Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
Professor Alesina now asking Obama for "man tax" in U.S.
Submitted by Matt on Mon, 2008-10-20 00:48
Via Marc A.: Some MRAs think I have overstated the threat of a "man tax" in the U.S. Well, maybe so. But here it is again. Professor Alesina is now calling for Obama to implement it. My posted comment:
'Alesina's "man tax" theory was debunked by one of Europe's most prominant labor economists, Professor Gilles Saint Paul, in his article, "Against gender based taxation: Abolishing equality before the law is wrong and dangerous." http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/922
Alesina also ignores people's right to equal treatment. Article 2 of the United Nations universal declaration of human rights says "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race . . . sex . . . ."
Apparently Alesina doesn't think that matters much.
In fact he treats humans as "goods of sale" and forgets that people have a fundamental human right to equal treatment regardless of their sex
Men already pay more taxes than women, work 90% of overtime, make about 90% of occupational deaths, drive longer commutes and die younger in the process. They collect Alesina's garbage, climb in his sewers and get exposed to chemicals so he can go to his ivory tower job and propose taxing men more. His man tax is nothing short of outright sexism, hypocrisy, double standards and bigotry.
The "pay gap," which Alesino uses to justify his man tax, is actually not about male privilege at all but a reflection of the female privilege of having more choices than men. In his book, "Why Men Earn More," Dr. Warren Farrell shows that in recent polls women prioritized flexibility, less hours and shorter commutes while men prioritized money, that never-married and childless women earn 17 percent more than never-married men with the same education, and that women outearn men in 39 occupations including aerospace engineering, financial analysis and speech pathology. Women are choosing to retain their option of being primary parent and are even choosing men who earn more to allow them to make that decision. Prof. June O'Neill, Ph.D., former director of Congressional Budget Office, refutes the significance of the "pay gap" in "The Gender Gap in Wages, circa 2000" (5/03), American Economic Review.'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
He teaches at Harvard
Big surprise there.
http://ws1.ad.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/alesina/
Hmm
You think there is building resentment towards women due to their privileges now? If they would pass this I'm sure it would double, the children thing is in part to most mom's need to control everything with the child anyway. And they take care of their parents in part because they live longer. Not all.
Men take home 23-cents-an-hour more
Men take home 23-cents-an-hour more
only 23 cents?
I would think it would be higher.
As Steve Moxon has shown, the fact that the wage gap is not higher, is evidence of discrimination against men. This fits right in with Farrell's observations.
-ax
WOW!
Read the comments. No one's buying it! In fact, two women took the time to reject the idea on the basis that it's discriminatory. One of them made a point about the single father, and the man who's taking care of his parents, and how this policy wouldn't help him out cause he's a man, and that's wrong. Another said that the idea was 'BS' and that Alesina's idea is not for equality but preferential treatment. What does it tell you about a policy that benefits women when women take the time to debunk it?
Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!
Except
That one woman who constantly post with personal examples of a minority of the minority that would benefit. Of course this is complete disregard of the consequences to anyone else, but what else is new with selfish gynocentric points of view? Reminds me of that woman from "The Mist" that through inculcation ended up "christening" the whole store after a week or so.
Increase taxes on women, not men
As Marc notes, men already more in taxes than women. That's true because men earn more but also because tax law favors women. A single mom can usually take exemptions for the children, head of household, EITC, child care, etc., etc. Any child support she receives is tax free. A single dad, unless he's got custody, pays taxes on CS and usually cannot take the other deductions.
In addition, men are more likely to pay when a couple dates, marries, or divorces (child support, alimony, and divorce settlements--think Heather Mills). The flow of money is from men to women.
Women are more likely to more in social benefits, aka welfare. (At least in the US.) And as they're likely to outlive men, they also receive more in social security and medicare benefits, though they pay less in. In addition, women are more likely to receive life insurance benefits and spousal inheritances--again, because they usually outlive men.
So it makes more sense to increase taxes on women, not on men. Yes, men earn more but they also pay more than their fair share. Time for women to step up and should their fair share of the tax burden.
Our Reward
This is it, guys. This is our reward for working longer hours, more overtime, and more dangerous jobs. Not only do we receive much less return in our taxes paid (less research on male-specific diseases, etc), some people believe that we should be taxed even MORE for it! This blatantly unconstitutional idea should be taken out back and shot.
India already has that
A man earning 200,000 rupess pays more tax then woman earning 200,000 rupees
and his net income becomes 10% less then her
This will come to pass. The Man Tax will be realized.
Men will continue to bow to their masters. Unless they finally gather the nerve to overthrow them.
I see some cheerleaders for women here "happy" because one woman said something remotely in favor of men.
Until I see scores of women rejecting misandry and marching against nonsense such as this I count them as trojan horses attempting to "appear fair."