Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
UCGal
Participant[quote=patb][quote=UCGal]
I’m active on a “mom’s message board”… It’s about 70 women who all have kids born the same month/year… from 4 different countries.
On that board the number of families with 4 or more kids is greater than the number of families with just 1 child. So… based on this VERY limited data source (so really useless….[/quote]
selection bias.
It’s a group of women who want to be moms and want to have kids and
want to hang out with other moms.The census numbers are very straightforward.
How about the tons of women who just aren’t marrying
or the ones not having kids.[/quote]
I agree it’s selection bias. I think I even pointed it out.Participant[quote=patb][quote=UCGal]
I’m active on a “mom’s message board”… It’s about 70 women who all have kids born the same month/year… from 4 different countries.
On that board the number of families with 4 or more kids is greater than the number of families with just 1 child. So… based on this VERY limited data source (so really useless….[/quote]
selection bias.
It’s a group of women who want to be moms and want to have kids and
want to hang out with other moms.The census numbers are very straightforward.
How about the tons of women who just aren’t marrying
or the ones not having kids.[/quote]
I agree it’s selection bias. I think I even pointed it out.Participant[quote=jstoesz]
My personal favorite it to get rid of the income, payroll tax, and corporate income tax etc. and replace it with only a consumption tax like the european VAT applied to all levels of spending corporate and individual equally.
[/quote]Some questions on how this would work for corporations and families:
– would the cost of labor be taxed… Most corporations spend a good deal on salaries, benefits… would this be taxed? (This is a huge paradigm shift – pretty much the opposite of the current taxation where these costs reduced the taxable income.) Buying new equipment or building a new factory – would that be taxed?
– would *everything* you buy be taxed. So if I buy a CD or a savings bond or a share of stock – it’s taxed. If I buy a house, it’s taxed. If I buy a cup of coffee, or a plane ticket, it’s taxed? How about paying tax on my utilies… since that’s consumption too.It’s an interesting idea… as long as it’s applied uniformly… but somehow I don’t see this EVERY happening. There would be exclusions for some things, and not for others. I just don’t see how this could ever happen in a fair, consistent manner.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]
My personal favorite it to get rid of the income, payroll tax, and corporate income tax etc. and replace it with only a consumption tax like the european VAT applied to all levels of spending corporate and individual equally.
[/quote]Some questions on how this would work for corporations and families:
– would the cost of labor be taxed… Most corporations spend a good deal on salaries, benefits… would this be taxed? (This is a huge paradigm shift – pretty much the opposite of the current taxation where these costs reduced the taxable income.) Buying new equipment or building a new factory – would that be taxed?
– would *everything* you buy be taxed. So if I buy a CD or a savings bond or a share of stock – it’s taxed. If I buy a house, it’s taxed. If I buy a cup of coffee, or a plane ticket, it’s taxed? How about paying tax on my utilies… since that’s consumption too.It’s an interesting idea… as long as it’s applied uniformly… but somehow I don’t see this EVERY happening. There would be exclusions for some things, and not for others. I just don’t see how this could ever happen in a fair, consistent manner.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]
My personal favorite it to get rid of the income, payroll tax, and corporate income tax etc. and replace it with only a consumption tax like the european VAT applied to all levels of spending corporate and individual equally.
[/quote]Some questions on how this would work for corporations and families:
– would the cost of labor be taxed… Most corporations spend a good deal on salaries, benefits… would this be taxed? (This is a huge paradigm shift – pretty much the opposite of the current taxation where these costs reduced the taxable income.) Buying new equipment or building a new factory – would that be taxed?
– would *everything* you buy be taxed. So if I buy a CD or a savings bond or a share of stock – it’s taxed. If I buy a house, it’s taxed. If I buy a cup of coffee, or a plane ticket, it’s taxed? How about paying tax on my utilies… since that’s consumption too.It’s an interesting idea… as long as it’s applied uniformly… but somehow I don’t see this EVERY happening. There would be exclusions for some things, and not for others. I just don’t see how this could ever happen in a fair, consistent manner.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]
My personal favorite it to get rid of the income, payroll tax, and corporate income tax etc. and replace it with only a consumption tax like the european VAT applied to all levels of spending corporate and individual equally.
[/quote]Some questions on how this would work for corporations and families:
– would the cost of labor be taxed… Most corporations spend a good deal on salaries, benefits… would this be taxed? (This is a huge paradigm shift – pretty much the opposite of the current taxation where these costs reduced the taxable income.) Buying new equipment or building a new factory – would that be taxed?
– would *everything* you buy be taxed. So if I buy a CD or a savings bond or a share of stock – it’s taxed. If I buy a house, it’s taxed. If I buy a cup of coffee, or a plane ticket, it’s taxed? How about paying tax on my utilies… since that’s consumption too.It’s an interesting idea… as long as it’s applied uniformly… but somehow I don’t see this EVERY happening. There would be exclusions for some things, and not for others. I just don’t see how this could ever happen in a fair, consistent manner.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]
My personal favorite it to get rid of the income, payroll tax, and corporate income tax etc. and replace it with only a consumption tax like the european VAT applied to all levels of spending corporate and individual equally.
[/quote]Some questions on how this would work for corporations and families:
– would the cost of labor be taxed… Most corporations spend a good deal on salaries, benefits… would this be taxed? (This is a huge paradigm shift – pretty much the opposite of the current taxation where these costs reduced the taxable income.) Buying new equipment or building a new factory – would that be taxed?
– would *everything* you buy be taxed. So if I buy a CD or a savings bond or a share of stock – it’s taxed. If I buy a house, it’s taxed. If I buy a cup of coffee, or a plane ticket, it’s taxed? How about paying tax on my utilies… since that’s consumption too.It’s an interesting idea… as long as it’s applied uniformly… but somehow I don’t see this EVERY happening. There would be exclusions for some things, and not for others. I just don’t see how this could ever happen in a fair, consistent manner.
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids?
Josh[/quote]Taking a stab at this. One woman’s thinking…
We chose to have 2. In part because we prefered our kids have the experience of having to compromise with siblings… not being the sole focus of our attention, etc. My husband is from a large Italian family – one of six. I was from a typical WASP family – one of 3.
We might have gone for #3 to get the elusive “girl baby”… but I was too damn old for that. 2 was the max.
Hubster did not have kids (nor was married) – and is 10 years older than me. And I am/was old. I was 39 when I had my oldest, 41 for my younger son. We didn’t meet till I was 37… and that courtship, marriage, getting knocked up thing took a year. LOL.
I know I had set my limit at 2. period. But my husband almost convinced me to go for #3… I pointed out that boys run in his family (he has 4 brothers). So… no dice.
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids?
Josh[/quote]Taking a stab at this. One woman’s thinking…
We chose to have 2. In part because we prefered our kids have the experience of having to compromise with siblings… not being the sole focus of our attention, etc. My husband is from a large Italian family – one of six. I was from a typical WASP family – one of 3.
We might have gone for #3 to get the elusive “girl baby”… but I was too damn old for that. 2 was the max.
Hubster did not have kids (nor was married) – and is 10 years older than me. And I am/was old. I was 39 when I had my oldest, 41 for my younger son. We didn’t meet till I was 37… and that courtship, marriage, getting knocked up thing took a year. LOL.
I know I had set my limit at 2. period. But my husband almost convinced me to go for #3… I pointed out that boys run in his family (he has 4 brothers). So… no dice.
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids?
Josh[/quote]Taking a stab at this. One woman’s thinking…
We chose to have 2. In part because we prefered our kids have the experience of having to compromise with siblings… not being the sole focus of our attention, etc. My husband is from a large Italian family – one of six. I was from a typical WASP family – one of 3.
We might have gone for #3 to get the elusive “girl baby”… but I was too damn old for that. 2 was the max.
Hubster did not have kids (nor was married) – and is 10 years older than me. And I am/was old. I was 39 when I had my oldest, 41 for my younger son. We didn’t meet till I was 37… and that courtship, marriage, getting knocked up thing took a year. LOL.
I know I had set my limit at 2. period. But my husband almost convinced me to go for #3… I pointed out that boys run in his family (he has 4 brothers). So… no dice.
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids?
Josh[/quote]Taking a stab at this. One woman’s thinking…
We chose to have 2. In part because we prefered our kids have the experience of having to compromise with siblings… not being the sole focus of our attention, etc. My husband is from a large Italian family – one of six. I was from a typical WASP family – one of 3.
We might have gone for #3 to get the elusive “girl baby”… but I was too damn old for that. 2 was the max.
Hubster did not have kids (nor was married) – and is 10 years older than me. And I am/was old. I was 39 when I had my oldest, 41 for my younger son. We didn’t meet till I was 37… and that courtship, marriage, getting knocked up thing took a year. LOL.
I know I had set my limit at 2. period. But my husband almost convinced me to go for #3… I pointed out that boys run in his family (he has 4 brothers). So… no dice.
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids?
Josh[/quote]Taking a stab at this. One woman’s thinking…
We chose to have 2. In part because we prefered our kids have the experience of having to compromise with siblings… not being the sole focus of our attention, etc. My husband is from a large Italian family – one of six. I was from a typical WASP family – one of 3.
We might have gone for #3 to get the elusive “girl baby”… but I was too damn old for that. 2 was the max.
Hubster did not have kids (nor was married) – and is 10 years older than me. And I am/was old. I was 39 when I had my oldest, 41 for my younger son. We didn’t meet till I was 37… and that courtship, marriage, getting knocked up thing took a year. LOL.
I know I had set my limit at 2. period. But my husband almost convinced me to go for #3… I pointed out that boys run in his family (he has 4 brothers). So… no dice.
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids? UCGal does your quick tally break down kids/family by nationality or age?
I’ve never felt any pressure to have kids, but most people seem to. I’m just curious what drives the number they envision having.
Josh[/quote]Married younger correlates to more kids. There are a couple of us older moms that skew it to fewer kids (and hence some of the secondary infertility).
Nationality – the vast majority of the members of that board are US Citizens, Caucasian (although some are in mixed race marriages). The Canadians, Icelandic, and Israeli members have 3 or less kids.
Education also seems to be a factor. The younger moms who have lots of kids also have less education, on average. This is a pretty educated group considering it started as a Parents Place Expecting club board (and migrated to a private board years ago).
We have one member who has no kids… she’s friends with one of the other members.
Keep in mind – this is not a typical cross section. These women all have kids (with one exception) That’s our common bond… 8 year olds. (Wow – that community has been together for 9 years now… we formed when we were preggers.) It’s not a cross section because it’s made up of women of child bearing age who chose to have children who are computer literate and have access to the internet. That skews it towards middle class breeders.
Does that answer your question?
Participant[quote=barnaby33]I’d be curious to know why woemen chose to have x or y kids? UCGal does your quick tally break down kids/family by nationality or age?
I’ve never felt any pressure to have kids, but most people seem to. I’m just curious what drives the number they envision having.
Josh[/quote]Married younger correlates to more kids. There are a couple of us older moms that skew it to fewer kids (and hence some of the secondary infertility).
Nationality – the vast majority of the members of that board are US Citizens, Caucasian (although some are in mixed race marriages). The Canadians, Icelandic, and Israeli members have 3 or less kids.
Education also seems to be a factor. The younger moms who have lots of kids also have less education, on average. This is a pretty educated group considering it started as a Parents Place Expecting club board (and migrated to a private board years ago).
We have one member who has no kids… she’s friends with one of the other members.
Keep in mind – this is not a typical cross section. These women all have kids (with one exception) That’s our common bond… 8 year olds. (Wow – that community has been together for 9 years now… we formed when we were preggers.) It’s not a cross section because it’s made up of women of child bearing age who chose to have children who are computer literate and have access to the internet. That skews it towards middle class breeders.
Does that answer your question?
-
AuthorPosts
