Taxation in the United States
Not only when time comes to pay taxes but as a general statement, citizens are all categorized into one group or another. Stereotyping and generalities used to distinguish the similarities along with differences between certain groups or categories of people is necessary in establishing a personal identity. In the past, more than now, people sought to achieve identical and symbolic features in order to gain acceptance; if they could not, then they were cast out and typecast as weird. "More than now" entails this past half-century; due to the technological and industrial advancements throughout this entire past century, that collective mindset is too far removed than to dictate the bills we pay today. Focusing in on the alterations occuring since 1960, every aspect of United States fiscal principles and conceptualization of taxation have adjusted far more rapidly than ever throughout history to consider abiding by any concept of tradition.
Yet so many of the United States’ principles of taxation abide by these established, though obsolete, principles. Still. Times have changed, and so should the taxation of United States citizens. Luckily, the U.S. constitution will always accept changes, expansion, and readjustment; so our congress leaders simply need to be made aware of these archaic conventions which citizens must still abide all the same.
Since the late 1960’s and early 1970’s the high regard for individuation and distinct personal attributes began to hold a much higher regard than being in a large collection of people acting and reacting in herd-like fashion. So much so, in fact, that the opposite effect began holding stature in both the workforce and in all upper-division (college) school systems: the "odd-man-out" then became the person who mindlessly followed the herd rather than the trend-setter who acted on his or her own free-will. This is quite a drastic shift.
Despite that the term "society" demands to be seen for its societies just as well as for sake of the individual, taxation within the U.S. still maintains a traditional system. Therefore, every part of society must adhere to this same ideology.
Points of Concern
1. Single people typically have themselves to depend on for all money-matters. Taxation to-this-day dates back to a time when individuality was not nearly as recognized as it is now. Single men and women were classified as young and irresponsible and mariage was standardized with much greater emphasis, more importantly, the social outcast was the single person who was not adamantly striving to be married. Individual men and womendid not need money because they were understood as dependents of their parents. Any regard for individualism and independent identity truly did begin to be recognized within this past half-century.
2. Married people typically have two incomes. Simply put, they make more money, so they need to spend more money on taxes — at least on par with single people with children, regardless of marital status. This is a point of argumentation, but really… How many marriages have occured purely for sake of the tax write off? Count the show of hands after asking that question in a large group of sincerely honest people, hypothetically speaking of course, and well over half the crowd will have their hands raised high. Must we conform and unwillingly take place in a marriage solely in order to save on taxes any longer? Sure, this may seem harsh or abrupt or (God forbid!) radical, but in a very practical sense, far more marriages exist for far different reasons than what the institution of marriage exists to embrace. So marrital status should hold no bearing in individual taxation.
3. Single people need more of their own money because they usually have kids to pay for and only their income to rely on. And at a ridiculously taxed amount: up to 60% of earned income is pulled for taxes!
4. Married people payed fewer tax dollars back when the wife didn’t work and took care of the kids. The overwhelmingly greater majority of even married couples today both are employed.
5. The "bread winner" back then took on extra responsibility by being the sole provider and needed the extra money. Again, times have changed; priorities have changed; people have changed. Now, with more single parent families, the "bread winner" is having to pay more taxes and still survive on the one income, while also maintaining complete disregard as an individual.
6. Conclusion: Single people and married people should all be regarded as individuals and be taxed accordingly.
