Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos
I don't know. Maybe we shouldn't. I don't think they do anything anyway.
But if one group (for example, heterosexual couples) get them, another group (homosexual couples) should get the same deal. It's only fair, after all.
As for the added burden for singles, I'm one of them and I don't really care. It's such a tiny consideration, in the grand scheme of things, that I don't worry about it.
|
Perhaps your underestimating the impact. Your paying medical insurance at an higher rate to help subsidies a marriage partner and any children they have. I would imagine you are paying about a third more than you would if those considerations didn't exist. Any retirement plan your company might have would also have those inflated premiums. Taxes probably cost you a couple extra thousand than it would if you didn't have the benefit. More if you figure the spousal benefits paid by our government to it's employees and vets.
Your losing all this money and don't even see a reason that this special group gets these benefits. What makes your position even more ironic is that you are here defending another groups right to belly up to the same trough. Right?