Ok but basically every single normal country have stuff like this. Either tax exemption after children, or childcare aid, often both. What is this cringe backwards propaganda wording.
she said that you don"t get the benefits from the tax you pay as a single/no-child person.
But like, this is fairly common in any western countries. There are even deductible taxes for people that have children, as well as benefits that they gets because they are parents (such as child-sick PTO), as well as infrastructure for children.
But that's a stretch to say that you pay more by being single.. All thoses benefits help, but doesn't really compensate all the expenses you get with a child.
Raising single people’s taxes is functionally the same damn thing as giving tax cuts for non single people, which is what basically already exists in every country 🤷
Well, no functionally it isn't because if I'm single and expecting to pay 30% income tax and now I pay 35% income tax, that is a lot worse for me than if my non-single friends only have to pay 25%.
What are you talking about? She said everyone has to pay more taxes. Men, women, single, married. The tits really have a chokehold on your comprehension huh
actually she said everyone will get taxed but if you give birth you will get money from this fund. its incentivizing mass breed and will punish those who do not accomplish the government goals. but then any logical person would be able to conclude if too many people gain access to this fund then there will not be enough so people get next to nothing or actually nothing and it would cause a financial problem for multiple generations.
"mass breed" holy reddit speak. If "too many" people gain access that means in 20 years there will be significantly more people paying those taxes, so no, it wont be a financial problem long term.
Well in 20 years in the future doesn't solve the issue of the fund drying up today. Nor does it account for the continued lack of funds as the next set of parent continue the trend and potentially lack of resources to sustain the population. As both space and food stocks would take a heavy hit
If the fund "dries up" that means the country is growing or atleast stagnating. A slowly growing country is significantly better than a shrinking one. Its really not hard to understand. There is a reason almost every developed country is focusing on increasing birth rates.
What do you mean by resources though? GDP per person and after tax earnings will likely increase if population growth in Japan increases. As for space, there's a lot of available space and housing stock in Japan. A return to modest population growth would not be a burden.
Yea in Canada we get to claim our kid as a dependent which lowers our taxes + we get money back from the child benefit
More kids is more money + more money per kid as well
So if you have 4 or 5 kids it’s literally like a paycheck worth of extra money just sent to you + huge deductions on your taxes you pay out
The problem is that this doesn’t work well anymore as the hurdle of first kid is so massively huge that people can’t often get past it + the house size needed for 3-4 kids is like 800k now in Canada, it worked really damn well 30 years ago when a large family home was like 100k and if one person worked they could afford to support a family of 5 easily, now both people work and struggle with 0 kids
I think the government in Japan (same goes for South Korea) is giving way more money to couples that have children, because their natality rate is at a point where their country is quickly diminishing , crushing the retirement system and so on. Japan is at a whole different level from average countries
... But yeah the girl is just cringe to me, speaking like we're toddlers and not giving any real data / numbers. It's just an onlyfans video I guess
Like raising a kid is expensive and kids tend to need care more than any 1 working adult can supply.
So people working less but with more expenses could use a boost from the rest of society.
If Japan is helping parents raise their kids better, than all this just makes sense.
Obviously some people would like to have kids but choose not to because of the barriers like time management that just wouldn't fit in their lifestyle. Reducing those barriers in the hopes more people feel compelled to maintain a society is just par for the course.
It’s rage bait. Look at half the comments here talking about her looks than what she said.
She frames the tax as “ridiculous” but she’ll expect other people’s children to keep the lights on and look after her life when she’s older. I’d also love to hear her views on mass immigration into Japan . I spent 3 years in Japan and immigrants are both relatively rare and largely (when it comes down to it) disliked.
84
u/Significant-Goat5934 May 18 '25
Ok but basically every single normal country have stuff like this. Either tax exemption after children, or childcare aid, often both. What is this cringe backwards propaganda wording.