I do not have children, and I never will, yet my property taxes still go toward paying for schools. I’m happy to have my taxes pay for roads, infastructure improvement, fire, police, and all the other municipal services that benefit me as a resident of the county.

The government needs to determine the cost of educating a child from kindergarten to high school, divide this by 18, and apply it as a yearly tax to parents. Children deserve an education, but children also put an additional strain on society. I should not be forced to pay for someone else’s decision to procreate.

    • Moira_Mayhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      My uncle just moved to Florida and found out that cashiers there have zero concept of exact change. If they don’t have a display telling them what to count out, they can’t do it in their heads.

      Was a bit of a culture shock for him.

  • Teon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I will never have children. But I want children to be properly educated so when I am eleventy-million years old and in a nursing home, some one educated can care for me.
    Otherwise, we all end up in chaos living with idiots.

  • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a classic situational argument. There are lots of things I don’t use that my tax dollars still pay for. I can only see the long term effects of making parents pay for schools. Look how poor the average Canadian is now. If they can’t afford private school, which likely most can’t, then our population going forward will be less and less educated and overall less intelligent.

    Children put strain on, yes, but what happens when you’re a senior in your retirement home? A fellow senior going to look after you? It’s important to have a strong foundation. I’d argue we are not doing enough for the younger populace. Many leave because of affordability already…

  • Fogle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What about people that don’t drive? My house has never caught fire why do I have to pay for the fire department?

    What an incredibly selfish fucking take

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Education has one of the best returns on investment of any tax. Now should it be specifically property tax? That is arguable.

    Taxes are for things that provide a social good. Education of people is one of those things, and presumably you received it already but now don’t want to pay in?

    You are describing children as a separate category from people, which makes no sense. All those children will, like you, grow up to be adults and will pay into the system. As adults of the past paid for you.

  • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Unpopular take.

    The government exists to serve its citizens.

    You may not specifically benefit from some programs at this very moment - shall we dismantle them?

    Unemployment. Medicare. Libraries. Social security. Road / infrastructure. Low-income food/housing/assistance. Foreign aid. Fire / EMS. Diplomatic services. Police.

    At any given time, most people don’t personally benefit from all of these things, but they likely use them at various points in their lives.

    You went to school, didn’t you? You already got yours.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Educated children are how you get your road workers, doctors, firefighters and librarians, services you are happy paying.

    Yes, you should be forced to pay for education because it is the foundation of every facet of your civilization.