Overheard at the LFGSS golf club bar

Breeders pay all the tax. Non-breeders no tax.
Hedonism kills off non-breeders sooner.
Parents that can't afford childcare have their babies plugged into the matrix or turned into Soylent Green. The planet will thank us. I see no obvious drawbacks.
Mmm soylent

Or shall we go brave new world?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K4J90s1A2M

No need for that, when you can sell your child to a workhouse.

So the only children left alive are private school kids fed on the mulched up remains of poorer people?

Sounds sensible.

No, because the greedy won't want to waste money on gross children and the tax burden.

Just the people that really want kids will cop the tax. It's foolproof I tell ya!

On the downside, there will be fewer young people bothering to do competitive sport, so Valverde will never retire.

We now have a thread for this kind of chatter.

This thread is for jealousy and incredulity that people make different choices than you do.

Will middle class parents give up their less able child?

I have A Modest Proposal for that.

Only if those choices are more expensive than the ones you've made right? I still get to reverse snobbery all of Dammit's purchases in here, yeah?

Coffee #2 first or shit #1 first?

The eternal first world problem.

Damn right god @dammit

My new idea is to ban private schools, tax all parent per child they have and put it all towards education.

Labour's proposal to take away their charitable status to raise additional funds for state schools is a pretty good one.

There's no legitimate argument for their charitable status.

Breeders pay all the tax. Non-breeders no tax.

Here is a politician who talks my language!

Why should I subsidise other people's questionable environmentally damaging lifestyle choices when I could be spending the money on bike parts or nice things for my house?

Because we need young people to pay our pensions when we're retired.

Yes. Pension payments should be index-linked to the number of children you have. Capped at a maximum of 3, of course - want to keep it fair.

Because we need young people to pay our pensions when we're retired.

And that right there, is the main reason why the UK government has encouraged high immigration levels. Migrants are usually young net contributors to the economy. When you've got an ageing population with expensive long term conditions and a multi trillion pound pension deficit, encouraging working age people to your country and in turn hoping they have kids (who then spend their lives working and contributing as citizens), is much easier than getting your native population to have more children.

Either that or fuck the plebs and change the retirement age to 80.

Exactly, tax all income streams so that being retired early is punitive or at least contributing as much tax as if you were still employed up until retirement age.

But then boomers would have nothing to talk about.

Will middle class parents give up their less able child?

No true middle class parent believes their child is below average!

Preach.

This is why people still get wet for grammar schools.

Oh yeah, that's it! Knew there was something.

Keep having children pls so I don't have to.

People’s ability to self evaluate is utterly atrocious. This is why 85% of drivers think they are better than average and why 35% of drivers are utterly unaware how shit they are.

dunningkruger.gif