Biden's address to Congress

[TV and credit cards]

I think the child tax credit should phase in. My daughter got much more expensive once she thought she was an adult. Start it at age eighteen and end it at... well, I'll have to get back to you on that.

 

[Gun Nut]

You are aware that daycare for 1 child is ridiculously expensive too, right?

If it is prohibitively expensive for you, then you cannot afford the privilege of raising a child of your own while simultaneously demanding that others care for your child so both you and the baby-mommy can acquire more material gains. perhaps put those intentions into helping others in your community raise their children instead?

Flying first class to Hawaii from the mainland is ridiculously expensive. The government should pay me a subsidy so that I may exercise that right.

 

[Gun Nut]

Many tax benefits phase out. It is not unreasonable that the child tax credit do so as well.

However, in the current political climate it is difficult to find reasonable solutions to many issues.

It is not the reasonableness of solutions that is different in this climate. It is the reasonableness of people to accept and agree upon reasonable solutions.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Many tax benefits phase out. It is not unreasonable that the child tax credit do so as well.

However, in the current political climate it is difficult to find reasonable solutions to many issues.

It is not the reasonableness of solutions that is different in this climate. It is the reasonableness of people to accept and agree upon reasonable solutions.

I agree. Reasonable solutions actually exist. Reasonable politicians are extremely rare.

The divisiveness of current politics, driven primarily by the culture wars, means that politicians can be unreasonable and still get re-elected, catering to a vocal minority of constituents while keeping the loyalty of the majority due to their disinclination to vote for the “other side”. This happens even if the bulk of what the voters get seems to be against their own interests.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You are aware that daycare for 1 child is ridiculously expensive too, right?

If it is prohibitively expensive for you, then you cannot afford the privilege of raising a child of your own while simultaneously demanding that others care for your child so both you and the baby-mommy can acquire more material gains. perhaps put those intentions into helping others in your community raise their children instead?

Of perhaps you could get a clue? Daycare is about a mortgage a month for one kid. So in my personal case, it was put money into 401K and Savings... or Daycare. FYI, I don't make crap money.

I can't imagine how people who make $10 an hour manage it (because people refuse to recognize $10 an hour isn't sufficient any more). Oh, I do, in the cities the schools are used as daycares before/after school hours.

Flying first class to Hawaii from the mainland is ridiculously expensive. The government should pay me a subsidy so that I may exercise that right.

Yeah, that is just ignorant. There seems to be a hole in the bucket mentality for some. People shouldn't have kids if they can't afford it. But we can't provide viable wages for millions of jobs because the unskilled labor isn't "worth it", in their own opinions. And, we can't provide help for daycare so a household can have two working incomes because they shouldn't have children if they can't afford to pay two mortgages and a car payment every month (don't forget saving for college and retirement!). How many people are having kids at this point?

 

[Toni]

After some point in your life, you will be dependent upon children born today and over the next 10-20 years as well as those born in the last decade or more for your medical care, to provide and run infrastructure, to run society when you are too old and too ill to do so. If we want our society to keep functioning, we need to encourage the next generations. And to make it possible to raise children decently.

I understand all that. I am in favor of free K-12 education, free community college and subsidized public 4 year and graduate universities. I am also in favor of some help to parents.

But US already had plenty of those. EITC is much more generous and has much higher income caps for people with children than the child-free, and so are other forms of public assistance like food stamps and Medicaid. Then there is child tax credit, which is "refundable" meaning you may have a negative effective income tax rate!

All that has existed already. No need to add more and more subsidies for people having many children. Note that the Biden $3000-$3600 per child entitlement (which he wants to make permanent) is not phased out by number of children, which means that it is more beneficial to those having a lot of children than those having few because marginal costs of n+1th child goes down substantially with increasing n.
So in effect it encourages people to pop out a lot of kids.

Like that drug dealer in North Carolina who got shot during a warrant service. 7 children! Seven! That's $21k- $25k in free (to him, in reality paid for by taxpayers like me) money.
So he has tax free illicit earnings and 5 figures bonus for having a lot of sex without a condom, while us taxpayers have to subsidize his lifestyle. Only in America!

I don’t know where you are getting the ‘plenty of that’ idea. To speak to just one of those: state funding of public post secondary education has fallen over the past couple of decades—and more—as a percentage of funding.

Public education is underfunded and constantly expected to do more than teach academic subjects and the ‘extras’ that are so important: music, art, physical education, etc.

In some states, food stamps require an in humane level of poverty to qualify a final states are inadequate. Medicaid patients struggle to find providers because Medicaid reimbursements fir services are so inadequate and do not cover the cost of services provided.

Being poor is hard work, unprofitable and exhausting. And it’s a drain on all of society.

 

[Rhea]

.
If your post is nothing but an ad hominem, click cancel instead.
There is lots to discuss - stay away from insults and flaming.

 

[thebeave]

Anyone see Tim Scott's post Biden speech response?

So, apparently, the virtue signaling left decided the use of the word "uncle" in the 70+ year old "Uncle Ben's Rice" was offensive (resulting in the new name of "Ben's Rice"), but its OK to use it when referring to a living, breathing black man, who doesn't happen to share their views. Nice. Well done.

https://nypost.com/2021/04/30/tim-scott-hits-back-against-uncle-tim-slur/

 

[thebeave]

Like that drug dealer in North Carolina who got shot during a warrant service. 7 children! Seven! That's $21k- $25k in free (to him, in reality paid for by taxpayers like me) money.
So he has tax free illicit earnings and 5 figures bonus for having a lot of sex without a condom, while us taxpayers have to subsidize his lifestyle. Only in America!

Is this the rule or the exception to the rule? Is it only drug dealers with 7 kids who benefit from this? What bout the Mormons I see walking around here with their 8-9 kids? Fuckin thugs.

Sorry, shouldn't derail the thread.

GOP eedjit Stephen Miller "Biden's speech lacked human warmth".

Actually, If Biden had gotten any warmer, we would have all melted down into puddles of love.

MSNBC just reported Biden's speech has a 85% approval rating among Americans. That must chap these GOP morons' asses big time.

Well, no not exactly.:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/85-percent-americans-biden-speech/

We don’t know what percentage of Americans approved of Biden’s speech yet, but it likely wasn’t 85%.

This stat comes from a report by CBS News who reported that 85% of viewers, not Americans, approved of the speech. As the audience for Biden’s speech last night likely skewed to the left, this statistic does not represent “all Americans.” CBS News reported that 54% of the people who watched the speech were Democrats, 25% were independents, and 18% were Republicans. Of those people, 85% approved of the speech.

 

[Trausti]

GOP eedjit Stephen Miller "Biden's speech lacked human warmth".

Actually, If Biden had gotten any warmer, we would have all melted down into puddles of love.

MSNBC just reported Biden's speech has a 85% approval rating among Americans. That must chap these GOP morons' asses big time.

Well, no not exactly.:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/85-percent-americans-biden-speech/

We don’t know what percentage of Americans approved of Biden’s speech yet, but it likely wasn’t 85%.

This stat comes from a report by CBS News who reported that 85% of viewers, not Americans, approved of the speech. As the audience for Biden’s speech last night likely skewed to the left, this statistic does not represent “all Americans.” CBS News reported that 54% of the people who watched the speech were Democrats, 25% were independents, and 18% were Republicans. Of those people, 85% approved of the speech.

Viewers of Biden speech.

Viewers of Biden falling down stairs.

 

[Derec]

I guess it’d depend on where you live but spending only $3k on a kid in a year would be close to child abuse in a lot of places. Not that child abuse doesn’t happen so I guess it’s possible.

Marginal costs decreases substantially with increasing number of children. You may get a bigger place with another bedroom with one child or two children. Having more children also means more hand-me-downs and of course, ability to buy food in bulk. But in Biden's plan, you get $3k for your first child and the same amount for your 10th.

 

[Derec]

I don’t know where you are getting the ‘plenty of that’ idea. To speak to just one of those: state funding of public post secondary education has fallen over the past couple of decades—and more—as a percentage of funding.

I was talking more about moneys and benefits that parents get directly, such as child tax credit, federal exemptions, EITC and food stamps. The $3k should be viewed in light of all the benefits parents are already receiving from the government.
I tend to agree about education funding in general although I also think there is too much politicization and nonsense in higher education (prime example being the so-called "critical race theory") as well as administration bloat.
So higher education needs reforms beyond just throwing more money at it. Same goes for K-12 - US spends a lot of money per student, comparable with other OECD countries) but we have less to show for it because of education politics and bloat.
Also note that education is primarily a state responsibility, not federal. Public universities are called state schools, not federal schools.

Public education is underfunded and constantly expected to do more than teach academic subjects and the ‘extras’ that are so important: music, art, physical education, etc.

That is not true actually.

US spends comparable amounts. It's about HOW the money is spent.

In some states, food stamps require an in humane level of poverty to qualify a final states are inadequate.

What do you consider an "in humane level of poverty"?

Being poor is hard work, unprofitable and exhausting. And it’s a drain on all of society.

One way to avoid being poor is not to have children when you can't afford them. Not demand more and more dough from the government.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I guess it’d depend on where you live but spending only $3k on a kid in a year would be close to child abuse in a lot of places. Not that child abuse doesn’t happen so I guess it’s possible.

Marginal costs decreases substantially with increasing number of children. You may get a bigger place with another bedroom with one child or two children. Having more children also means more hand-me-downs and of course, ability to buy food in bulk. But in Biden's plan, you get $3k for your first child and the same amount for your 10th.

How many children do *you* have?


(By the way, you may have seen me agree the benefit should phase out.)

 

[Harry Bosch]

I guess it’d depend on where you live but spending only $3k on a kid in a year would be close to child abuse in a lot of places. Not that child abuse doesn’t happen so I guess it’s possible.

Marginal costs decreases substantially with increasing number of children. You may get a bigger place with another bedroom with one child or two children. Having more children also means more hand-me-downs and of course, ability to buy food in bulk. But in Biden's plan, you get $3k for your first child and the same amount for your 10th.

How many children do *you* have?

I doubt that he has very many! Because costs do not go down with more kids! If we really wanted to help the poor, we'd encourage smaller families. Maybe we should incent families with tax credits for having fewer children. Maybe incent adoption.

 

[Shadowy Man]

How many children do *you* have?

I doubt that he has very many! Because costs do not go down with more kids! If we really wanted to help the poor, we'd encourage smaller families. Maybe we should incent families with tax credits for having fewer children. Maybe incent adoption.

His comments come across as a childless person’s academic analysis of the theoretical expectation of how having children should expect to go and not as based on the practical experience of having had children and needing to provide for them.

In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.

 

[Shadowy Man]

To your last point, perhaps the tax credit could phase out after two biological children, but continue for adopted children. That could incentivize families but not incentivize more reproduction.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Marginal costs decreases substantially with increasing number of children.

???

You may get a bigger place with another bedroom with one child or two children.

Bedrooms are important, bathrooms will also become an issue.

Having more children also means more hand-me-downs and of course, ability to buy food in bulk.

The "ability to buy food in bulk". Do food prices really drop that much in bulk? Also, apartments don't usually have a lot of bulk grocery storage Meanwhile, hand-me-downs? I'd expect not so wealthy to already be starting with hand me downs (consignment, goodwill, garage sale), and clothes don't last forever!

White families voted for Mussolini because America forgot about them, and when Biden announces a plan that'll benefit the forgotten Americans, they whine that this makes blacks want to have more babies. At some point, the racism can't go unnoticed.

But in Biden's plan, you get $3k for your first child and the same amount for your 10th.

Damn Catholics!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

To your last point, perhaps the tax credit could phase out after two biological children, but continue for adopted children. That could incentivize families but not incentivize more reproduction.

Who is incentivized to have more children for $3,000 a year? The value of having a baby is only the joy of having a baby. You can't put a value on the sacrifice required when raising a baby! People would need to be straight up sociopaths to overlook those sacrifices. Of course, there are people out there that view minorities as animals and not human beings.

 

[Playball40]

I guess it’d depend on where you live but spending only $3k on a kid in a year would be close to child abuse in a lot of places. Not that child abuse doesn’t happen so I guess it’s possible.

Marginal costs decreases substantially with increasing number of children. You may get a bigger place with another bedroom with one child or two children. Having more children also means more hand-me-downs and of course, ability to buy food in bulk. But in Biden's plan, you get $3k for your first child and the same amount for your 10th.

Where you getting this kind of nonsense from?

 

[fromderinside]

Who is incentivized to have more children for $3,000 a year?

Simple question, simple answers. Those who enjoy sex and children are incentivized to have more sex and more children. Also those who detest normal work who prefer home life and raising children and see gain in having money to spend by just having lots of children.

Back in the day normal families ranged from about 7 to 18 children during westward migration era. Of course being a Mormon didn't hurt.

Normal behavior trends suggest that a small segment of the population would benefit from the plan greatly whether or not they had lots of children so why not do it.