Comments on: Divorce Penalty http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/ Forward Movement Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:04:43 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Should We Have a Minister for Marriage? « Leatherhead Matters http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/comment-page-1/#comment-62743 Should We Have a Minister for Marriage? « Leatherhead Matters Sat, 19 Apr 2008 05:04:34 +0000 http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/#comment-62743 [...] US commentator thinks Government have too much invested in fixing the adverse social consequences of our [...] [...] US commentator thinks Government have too much invested in fixing the adverse social consequences of our [...]

]]> By: Ben http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/comment-page-1/#comment-62645 Ben Fri, 18 Apr 2008 04:57:01 +0000 http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/#comment-62645 How about an incentive to put off having a child? Basically, as long as a couple is married without children, they can dump money into something like an IRA. If they have kids, they can get it back with some extra percentage or it can go towards, e.g. college. If they never do, it's just an ordinary IRA, but it's always there in case she pops. How about an incentive to put off having a child? Basically, as long as a couple is married without children, they can dump money into something like an IRA. If they have kids, they can get it back with some extra percentage or it can go towards, e.g. college. If they never do, it’s just an ordinary IRA, but it’s always there in case she pops.

]]> By: Fatty Bolger http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/comment-page-1/#comment-62498 Fatty Bolger Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:26:30 +0000 http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/#comment-62498 Yes, the report contradicted accepted liberal theology, er, ideology, so it MUST GO DOWN, AND IT MUST GO DOWN HARD. On the other hand, I actually somewhat agree with the AP editorial, er, article. I'm not a big believer in using taxes for social engineering. I guess my ideal income tax system would be something like this: 1. How much did you make: $xxxxxxxx 2. Is it over this much?: xxxxxxxx 3. If so, pay (#1 - #2) * xx% 4. Also, we've put x% of your money into a cafeteria account for you to use when you get old, or to leave to your heirs if you die. Yes, the report contradicted accepted liberal theology, er, ideology, so it MUST GO DOWN, AND IT MUST GO DOWN HARD.

On the other hand, I actually somewhat agree with the AP editorial, er, article. I’m not a big believer in using taxes for social engineering.

I guess my ideal income tax system would be something like this:

1. How much did you make: $xxxxxxxx
2. Is it over this much?: xxxxxxxx
3. If so, pay (#1 – #2) * xx%
4. Also, we’ve put x% of your money into a cafeteria account for you to use when you get old, or to leave to your heirs if you die.

]]> By: Right Voices » Blog Archive » Throw Money At A Problem, Do Nothing To Fix The Problem And You Have A Government Run Success Story http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/comment-page-1/#comment-62479 Right Voices » Blog Archive » Throw Money At A Problem, Do Nothing To Fix The Problem And You Have A Government Run Success Story Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:14:29 +0000 http://www.julescrittenden.com/2008/04/16/divorce-penalty/#comment-62479 [...] Jules talks about a divorce penalty and how we are paying for it. He cited this study: The breakdown of marriage in America costs at least $112 billion a year, owing to costs of health care, criminal justice, welfare programs and lost income-tax revenue, according to a study released today. [...] [...] Jules talks about a divorce penalty and how we are paying for it. He cited this study: The breakdown of marriage in America costs at least $112 billion a year, owing to costs of health care, criminal justice, welfare programs and lost income-tax revenue, according to a study released today. [...]

]]>