Marriage Tax Breaks

[eFestivals]

Its harder to walk away from a marriage than just cohabiting

so after saying that you're not talking about coercion or force, you now get to show that that is indeed exactly what you're meaning.

[lifelessfool]

I think the whole concept of giving benefits to those that are married absolutely ludicrous, on the surface it's a really really shallow cut, which just means money has to be taken from elsewhere, but the entire principle is ridiculous, I have one auntie and uncle whom never married and have been together 25 years and have no desire to get married, how is it the governments place to suggest this is wrong, as though people whom are married are some how living in a more superior manner. i have no idea how marriage affects children growing up, I know for certain when I was younger I had no idea why my mum and dad were married arguing and the like all the time. For me its just putting an official stamp on something that doesn't need to be stamped.

[eFestivals]

If the child has only known a single parent family then I would agree...

the evidence gets to prove that it's no less true where the child hasn't only known a single parent family too.

But then other consequences of that come to the surface in the vast majority of cases. But thats a different thread.

Not only is it a different thread it's a different subject entirely, nothing at all to do with the parent's commitment to their child.

If the parents are committed to the child then there is zero damage to the child by its parents being married or not.

[eFestivals]

Not at all... While there is some temporary blocks.... Finishing your marriage is an option for anyone...

and that 'block' is a force.

[lifelessfool]

Just because the government says Marriage is a positive / good thing / promotes it... However you want to label it... doesn't make every other family setup default wrong....

[kaosmark2]

I think people seeing marriage being promoted could have a difference. The government can do that via a tax break. The value won't make a difference, its just the way the state can show support.

I don't believe everyone should get married. I think every couple should consider it.

Nothing at all... Good luck to them!

[kaosmark2]

Asking someone to consider marriage isn't a force.... in my opinion...

[kaosmark2]

I think you have a point with equality point of view...

[eFestivals]

I don't think they are saying being in a cohabiting committed relationship is wrong...

... but they are saying it makes you less worthy of being thought of as properly good and so deserving of govt support than if you're married.

[eFestivals]

"Some"...

Its only as outdated as much as people want it to be outdated....

yep - such as you and Dave Moron for example, who are unable to consider non-married committed relationships to be on the same level of commitment as a married non-committed relationship.

[kaosmark2]

Some people get married for the 'event', with less of a commitment to the relationship than many

non married couples.

The assumption that getting married is a symbol of commitment is simply out dated

[eFestivals]

spin

says the man who along with Dave Moron is spinning a fact about marriage into something that it gives absolutely no proof about.

How many times does it need saying? There is absolutely NOTHING to support the idea that if more people got married the world would be a better place.

A fact about marriage as it happens today only says something about the people who get married today. It says absolutely naff all about what might happen if more people than currently do were to get married.

Will you accept that you're spinning an idea that's been spun to you by a spin doctor called Dave? Or will you continue to say that it'll do what you claim despite there being absolutely no evidence to support that idea?

[eFestivals]

I believe people who have married have taken took extra steps to ratify, declare and bring others into their commitments than the majority of none married couples.

none of which makes them IN REALITY more committed, it only makes them look more of a tit if they later split.

As that is the default start of a marriage where as none married couples don't do any of this by default.

And? None of that proves any real commitment nor maintains a commitment.

Commitment comes only thru being committed. A piece of paper or telling your friends makes no difference to this.

[fred quimby]

I'll just add that I don't mind if the Goverment bung me £150, in fact I'm more than happy to take it

[eFestivals]

What sort of evidence do you want ?

one itoa would be a good starting point, rather than none at all.

After all, you've said this....

... that is more likely, proven statistics, to help your family work...

... when those statistics prove no such thing.

Its about morals, opinions and feelings...

So not about "proven statistics" after all then? We're getting somewhere.

So, now you've accepted that there are not the "proven statistics" which say what you claim they do, we get to the heart of things, the real reasons.

So: please do tell me how two people who are fully committed to each other become further committed by getting married? Can you? Or will you run around in circles again until you finally admit that you can't get more committed than 100%, marriage or no marriage? That would strike a line thru the 'opinions' bit there.

And then we move onto feelings - the feelings that you said you had evidence for, but now admit that you don't. So that's a strike-out too.

So we're left with 'morals', where you can't show that your own morals of 'people should be married' is anything better.

Are you done now?

[eFestivals]

I sometimes think you try your very best to totally lack understanding of what someone else is saying...

Your view of marriage is CLEARLY out of step with mine... Its not about commitment, its about ties, responsibilities, support...

You have a limited view of marriage and what it means, this is clear to me from your ramblings...

"its about ties, responsibilities, support..."

Care to tell me how those things are absent in any way from a committed non-married relationship?

I have a REAL view of marriage and what it means, a real view that realises that a bit of paper makes absolutely no difference to the commitment two people have to each other.

[kaosmark2]

I said pages back that my opinion is based on statistics, experiences and other expert analysis.

For me you can join the dots that if more married people stick together than cohabiting families than that is more often creating stable family units, and more happy children. You take a different view.

But it is an opinion with statical backing.

I don't have the numbers, but I reckon if you look at a range of factors, success in the work place, crime, etc you will find kids from stable married background out perform other groups...

Its all evidence... But you don't like or trust the evidence which is your choice...

I can't help some people sticking there head in the sands

[lifelessfool]

I'll just add that I don't mind if the Goverment bung me £150, in fact I'm more than happy to take it

[kaosmark2]

Oh there are loads of factors and children from stabled married couples always seem to come out well...

What a bastard people are for suggesting more people should think about it

Its like when we have to pretend one parent is as good as two parents... Its just goes against all the facts and logical thought anyone could muster.

Each to there own I suppose. Glad the government at least recognise a good thing we they see it.

[kaosmark2]

Well of course not always...

[fred quimby]

I wish they would pay me £150 but i'm far too busy adding to the JK population by swinging it around on the weekends

[kaosmark2]

To forgive me for not proof reading everything I write... I read around enough of the bollocks of what you write...

[eFestivals]

This idea you can look to the past to see what the future would be is stupid as well...

what, you mean like taking some historical stats about marriage and spinning them into something they never are able to demonstrate anyway, that more people getting married would be a good thing?

Which I think is what Neil is trying to do throughout this to show more married people equals higher failure rates.

It's not something I've done "throughout".

But it's certainly the case that the stats for marriage show that marriage has got more successful in recent years, the same years where fewer people feel an obligation to get married because of the reduced pressure from society to do so.

That's called using a stat properly, because the assumption made from that stat is information from within the stats .... which isn't the case with the assumption you're making from your stat, because your stat is not able to say what happens outside of what it's looked at to come up with the stat. You have a stat for people that are married, but that can tell you nothing of what happens if those currently outside of those stats become included thru getting married.

But hey, in the absence of any data, why not make it up out of nothing? Oh, you already have.

So much has changed since the 50/60/70s...

The fall in the 'success' of marriage followed by the rise in the 'success' of marriage (by people staying together) is something statistically documented right up until last year. Marriage is the same thing that it always was - and so the only change can be from people's perceptions on marriage.

The stats get to show that nowadays a greater proportion of the 'right' people to get married are getting married, and that a greater proportion of the types that shouldn't get married are not getting married.

With things showing such a steady improvement towards marriage - the stats don't lie - wtf would anyone want to change things aside from gross stupidity (or religion, which is the same thing)?

Marriage is a different deal now then it was then...

The people who get married now are predominately those people who REALLY want to get married, and the result from that is a growing success for marriage.

Far fewer people now get married for the spurious reason of an expectation by society of getting married, and which were the marriages most likely to fail.

Which of those is the thing you're wanting to bring back, and you believe would be an improvement?

[kaosmark2]

Going in circles here...

Its not direct proof but its supporting evidence... It hardly a thumbs up for cohabiting....

[lifelessfool]

Need it for all the kids the CSA are chasing him over