theprof00 said:
Couples in which one spouse earns all of the couple’s income never incur a marriage penalty and almost always receive a marriage bonus, because joint filing shifts the higher earner’s income into a lower tax bracket.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/family/marriage-penalties.cfm
Whoever explained it to you explained wrong. Secondly, now that I've shown you that married indeed get benefits over individuals, I never said that the chick-fil-a guy was completely in the wrong for voicing his morals. I HAVE called his morals hypocritical for the points I illustrated, ie, denying privelages to others because they were sinful. I hear all the time that "you don't allow gay marriage because it promotes gay marriage. It allows for people to enter into sin more freely than to rise above the 'temptations' like they should be doing...we should not be telling these people that it's OK". Now, because it's so common to think that I'm 'boiling all Christians down to this stereotype or thought process', I will say that I am not. The anti-gay marriage crowd is so hard to fight because they all have different reasons. It's like the tea party. How do you argue with them? Each group within has like their own ideas and desires. For the anti same sex marriage crowds it's no different. Some say it's enabling, so no. Others say, "no because marriage is sacred"... etc etc. So when you solve the problem of marriage being sacred and say, "OK, so let's give them civil unions with marital benefits", it doesn't work, because the people that held that obstacle then shrink back while another group says "it's enabling". So yeah, it's frustrating, and yes, I think it's backwards and hypocritical. I mean, this is something that would HELP the economy, as well as making the rest of the world look at us again and say, "damn as much as I hate those americans, they're more progressive than we are once again". There are a myriad of other benefits to marriage besides tax, including credit power, hospital visitation, tax free gifts to spouses, etc etc. |
Firstly the benefit of filing a joint tax return by married couples is actually just a recent trend in perspective. Up until 2001 filing a married joint tax return did in fact create a marriage penalty. It was that way to supposedly level the playing field of joint filers with single filers. So only until the last decade or so (coinciding with the increased attention to gay marriage) has being married actually worked in favor of maried tax payers. What is worse is that this marriage shelter works in favor of those who have higher incomes especially for those who have larger income gaps between spouses. For example: Spouse 1 makes 80,000 and Spouse 2 makes 20,000 = 100,000 total income. They both file as making 50,000 giving them a tax advantage. Just another unfair advantage given out by our progressive tax system.
The problem with gay marriage proponents using this to support their arguement is again, they want it for themselves and no one else. They would rather join the ranks of heterosexual COUPLES than remove the preference all together alowing ANYONE to be married and still pay the same taxes despite their chosen lifestyle. I have said it before, polygamists will be watching the direction we go on this issue and when gay couples are successful in "equalizing" the playing field between them and heterosexuals they will have precedent for arguing against polygamy laws. And who could deny them? Based on what? How they share their resources? Sounds like private business to me just like who you sleep with.
I for one feel that the marriage advantage should be either removed or allowed to be used by ANYONE regardless of their sexual orientation or lifestyle. I happen to be married BTW. But that wouldn't make for good politics as it always seems that rather than truly leveling the playing field they just want what they want, everyone else be damned. Not to mention the entire tax system as it is is broken and wrong. But thats for another thread.
As for the other so-called benfits of marriage, removing uncle sam from the eqaution all together is the solution to those issues. For those in love with gay marriage how do you suppose the opponents will treat it when the have the regulatory powers that have been put in place? These issues should never have been njected into politics as the have only become weapons to weild against an opponent to garner power. It is only great when your guy is in power.
