Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-15-2014, 03:11 PM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,431 posts, read 19,003,195 times
Reputation: 5224

Advertisements

One thing thst the marriage equality struggle has brought out into the open is the disparity between the benefits that single and married people receive. Leaving all of the other tangible benefits aside like child adoption, survivorship, inheritance, testifying against spouse, etc, why should taxpayer dollars be funneled to married couples? Everyone knows about the so-called "marriage penalty" where married couples pay equal to or more than a single taxpayer. But what about the couples with one non-working spouse? Why should there be a separate 1040 tax table for them with tax dollar amounts much less than that of a single taxpayer? I would argue that those are oftentimes those well off couples that most enjoy that perk. Why shouldn't we have one set of tax structure for all taxpayers regardless of spousal influence? Why shouldn't single people be able to name a Socisl Security beneficiary in case of premature death? In a couple's situation, the death benefits flow to the surviving spouse and dependent a under 18- a windfall for them. The single receives Zero for all of those years of paying into that crooked SS system. How is that fair?
I would also argue that the distribution of all these advantages is a direct contradiction to those social conservatives who decry that they want the Government to get out of the marriage business. Would they want to give up their privilege too??

Last edited by wehotex; 02-15-2014 at 03:23 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-16-2014, 12:25 AM
 
Location: Armsanta Sorad
5,648 posts, read 8,058,246 times
Reputation: 2462
I'm not a conservative and definitely not a liberal. But I think when people marry with a license, they lose whatever benefits they had prior to marriage. Which is a good reason to get the government out of marriage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 12:36 AM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,431 posts, read 19,003,195 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by West of Encino View Post
I'm not a conservative and definitely not a liberal. But I think when people marry with a license, they lose whatever benefits they had prior to marriage. Which is a good reason to get the government out of marriage.
Which benefits are you referring to?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 12:39 AM
 
16,431 posts, read 22,202,108 times
Reputation: 9623
I am in favor of removing spousal and survivor SS benefits unless the spouse was a stay at home mother and was therefore unable to earn her own Social Security benefits. There is no other justification for such benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 12:45 AM
 
14,917 posts, read 13,103,566 times
Reputation: 4828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
I am in favor of removing spousal and survivor SS benefits unless the spouse was a stay at home mother and was therefore unable to earn her own Social Security benefits. There is no other justification for such benefits.
Just mothers? What about stay at home fathers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 12:48 AM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,414 posts, read 10,493,911 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
I am in favor of removing spousal and survivor SS benefits unless the spouse was a stay at home mother and was therefore unable to earn her own Social Security benefits. There is no other justification for such benefits.
How about the protections for inheritance or property taxation? Why when it comes to same sex marriage, striaght people are then willing to lose those 1049 rights, benefits and protections? All other times they take them for granted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 12:49 AM
 
Location: Armsanta Sorad
5,648 posts, read 8,058,246 times
Reputation: 2462
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
Which benefits are you referring to?
Like if a person is receiving unemployed benefits. Or if a person marries another with bad finances, then the finances merge. Then her financial problems become his problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:22 AM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,944,791 times
Reputation: 2385
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Just mothers? What about stay at home fathers?
Now you're just being PC.
///
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:25 AM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,431 posts, read 19,003,195 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
I am in favor of removing spousal and survivor SS benefits unless the spouse was a stay at home mother and was therefore unable to earn her own Social Security benefits. There is no other justification for such benefits.
Why did the mother stay at home in the first place? Many mothers work and mother their kids. Why not tax their working spouse at a higher rate to accommodate the additional actuarial expense of providing for his/her survivors? Or at least allow EVERY taxpayer to designate a beneficiary in case of early death. Our system picks way too many winners and losers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 04:47 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,285,820 times
Reputation: 3826
LOL, then you'll have a lot of commonlaw marriages and people intentionally staying single to reap additional benefits.

Then we can be more like Europe. As someone who was raised and has family there...no thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top