UAW, let me just say that for most people there is never a perfect time to have kids. If I would have waited for everything to be "perfect" I would have been over 40. With that age comes a whole multitude of problems for the mother and the child. In a perfect world everyone would wait until they are financially stable, but it's not perfect. Let's not dream about things that are unattainable. And in all actuality the birth rate is declining because it's so expensive to have kids nowadays.

UAW first off let me state that this survey wasnt about anyone picking up the cost of Daycare, 2nd it was a comparison of percentage of cost from low income to higher income, so please dont read into something thats not there. 3rd when you talk about the deduction offsetting the cost that is true but its not dollar for dollar only a small percentage is recouped. I'm 51 single grandparent and took custody of my 3 year old granddaughter (daughter made some bad choices, Lifes little curve ball ) never expected to be raising another but the cost now compared to when my kids were growing up is a huge differance. Cost of everything has not kept up with wages and with most incomes taking a hit these days sure makes it hard for younger couples or single parents to get ahead because everything they make is just to maintain and just survive. As far as school tax well everyone pays them, If you want to have schools thats just part of the system. As far as you not having kids and never will, its great you realize that some shouldnt have kids and personally if you dont have kids and seriously dont have a clue you shouldnt comment. Like voting if you didnt vote.....you have no reason to complain.

Seems fair, but alot of the interminable school referenda costs, are for the maintenance of bldgs, teacher's salaries and pensions, new computers, etc. I think it's insulting to teachers that kids are portrayed as deprived if they don't get "more" each year. Parents need to be accountable for the education of their own kids, and the schools should be the medium to fill in the gaps. In smaller communities, with aging populations, many of whom are on fixed incomes, it takes a huge hit, as it does to homeowners your age, to keep going back to the well for more all the time. And many young couples are not having that second child because the day care and school expenses were so costly for the one kid. That will have a cumulative effect on population as time goes by, and the Boomers age and die.

UAW: Try really, really hard to use some common sense here. We all pay taxes for something called the common good...including schools for ALL kids. what about basic tenants of democracy do you not understand? You do not live on an island. You actually argue FOR an uneducated populace? You take selfishness to unbelievable heights. (and presumably only drive on the part of the road you pay for or the use the small part of the hospital you help pay for??) along with absolutely no sign of common sense, you clearly don't seem to have the remotest contact with fiscal reality. A "tax write off" wouldn't take care of a few weeks at day care let alone a year, (from a taxpayer who undoubtedly pays one heck of a lot more in taxes than you do and isn't whining about it.) You are beyond clueless.

Having a civilized society means that all of us pay for all sorts of things that we, personally, may never use. I've never called the police for help, but my taxes help to finance my town's police force. Should I complain about having to pay for OTHER people's calls for help? I've never needed the first department, either. Nor do I take public transportation, which also receives tax dollars in my town. My father has never entered a public library in his life, but his tax dollars help to support them.

We all work together to create a society for the benefit of all. It's easy to get worked up about those who are irresponsible, but that's not the majority. I think of it as a karma boost: one day maybe I am giving more, but another day I may end up needing to receive. You never know what's going to happen to you in this life.

Well sir, someone paid for your school and other civic needs as a child. It is your responsibility to repay that debt to the next generation. Also, who will pay for your social security and take care of you when you are old? One of the bright spots for America compared to its European friends is that we still have a decent growth. Without a new generation, a country is doomed.

There's no point in arguing with UAW, he/she makes the same complaint on this message board all the time, and many other posters have spent time trying to explain why public education benefits us all.

Hopefully you'll keep that independent attitude when those kids decide in the future they don't want to foot the bill for your SS and medicare.

We have two incomes but don't qualify for any childcare credits because of the way my wage is set up. I have a prestigious fellowship that pays a stipend, but not a wage, even though I pay taxes on it. So, we're paying $1100 a month for our infant in daycare with no benefit. I'm 34 and this is our first and we don't know if we can afford anymore. Sad, as we both have PhDs.

If poor people did not have children, then you wouldn't have anything to rant about. Ohh yeah I guess you would just pick something else to be pissed about. How long is your list exactly??

Any American, who has children, and filed a tax return, has taken government money for the support of this child or children. The poor are not the only ones accepting government money for their children. You are allowed a deduction on your tax return for each child, and allowed to deduct certain costs related to raising a child.

No Tweet. My family has never been able to take the deduction for our daughter. That tax credit disappears as one's income increases.

TWEET..... it is NOT the governments money.....you have it backward......a tax deduction for a child is the government not stealing more of YOUR money......

@Go USA: That's not true, plain and simple. When you file your tax return, everyone has the opportunity to take the standard deductions, one for yourself, one for your spouse, and one for each of your dependent children. If you're saying you're not getting the standard deduction for having the child, you're either 1) doing your taxes wrong or 2) lying.

Matt, she said the "tax credit" disappears which is something entirely different than the standard deductions. The tax credit is phased out as the income increases and is entirely phased our or used to be at about $130K. So she's not doing her taxes wrong or lying.

Dr. Jay... This story is about working mothers who are trying to not be poor. I am personally childless by choice, but I respect that others enjoy having children, and in this economy when half the population is considered poor people cannot put off having children on the hopes that some day they may be more financially stable, as that day will probably not come. Besides, a healthy economy depends on having more younger people to support the older ones. If only the rich had children and we stopped allowing immigrants to enter the country, we would have some serious problems.

The article talks about the costs of child care, but doesn't say if the costs were offset by the childcare tax credit or taxes avoided with deductions and childcare flexible spending accounts. Some states also give some income tax breaks for childcare.

In other words, were these gross or net costs?

mailman- in my area (likely average of what's available across the country), childcare can range from 100/week for 2 years and older at a home daycare, to close to 300/week for an infant in a center.

They also seem to think that no one had to pay for their education, or is it that they think they were never kids?

The bottom line is, people with several children pay NO TAXES.

Sam- they may not pay Federal taxes while their kids are under 18 if their income is under a certain level, but they'll be paying them before and after having those kids. They'll also be paying other taxes regardless- property tax (directly or as part of rent), sales tax, and likely some state income tax.

Sam: what planet do you live on that a modest tax deduction for children means you pay NO taxes?? Does you Bush tax cut mean you pay "NO" taxes?? Good quality daycare and its cost is not just an issue for the poor.

I love how no one notices those without children get punished in the form of higher tax burdens.

How about eliminating the deductions... I'll gladly pay my school taxes, as I believe public education is good for the body politic. I don't believe you should pay less just for having children.

I love the fact that people that have no children whine and complain about paying more taxes. Selfish much? Its probably a good thing you didn't have children....after all "its all about you."

@Just Me: So you're saying, it's wrong for people with no children to pay less taxes, but it's okay for people with children to pay less taxes? I'm just trying to get some transparency here.

The original poster stated that "she loves" how people without children complain about having to pay taxes that go toward children. I have no qualms about supporting children. My point is that everyone should pay the same, instead of the reverse which is currently used.

Matt, do you also feel the same about deductions on you mortgage interest? What about the renters, they don't get that deduction, is that wrong also?

@verno: I'm in favor of a simplification of the tax code. We could do quite well by ditching all the deductions and simplifying the code to reflect a flatter system, while not quite "flat." The complexity of our existing tax code (tens of thousands of pages) is what enables corporate loopholes and the corruption people complain about.

I'm with you Matt. Have a graduated tax (higher rates for higher incomes) but eliminate all the social-engineering deductions.

The government (which is the people) should not bribe persons or companies to have children, apply for mortgages, drill for oil, grow or not grow corn/cotton/soybeans, make ethanol, insulate houses, borrow money to invest, etc. etc. etc.

All of these may be desirable activities, but they should have their own rewards - economic or personal.

What a bunch of nonsense. I could ensure my "neighbors" kids are well-educated by taking all the tax dollars I contribute to a broken public school system, pooling it with like-minded neighbors and giving it to any random schoolteacher in the area to open up a schoolhouse out of their living room. Guarantee I'd get better results than what is currently being done laundering my taxes through the federal system only to land in a random DoE employee's classroom.

It's still government money. It helps a person, by allowing them to keep more money rather then pay a higher tax bill. It is still government help with the costs of raising a child.

The government does not go to my and my husband's jobs each day and put in 8 to 10 hours earning that money. If we all quit work, where would the government get money? It is our money that the government takes in taxes. Taxes are what the government takes to run society. Yes, to have social services like police, education, roads to drive, a safety net for the poor, military to protect our country, etc. we must all contribute and we do that through various taxes.

At some point, the government decided it was beneficial for this country to have strong families, therefore they decided people raising children could KEEP a bigger portion during the years they were raising them, because without any children, there is no future for the country.

I willingly pay my taxes, but let's get this straight, the government did not go to work for me and earn that money, I DID!

@EAE,

And the tax law said that I, as a single person with no children, must pay more of my income to provide services for you and your spawn.

I willingly pay my taxes, but let's get this straight. I went to work to earn that money just like you, but I get to keep less of it so that you can get a bigger refund. You're welcome.

Mailman

Then when your nursing home bills run more than your Social Security, and your 401K is used up, please do not expect my and other people's "spawn" to pay for your care with their taxes.

At some point we all need help, and at some point we all give help. That is life. If no one had kids except the very rich, we not only would not have a future generation to continue this country, but we would all be in a lot of trouble when we all get too old to work and care for ourselves!

Other people have to pay higher taxes to offset your lower taxes so you are getting government help.

BTW: by that faulty reasoning, everyone is getting "government help" if they are enjoying the Bush tax cut, the mortgage deduction, medical deductions, business deductions and on and on. YOU are getting "government help."

Also, remember that you are paying less than other people are to enjoy the use of interstates, protection of the military, weather reports, and everything else the government does, so, in a way, it is kind of government help, but not in the strictest definition.

Paddleboard: I agree with you 100%. Everyone likes to whine and complain about "poor people this and poor people that blah blah" and although I would not consider myself "poor" (more like lower-middle class) I really do appreciate all of those workers at restaurants/hotels/retail stores because I enjoy using their services. At least they are working.

I do not like when people abuse the welfare system by doing nothing their whole lives and living off the taxpayers...having kids and then abusing/abandoning them, etc...but these working poor let all the other Americans have decent lifestyles without it costing us too much. Every morning, I drive through the McD's drive-thru and get a Diet Dr. Pepper. It is my treat for the morning and it is a waste of money, but I can afford it and it makes my morning better at work. The workers at McD's are always very nice and polite to me and I know people yell at them and treat them like crap. I try to always show respect because they have a hard life, yet keep coming to a very low paying job and try to be nice to me.... thanks for your great post....

Well said, Paddleboard! Not everyone can be an upper-level executive (who would cut their grass and wash their windows?!). This idea that anyone who is not wildly successful and wealthy is some kind of loser who doesn't deserve to live, much less reproduce, is really pissing me off these days!

I went to college and make a good income. We are still living a frugal lifestyle due to expenses like daycare, private school, braces retirement savings, college savings, and the like.

The sad thing for this generation of little ones is a lack of opportunity. I came from very modest means and was able to achieve success. I don't think kids from a similar background have access to the same opportunities.

Rebecca: I too dislike people living off of welfare, but, you must consider that countries with better welfare systems have far less violent crime than the United States. I commute between Prague, Budapest, and Tampa, and I pay taxes in all three countries. I dislike that in Prague and Budapest a large number of people are getting paid by the government to do nothing, but I do appreciate the fact that violent crimes are extremely rare, to the point where a single murder will be on the front page of the newspapers for a month. In Tampa, the papers are filled with local murders.

So what is your point? If you can't pay for the kids...don't have them. You have a right to have kids, but you don't have a "right" to have your children paid for by me and my family. And are you going to be the one to tell Loquisha that 9 kids is ok but 10 isn't? If you can't pay for one, let it be a lesson to you and don't have 2.

sickened, that is the second time you have used the same implicitly racist reference in your posts. Please stop. For the good of civilized discourse, please, please stop. Minorities with what you clearly consider silly names are certainly NOT the only people who have children they cannot afford. I do not entirely agree with you hateful and simple minded point of view, but I'd be much more willing to listen to your drivel if you'd do away with the racism.

Wow, the Minneapolis area is costly. They seem to be competing with Frisco and NYC - don't blame you for being grumpy.

For a couple with kids, it must be a tough decision to take that second job. When the costs are all added - childcare, extra transportation and time hauling the kids to care, transportation/clothing/lunches/etc on the second job, extra taxes on the second income - it must be a really well-paying job to have any take-home money. And the remaining pittance must be balanced against all the intangibles of missing time with the family, no time for house chores, etc.

Actually, no one is complaining in the article. It's a set of statistics.

@Andrea: Nope. It's definitely the responsibility of those that can pay, to pay for those that can't. I'm pretty sure it's somewhere in the Constitution. Right, the 28th Amendment: Congress shall force people that are successful to pay for those that aren't, under the policy of Robin Hood.

I can think of worse ways to spend our money as taxpayers. If you prefer poor kids sit at home watching TV alone rather than spend a few bucks a year towards their daycare, consider it as an investment in cutting future costs. Studies indicate that the very best use of education dollars is in early childhood intervention/preschool. Google the Perry Preschool program, which followed poor kids from preschool to age 40. Poor kids who attended preschool were more likely to finish high school, be employed, own their home, have savings and remained married. There were less likely to commit crimes, be imprisoned or experience a teen pregnancy. Since you cannot sterilize the poor, consider this one way to cut down on your money being spent on them in later years.

Yes we can sterilize the poor. We just choose not to. To our society's detriment

Taking a deduction for a child IS government help - it is part of the social engineering built into our income tax system. And for people in higher brackets, it is a larger help (in dollars, not a percentage of gross income.) The more kids, the more deductions. The higher the bracket, the more each deduction is worth.

The same thing goes for the two mortgage deductions - the income tax system says that someone who owns a house is more valuable to society than a renter, so the mortgagors get some taxes back. And someone who owns two houses with a mortgage is even more honored.