Gender-Based Taxes

[tamzdance]

Here's an excerpt from an older article (author: Anita Henri) I read promoting men paying higher taxes than women. I'd really like to share and read opinions posted on this thread on this topic...and let's not make it a man vs. woman (or vice versa thing)---if that's at all possible. Thanks everyone.

"Half the taxpayers are women--men commit the most crime. Many women pay for male crime with their lives, but all women taxpayers pay for male crime with their tax dollars. Men are expensive. Ninety-four percent of all prisoners are male. Whether it is robbery, burglary, white-collar crime, crime against children, crime against women, drug dealing, drunk driving, murder, crime in government, or gang violence; Crime and Violence is a masculine statement.

If we could convince men that crime is a male statement for which they should pay more tax dollars, there's a possibility they might "clean up their act." Millions of men beat their wives, creating the need for battered women's shelters. The fastest growing crime, rape, terrifies half the population of this country. Hate crimes are encouraged by male organizations, such as the skinheads and the KKK. Yet where is the outrage at all this male crime?"

I appreciate your time reading my note. I would welcome any thoughts you have on the above.

[Brutha]

Actually men do pay more taxes than women as earning money is also a men thing.
Now making that observation is mainly sexist as just as the argument you made.

Now you could also make a statement that crime is a black thing because procentually more blacks than whites are imprisoned and that argument follows the same reasoning as yours.
But then it might easier to see the flaw of it.

If we could convince men that crime is a male statement for which they should pay more tax dollars, there's a possibility they might "clean up their act."

Trying to created a group identity where people feel that they are inherintly criminal is one of the worst ideas ever against fighting crime.

To bring people to commit crime you on the other hand it's helpful to convince them to have an self identity that they aren't the type of people who commit crimes.

[Angela]

Would it be fair to have non-criminal men be required to cover the costs incurred by criminal-men, just because they happen to be member of the same gender?

I think it would be fair, though, to require criminals who inflict loss on others, regardless of their gender, to be liable for making financial amends for that loss. In other words, for battered men and women to sue their batterers and have the courts enforce awards by putting liens on their property or having their future earnings attached. They pay their price to society by going to prison, but there's also the civil debt they incur to the individuals they harm.

[spirit4711]

Men paying more taxes than women because most criminals are men is one of the sillier ideas I read this century - you really made my day!

For starters:
What do non criminal men have to do with other men being criminal?
What do women have to do with criminals being criminal?

People being criminal is the price we pay as society for not addressing people's needs.
Blaming a sub group for others being criminal is nothing more than that - blaming.

[Engle]

Flawed idea, too simplistic and unenforceable.

Why divide only on gender lines ?
Why not on religious lines ? (Buddhists should pay less taxes than others)
How about age, marital status, education, earnings, political leanings, sexual orientation, area of residence, single-parent families, family history ...?

What if stats show that proportionally more black women commit crime than Tibetan men ?

The only line that counts is those who commit crimes and those who dont.

[funchy]

If we're going to make things fair, why do people who never have kids have to pay property taxes -- to send their neighbor's kids to school?

Why do the elderly have to pay property taxes so high they lose their homes? They don't have any school age kids and they use the roads much less. If you're getting $8,000 a year of social security and your home's property taxes are $4,000 is that fair?

[tamzdance]

I'm not sure of those who responded to this thread realized that I personally was not advocating higher taxation for men, but rather, wanted to share an article (again, written by someone named Anita Henri) I had read a few months ago. While it's certainly a flawed argument, it does have some intriguing concepts that I thought would spark some decent discussion.

Here is another (more recent) article about same:

Should men pay higher taxes than women? « The View from Alexandria

[spirit4711]

What are your own thoughts on these articles?

[sirkinm]

What about all the extra toilet paper women require in public restrooms -- not to mention the costs of having all stalls vs. urinals...

But seriously folks, that criminal wasn't raised by nobody -- he had a mom and a dad that probably raised him poorly. So it's not cool to try to divorce women from the fact that when men turn out badly, they can go bad in expensive ways.

[RT Wolf]

HAHAHAHA. That's hilariously stupid. I'm afraid if I read the actual article my head would explode. I'm chalkin it up there next to the guy looking to hire someone and told a potential applicant who wanted to know more details, "Well, I'm not going to tell you the interview questions!"

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by sirkinm

But seriously folks, that criminal wasn't raised by nobody -- he had a mom and a dad that probably raised him poorly. So it's not cool to try to divorce women from the fact that when men turn out badly, they can go bad in expensive ways.

We could tax parents whose kids become criminals!

Now that GM is owned by the government, do they still pay taxes?

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Angela

I think it would be fair, though, to require criminals who inflict loss on others, regardless of their gender, to be liable for making financial amends for that loss. In other words, for battered men and women to sue their batterers and have the courts enforce awards by putting liens on their property or having their future earnings attached. They pay their price to society by going to prison, but there's also the civil debt they incur to the individuals they harm.

You'll be happy to know, Angela, that the States allows people to sue on the same grounds as a criminal charge. So a battered person can sue and have their batterer's future earnings and property attached.

There are two problems with this. First, most criminals don't have the money or property to repay and, as felony convictions bar most gainful employment, never gain the earning power to pay off their debt. Second, wrongful death actions are notoriously bad civil actions. In terms of financial recovery, you're better being badly maimed than dying...

The second article posted was spot on. Rather than basing taxes on gender, it is wiser to find gender-neutral ways to support policy decisions.

If a law tried a prima facie discrimination, it would be unconstitutional and unwise. Gender is a poor predictor of cost to the economy. Besides crime, we would have to account for the total amount of tax contributed, tax contributed as a percent of wages per capita, per capita strain on the economy overall including social welfare, compensation effects created by couples filing jointly in which one member supports the other, tax exempted behaviors that contribute to the economy, and tangible contribution based on gender as occurs in services provided free (traditionally, labor/armed service for men and child rearing for women). While philosophically interesting, it defies just application.

Now, taxing less based on need and not taxing additional work supplied by the secondary earner in a couple makes pretty good sense and would often result in women being taxed less. Obama's Making Work Pay credit did this somewhat effectively, unless the proposal changed before becoming law.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

In terms of financial recovery, you're better being badly maimed than dying...

Good to know. Actually, in terms of financial recovery, I think I would find more use for the money if I wasn't dead.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Angela

Good to know. Actually, in terms of financial recovery, I think I would find more use for the money if I wasn't dead.

I think the exact opposite. Perhaps you should re-draft your will?