I would like to propose a tax on Reform candidates.
So people who don’t have children but must have them later because life is so unaffordable, and less of them, must pay more tax? Right… honestly who the fuck are these idiots leading the polls
People in the Manchester constituency today got a letter pretending to be from a pensioner called “Patricia Clegg” who complained about winter fuel, the nhs and gender free toilets lol. They’re so manipulative and desperate it’s unreal
If a couple with kids receives tax relief, it will be the same with all couples without children paying more tax.
This is a classical debate about taxes.
Germany (for example) provides tax discounts for those with children. And that can be interpreted as tax on child-free people.
Why is it that the worst people out there are the ones so obsessed with everyone having kids
Word on the street (i.e. PopBitch) has it that this dude lost his last election campaign (in school) to someone whose only policy was ‘A Vote For Goodwin Is A Vote For The Gays’.
Make of that what you will.
Im always amused by people who believe migration rates should go down and birth rates should go up simultainiously.
If migrants should go home because Britan is full then people having more kids isnt going to make things better. If people should have more kids because jobs are going unfilled then migration solves that problem now rather than in 2 decades time.
Is this some Musk/American evangelical talking point or something? I thought the right was against the state paying for or helping children in any way?
Alot of people (most?) want to buy a house before having kids. You know what would set people back? Being unable to save a deposit because they’re paying more tax… because they don’t have kids!
That would be a vicious cycle.
They already do, this is what child tax credits and tax free childcare and child benefit is all in place for
That’s such a rage bait way to write “tax breaks for families with children” 🙄
What if you _Can’t_ have children and don’t want a surrogate or to adopt?
People who vote Reform should pay more tax. They seem happy enough for everyone else to struggle. Only fair they do their bit.
Obviously this is nonsense.
However I do think that people who have kids and work full time should get a tax break somehow. Kids are very expensive and parents are raising future tax payers so the government should incentivise having kids (for tax payers at least)
This already exists in some form via child benefit. Numerically, there is no difference between people with kids getting a benefit versus people without kids paying more tax. The difference is only psychological.
What if we can’t have children? Will we get a disability check?
lol they wouldn’t get any tax from me because I would be out of this country with that shit. If you choose to have children that’s your tough shit you have less money. That’s part of the reason I don’t want children. I pay enough mother fucking tax that goes towards benefits families already get.
so as a young infertile person he thinks i should get bent, got it
I do, but it’s the other way round. We all pay the same tax rate depending on our pay, and they literally get cash back.
Reform literally have no clue.
So paying more than the average UK salary in tax isn’t enough?? Fuck off..
What should we call this tax, that’s what I want to know!
But Farage says we have too many people and it puts a strain on housing, transport, NHS etc
I actually want to be a mum. Wanted to be a wife and mother since i was young but as we got older we have realised its not affordable to have children and honestly not much of a safe world to bring them into. So we are being punished for doing the right thing ?
Ah yes, bleed the childless and young dry to prop up the triple locked, bus pass wielding, free prescription having, asset owning cohort of pensioners that swing elections.
God help this country.
So basically if you’re young, single and childless but working you get no assistance for anything and taxed even more, while already having a totally unworkable cost of living.
Why do these clowns think they’re anywhere near competent enough to be commenting on policy?
What about people who can’t have kids, or people who have lost a child, would they have to pay more tax too according to this shit stain.
People who cost less should pay more as punishment… great logic 👍 How about Reform’s donors pay more tax instead!
Article reads as if he suggested a similar tax policy to Poland, in regards to a cut after 2 children, rather than imposing a tax on childless women.
Don’t they already? If you consider child benefits.
shame their parents were not told this interesting fact, they might have had second thoughts.
Would be interesting to see what the anti-migrant crowd has to say about this. Y’all thought Reform would only milk immigrants for their tax money and nobody else?
This is objectively an incredible idea.
The same people on here whining about how they’ll never get a pension are the same people who don’t want kids. They’ll maybe have one at 35. The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
The average cost of raising a child is £250,000 over the first 18 years of life. That doesn’t even factor in the reduced lifetime earnings one has from having to take time out of work to prioritise them.
If you’re childless, you’re saving £500k compared to someone with two kids, and yet those kids will pay for you not to work when you’re older. How can that possibly make any sense?
Ahh so those who can’t afford to have kids should pay more? The idiocy of reform aside, the math ain’t mathing.
As someone who doesn’t have kids, I’d happily pay more tax.
So long as it doesn’t go to politicians pockets and goes to inherently good sources: NHS, public schools, services etc
But that won’t happen. It’ll go to reform donor pockets
So copying china’s way of solving it.. How about addressing the underlying issues instead that is in no way solely isolated to the UK. At least be brave and suggest that parents should have mandated less work time in order to care for their kids. Do you need a place to live with your kids? Cool now the state subsides your mortgage for the amount of time it takes to achieve legal age for he child. Cheaper groceries? Here you go, a yearly allowance. Childcare is now basically free.
Ah yes lets pump out kids as a way to claim benefits and a tax dodge, what a great plan. Can’t believe people actually consider these clowns a real party…
Fascinated by the parallels between him and JD Vance.
-Went from being a darling of the liberal press for his work analysing the rise of right-wing populism and the ways in which it takes root in ‘left behind communities’ to being a hardline rightoid himself and subscribing to all the extreme views he once examined academically
-Pro-natalist nutcase calling for punitive measures against people who don’t have (white) children despite being a member of a political party which opposes any kind of social security measure or welfare benefit designed to stop the cost of raising a child from becoming prohibitively expensive.
-Constantly makes a virtue of his ostensibly precarious and humble working class upbringing, the details of which he most likely heavily embellished or exaggerated
-Running for political office on a platform of ‘look how much of a disgusting derelict shithole this area you live in is and what idle disgusting louts its inhabitants are’.
-Completely unprincipled reprobate whose political views change at a moment’s notice depending on which group/powerful figure he’s currently trying to ingratiate himself with.
-Completely and totally nuked his brain through 20+ hours of twitter usage a day, resultantly obsessed with being seen as cool and based by 17 year old groypers on twitter with usernames like ‘AngloHitler1488’
-Hideously ugly and genuinely insufferable freak completely incapable of holding a conversation with a normal person for 5 seconds.
Japan is trialling this. Best way to do it? Scale it by age.
Don’t particularly tax young people without kids to subsidise those who do, rather have the % of the tax scale upwards between 18 to retirement age, with medical exemption, so it’s really focusing on those who have *chosen* not to have kids rather than those still trying to find their way in life, or those who cannot medically.
People ruling this as unfair, consider that being childfree vastly increases disposable income, free time, etc. A life choice that hurts society if too many people choose it (and too many indeed are choosing it) because it makes them personally wealthier and more comfortable.
Eventually you have to tell people life isn’t fair and there is a responsibility for the next generation. If you want to just opt out of that entirely, then an additional tax makes a lot of sense as a tradeoff, especially if used to help those who want kids but are struggling to afford it. People don’t just get to opt into societal and economic collapse because they’d rather have a nicer car or an extra holiday a year, and if that sounds awful, the rest of us didn’t consent to being thrown into that collapse, because of the failure or refusal of our peers to do what everyother generation in history has done.
It’s obvious what his underlying theme is – as with all the other💩 he spouts. A truly odious creature.
Probably still be better off than having these rather expensive children.
childless people use less government/local authority services. so should pay less
42 comments
I would like to propose a tax on Reform candidates.
So people who don’t have children but must have them later because life is so unaffordable, and less of them, must pay more tax? Right… honestly who the fuck are these idiots leading the polls
People in the Manchester constituency today got a letter pretending to be from a pensioner called “Patricia Clegg” who complained about winter fuel, the nhs and gender free toilets lol. They’re so manipulative and desperate it’s unreal
If a couple with kids receives tax relief, it will be the same with all couples without children paying more tax.
This is a classical debate about taxes.
Germany (for example) provides tax discounts for those with children. And that can be interpreted as tax on child-free people.
Why is it that the worst people out there are the ones so obsessed with everyone having kids
Word on the street (i.e. PopBitch) has it that this dude lost his last election campaign (in school) to someone whose only policy was ‘A Vote For Goodwin Is A Vote For The Gays’.
Make of that what you will.
Im always amused by people who believe migration rates should go down and birth rates should go up simultainiously.
If migrants should go home because Britan is full then people having more kids isnt going to make things better. If people should have more kids because jobs are going unfilled then migration solves that problem now rather than in 2 decades time.
Is this some Musk/American evangelical talking point or something? I thought the right was against the state paying for or helping children in any way?
Alot of people (most?) want to buy a house before having kids. You know what would set people back? Being unable to save a deposit because they’re paying more tax… because they don’t have kids!
That would be a vicious cycle.
They already do, this is what child tax credits and tax free childcare and child benefit is all in place for
[Every sperm…](https://youtu.be/fUspLVStPbk?si=RiS7P1zHGT-Arc5-)
That’s such a rage bait way to write “tax breaks for families with children” 🙄
What if you _Can’t_ have children and don’t want a surrogate or to adopt?
People who vote Reform should pay more tax. They seem happy enough for everyone else to struggle. Only fair they do their bit.
Obviously this is nonsense.
However I do think that people who have kids and work full time should get a tax break somehow. Kids are very expensive and parents are raising future tax payers so the government should incentivise having kids (for tax payers at least)
This already exists in some form via child benefit. Numerically, there is no difference between people with kids getting a benefit versus people without kids paying more tax. The difference is only psychological.
What if we can’t have children? Will we get a disability check?
lol they wouldn’t get any tax from me because I would be out of this country with that shit. If you choose to have children that’s your tough shit you have less money. That’s part of the reason I don’t want children. I pay enough mother fucking tax that goes towards benefits families already get.
so as a young infertile person he thinks i should get bent, got it
I do, but it’s the other way round. We all pay the same tax rate depending on our pay, and they literally get cash back.
Reform literally have no clue.
So paying more than the average UK salary in tax isn’t enough?? Fuck off..
What should we call this tax, that’s what I want to know!
But Farage says we have too many people and it puts a strain on housing, transport, NHS etc
I actually want to be a mum. Wanted to be a wife and mother since i was young but as we got older we have realised its not affordable to have children and honestly not much of a safe world to bring them into. So we are being punished for doing the right thing ?
Ah yes, bleed the childless and young dry to prop up the triple locked, bus pass wielding, free prescription having, asset owning cohort of pensioners that swing elections.
God help this country.
So basically if you’re young, single and childless but working you get no assistance for anything and taxed even more, while already having a totally unworkable cost of living.
Why do these clowns think they’re anywhere near competent enough to be commenting on policy?
What about people who can’t have kids, or people who have lost a child, would they have to pay more tax too according to this shit stain.
People who cost less should pay more as punishment… great logic 👍 How about Reform’s donors pay more tax instead!
Article reads as if he suggested a similar tax policy to Poland, in regards to a cut after 2 children, rather than imposing a tax on childless women.
Don’t they already? If you consider child benefits.
shame their parents were not told this interesting fact, they might have had second thoughts.
Would be interesting to see what the anti-migrant crowd has to say about this. Y’all thought Reform would only milk immigrants for their tax money and nobody else?
This is objectively an incredible idea.
The same people on here whining about how they’ll never get a pension are the same people who don’t want kids. They’ll maybe have one at 35. The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
The average cost of raising a child is £250,000 over the first 18 years of life. That doesn’t even factor in the reduced lifetime earnings one has from having to take time out of work to prioritise them.
If you’re childless, you’re saving £500k compared to someone with two kids, and yet those kids will pay for you not to work when you’re older. How can that possibly make any sense?
Ahh so those who can’t afford to have kids should pay more? The idiocy of reform aside, the math ain’t mathing.
As someone who doesn’t have kids, I’d happily pay more tax.
So long as it doesn’t go to politicians pockets and goes to inherently good sources: NHS, public schools, services etc
But that won’t happen. It’ll go to reform donor pockets
So copying china’s way of solving it.. How about addressing the underlying issues instead that is in no way solely isolated to the UK. At least be brave and suggest that parents should have mandated less work time in order to care for their kids. Do you need a place to live with your kids? Cool now the state subsides your mortgage for the amount of time it takes to achieve legal age for he child. Cheaper groceries? Here you go, a yearly allowance. Childcare is now basically free.
Ah yes lets pump out kids as a way to claim benefits and a tax dodge, what a great plan. Can’t believe people actually consider these clowns a real party…
Fascinated by the parallels between him and JD Vance.
-Went from being a darling of the liberal press for his work analysing the rise of right-wing populism and the ways in which it takes root in ‘left behind communities’ to being a hardline rightoid himself and subscribing to all the extreme views he once examined academically
-Pro-natalist nutcase calling for punitive measures against people who don’t have (white) children despite being a member of a political party which opposes any kind of social security measure or welfare benefit designed to stop the cost of raising a child from becoming prohibitively expensive.
-Constantly makes a virtue of his ostensibly precarious and humble working class upbringing, the details of which he most likely heavily embellished or exaggerated
-Running for political office on a platform of ‘look how much of a disgusting derelict shithole this area you live in is and what idle disgusting louts its inhabitants are’.
-Completely unprincipled reprobate whose political views change at a moment’s notice depending on which group/powerful figure he’s currently trying to ingratiate himself with.
-Completely and totally nuked his brain through 20+ hours of twitter usage a day, resultantly obsessed with being seen as cool and based by 17 year old groypers on twitter with usernames like ‘AngloHitler1488’
-Hideously ugly and genuinely insufferable freak completely incapable of holding a conversation with a normal person for 5 seconds.
Japan is trialling this. Best way to do it? Scale it by age.
Don’t particularly tax young people without kids to subsidise those who do, rather have the % of the tax scale upwards between 18 to retirement age, with medical exemption, so it’s really focusing on those who have *chosen* not to have kids rather than those still trying to find their way in life, or those who cannot medically.
People ruling this as unfair, consider that being childfree vastly increases disposable income, free time, etc. A life choice that hurts society if too many people choose it (and too many indeed are choosing it) because it makes them personally wealthier and more comfortable.
Eventually you have to tell people life isn’t fair and there is a responsibility for the next generation. If you want to just opt out of that entirely, then an additional tax makes a lot of sense as a tradeoff, especially if used to help those who want kids but are struggling to afford it. People don’t just get to opt into societal and economic collapse because they’d rather have a nicer car or an extra holiday a year, and if that sounds awful, the rest of us didn’t consent to being thrown into that collapse, because of the failure or refusal of our peers to do what everyother generation in history has done.
It’s obvious what his underlying theme is – as with all the other💩 he spouts. A truly odious creature.
Probably still be better off than having these rather expensive children.
childless people use less government/local authority services. so should pay less