not harmed by this.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  12. #12
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    Not true, the majority of working couples get a benefit/no reduction from this, and furthermore this has been delt with by law too. As of 1996 (before 2 major laws were enacted HELPING married couples) 51% got a savings from filing jointly, and 44% got more taxes for filing jointly, meaning 56% BACK THEN BEFORE the extra helpings were allowed, were not harmed by this.
    The majority who got tax breaks had a lower income, which (judging by the state the US is currently in), means they're probably in debt. Therefore, them getting tax breaks WOULD benefit the rest of the country, as less people in debt = a healthier economy.

  13. #13
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    So like i said, it was a good thing.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  14. #14
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    As well, the amount of gay couples that are adopting is rising exponentially, meaning by the time your suggestion would actually be made into law, it would probably be moot.

  15. #15
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    So like i said, it was a good thing.
    so... then why shouldn't gay couples fall under the same taxation law if it's obviously beneficial?

  16. #16
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Beneficial for the people under the law. Not everyone.
    If what your saying is true, then you are trying to kill a bear by ripping of a bandaid. If poor people need lower tax rates, then we should be lowering thier tax rates, not letting gay people get married. Not to say we shouldn't let gay people get married, but that is not the solution to the problem
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  17. #17
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Solly View Post
    As well, the amount of gay couples that are adopting is rising exponentially, meaning by the time your suggestion would actually be made into law, it would probably be moot.
    True, maybe. Depends on how soon or how late this could happen.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  18. #18
    what about .. eyebrows God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    among the people
    Posts
    49,776

    Default

    Exactly what benefit does having two straight people married bring? Kids(the future).
    people have to be married to have children

  19. #19
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Nope, but most married straight couples HAVE children. and most single couples do not.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  20. #20
    bye felicia stiles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    elijah rephrase your argument so i can understand it

  21. #21
    This pic is definitely of me!! Solly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    retarded
    Posts
    14,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    Beneficial for the people under the law. Not everyone.
    If what your saying is true, then you are trying to kill a bear by ripping of a bandaid. If poor people need lower tax rates, then we should be lowering thier tax rates, not letting gay people get married. Not to say we shouldn't let gay people get married, but that is not the solution to the problem
    But if gay couples marry, then the rich gay couples would be taxed more and the poor couples taxed less, as we just demonstrated. Allowing gay people to marry would be another step in more taxes for the rich, less taxes for the poor.

    If what your saying is true, then you are trying to kill a bear by ripping of a bandaid
    ...?

  22. #22
    bye felicia stiles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    and most single couples do not.

  23. #23
    what about .. eyebrows God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    among the people
    Posts
    49,776

    Default

    something like 40 percent of children are born out of marriage

  24. #24
    bye felicia stiles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542

    Default

    this is the first non religious argument i've seen against gay marriage. i never even stopped to think getting married only if you're two men or women would hurt the economy. if this is the case, unmarried couples should be outlawed from having children, and married couples without children should have a higher tax rate.

  25. #25
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Solly View Post
    But if gay couples marry, then the rich gay couples would be taxed more and the poor couples taxed less, as we just demonstrated. Allowing gay people to marry would be another step in more taxes for the rich, less taxes for the poor.



    ...?
    that is not how it works, first off if one person is rich, then the joint filling doesn't matter. And usually if one person is rich, then the other DOESN'T WORK TOO. Secondly if both are rich, the burden doesn't go up,
    the burden goes up if and only if

    THERE IS A LARGE DISPARITY, it does not matter how rich or poor the people are.
    If your incomes are close, you get a tax benefit, if your incomes are far away, you get a tax -.
    Did you not read the thing you linked?
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •