What do you think of this theory as to why having children is subsidized but not other luxury hobbies?

Question

OTHER HOBBIES DON"T GROW UP TO PAY TAXES !

The Govt. does not care how precious your kids are, they want you to produce taxpayers !

Answer 1

Whats your point?

Answer 2

If you do it correctly, you can write off your hobbies.

Answer 3

That is just so bloody brilliant.  What a genius you are for coming up with such a true and insightful theory.

Answer 4

Yes, and the more kids growing up dependent on the state, the more control the Government has over them.  Creating new tax payers that have grown up knowing the Government took care of them, instilling the belief that they cannot have children with out the support of Government.

Answer 5

You seem to have an issue with children, or having them.  Why not just shoot your nuts off?

"No issue with children in the slightest, only the issue of **Who Pays For Them **"

Well, unless you're proposing that children be left in the woods to fend for themselves, you do have an issue with children because with children comes the responsibilitly of raising them and supporting them financially.  And because parents are the ones doing this, why is it your business?

Answer 6

Your premise is still incorrect. Kids aren't a hobby. I didn't have my kids so that I'd have something to do. I don't know anyone who did. You can keep thinking this if you really want to, but you're mistaken. Ask any parent if their kids are a hobby.

Answer 7

I think it makes an awful lot of sense.  I never thought about it, but yeah, I think that's a reasonable argument.

Answer 8

Simply because these aren't hobbies, they are humans.

And indeed, they will become tax payers, but they will also (hopefully) become productive members of society.

Answer 9

Yes, although i still think calling kids a 'hobby' is a bit wierd!

EDIT: My biological clock is urging me to want a sports car, anyone want to help me out?

Answer 10

I'll agree with that if you add military members, doctors, police, fire fighters etc...societies necessary to survive members.  

Answer 11

Well, of course without any children, all of humanity would perish in a 100 years or so...

Answer 12

To the government we are all but pocket change.

Edit: He is not an idiot he aks a very valid question! Here in Australia some women are allowed to just keep popping out babies and collect centerlink payments. While idiots like me work, to pay for their children. A woman who lives across the road from where I work said to me one day: “I haven’t worked all my life, and now that my 6 year old is going to school I think I will have another baby.” You see what that does to people who do have to work hard? I hate that ****! We are all in it together, yes it is fine to take care of your children and recuperate. But to have another just so you don’t have to work. I have no respect! NONE!

Answer 13

The Gov't wants more productive citizens to:

Create the next scientific break through

become the next president

to win a gold medal

to carry on our nation

Would you say that the only purpose of a person is to eat? According to your logic the answer is yes, however, that is not the purpose of being a person.

You will know when you are growing up a little bit, when you don't see other people as "hobbies"

Seeing other people as hobbies is a perspective that a narcissit, amoral, sociopath might have. Is that true about you?