First, we will do away with Social Security and Medicare (and whatever else gets dreamt up) and just replace the whole menu of handouts with the omnibus Generational Wealth Transfer Benefit.
Amanda had previously pointed out an accurate fact in that those who do not raise up children generally have more money than those who do the family thing. I think this needs to be taken into consideration when dispensing the Generational Wealth Transfer Benefit.
So, what we'll do is tie the benefit amounts to the number of children a person raises up for the workforce. The more you 'pay in' to the system, the more you get out of it.
Fair, right?
This will provide all future generations with a solid and viable
I kinda like the traditional wisdom aspect of the whole plan. Remember, when way back, the more kids you had, the easier your life got?
I wanna bring that back.
Putting the 'Values' back in 'Family Values'.
Sound good? if maybe just a little bit?
Just thinkin out loud...
11 comments:
I think folks who want to have a social welfare plan ought to have one and the folks that don't shouldn't have to contribute. I'm a choice kinda guy.
You can have this if I get the carbon credit for not producing any more Americans (or Canadians).
:)
What about "those that have wealth MUST give it to those that don't"?
Obama already said he will push for a federal mandate.
Gino, remember that there is no such thing as forced charity.
RW: that works perfectly with my plan.
no production/pay in = no pay out.
brian: you need to produce carbon to warm up canada.
but i guess you can get credit for warming up the piece of canada you've taken possession of. ;)
Not to be a wrench-thrower, but what about the people who physically can't conceive? They WANT to contribute more, but they can't. It's not their fault!
Hm, well Gino, I PROMISE to do my part! If God wants me to have at least two kids, thus effectively replacing Marty and I, it will happen.
Not 19 though. That's something from my nightmares.
What about (per Amanda's comments) we simply phase out Socialist Insecurity and Mediscare, and then those who cannot have children will know very well that they need to save resources for retirement? It's what we had until FDR devalued the dollar to get SS passed.
amanda: still, just replacing you and marty wont be enough. a 1/1 worker/geezer ratio is just not sustainable.
add, that by the time you actually get those workers into the force you will be advanced age as it is, so their contribution just wont be enough.
childless couples can adopt. that would be fair.
So, if more kids mean easier life, I assume a small farm will have to be involved, right? Where will the government get the acres to give these enormous families? And the asses?
i know where a couple of asses can be located if the govt needs them.
They wouldn't have to look far.
Post a Comment