Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: homosexual marriage

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Thu, 28 Mar 13 11:58 PM | 67 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 13072 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 13071 by DigSpace)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

hi dig,

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/175/related/1/session/L2F2LzEvdGltZS8xMzY0NDk4NTIxL3NpZC9DN2pucGptbA%3D%3D

i think there's discrimination against the unmarried all over the entitlement system and throughout the tax code. starting with the marriage deduction. continuing until after the death of a spouse (inheritance tax breaks).

it's similar to the advantages of home ownership. if you can afford a home, you get tax breaks. which means if you cannot, you pay tax disproportionately. a neat regression in the tax code.

it's not that inequalities are always bad. i think they are fine in some instances. i'm all for advantages accruing to parents because i believe that to grow children requires parents to make sacrifices. since the state has an interest in the next generation, skewing things to encourage child rearing makes sense.

i am not so sure i universally agree that the state should offer privileges to a spouse eg one who has not been as financially successful. i am not sure why that is in the state's interest.

(i am using state to mean country rather than eg Arkansas)

but there may be a justification. eg let the elderly be.


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: homosexual marriage
By: DigSpace in ALEA
Thu, 28 Mar 13 11:23 PM 		Msg. 13071 of 54959

what is missing it seems is a zero sum. on alimony etc, the pie is largely fixed, that which largely is gets divided. the pie would be the same were the person married or not married, if they married, their piece gets smaller, somebody else gets a piece.

my limited understanding is one elects for levels or amounts of survivorship with sosec, but I am unsure of this. does the act of get gin married make the pie bigger? it should not. the premise is that the producer was more productive with a spouse on board, and the market measures that truth in terms of rewards and hence sosec pie size.

to me, that is the murky area, I'm all for survivorship, but it should not be making pies bigger, that is simply discriminating against the unamrried.


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next