Skip to content

Research finds that as a group, only men pay taxes

November 3, 2016

Research finds that as a group, only men are nett tax payers (something many of us knew 30 years ago)

(Research by Nicolas Kilsdonk-Gervais, October 14, 2016) – fowarded by George Piskor (Canada)

This new article by Nicolas Kilsdonk-Gervais and based on New Zealand findings [1] serves to reiterate the basic fact that women cost the state far more than men and what they pay in taxes is far less than they claim back in benefits and subsidies d schemers. Since the 1990s British and American statistics have shown that women, as a category, cost far more than they contribute, contribute less than men, and need far more subsidies than men.

The Kilsdonk-Gervais article is a summary of a far larger in depth analysis by both New Zealand Treasury officials and academics (eg Omar Aziz – Treasury; Norman Gemmell – Victoria University of Wellington), entitled “ The Distribution of Income and Fiscal Incidence by Age and Gender: Some Evidence from New Zealand.” Published on April 30, 2013 it utilises data from the New Zealand ‘Household Expenditure Survey’ (HES)  for 2010. It also includes a breakdown by age and gender of the dimensions of income distribution and fiscal incidence (how much each category pays and claims).

 

Legions of feminists will ferociously advocateSmash the patriarchy!” As they chatter among themselves at feel-good Internet rallies comfortably cocooned by their ‘group think’ they call for the end of the male supremacy in all spheres of life. Yet, few of them are aware, let alone acknowledge the fact, that one of these supposed spheres of male supremacy, government (yes, the very institution that grants them their rights and privileges), is entirely supported by male taxpayers.

Economically, women cost more to the state than they benefit. Put another way, the government (or men) is literally paying women to be alive. Strong independent women are only that way because the state is transferring money from men to them. Feminists are not seriously against being dependent on men, they are just against men having the full control over their money.

If you want to explore the intricacies, click on  http://ssrn.com/abstract=2375926 to see the New Zealand data

The real gender gap: the tax gap

While the 77¢ for a dollar wage gap has been under the spotlight for the past years, the 200¢ for a dollar tax gap has, to my knowledge never been mentioned, at least not by our supreme feminist leaders Barack Obama and Justin Trudeau. A quick glimpse at the data (Fig 5 below) reveals a massive difference in taxes paid by men and women.

newz1

The first thing that comes to mind is that half of women might be at home raising kids. However, the workforce participation rate gap between men and women doesn’t seem to exceed 10% in either age group. (see figure 4 in source)

The second thing that may come to mind as a confounding factor is that women spend more for children in education and health. Nope. No support for that either. Men and women spend approximately the same amount in both education and health (see figure 10 and 11 of the source).

In nearly all age groups, women receive more tax (by way of subsidy or benefits) than they give.

With the exception of the age group between 45-59 (a 15 year span) years old, women cost more to the state than the tax they provide. In contrast, men generate more tax revenue than they cost between 23 and 65 (a 43 year span). In the brief period in which women generate more or as much tax money than they consume, men out-score them by at least 3 times.

newz2By the end of her life, the average woman will have a negative fiscal impact of $150,000 (see Fig 17 below).

By in large, the cumulative tax money given to women outweighs the tax money generated by women. The short period of positive impact of women between 45 and 59 is countered by 65 other years in which their allocated tax expenditure is more than what they supply the state

Men, on the other hand, appear to have a positive cumulative net fiscal impact from approximately 40 until 80 years of age (see Fig 17 below). For these particular taxes and public expenditures, the net fiscal incidence on men is approximately zero when cumulated over all ages. (p. 22)

Overall, the research suggests that male taxpayers are the only ones to ever have a positive contribution in taxes. Based on Figure 17, the closest that the average woman will come to having a positive fiscal incidence is when she is at minus $50,000 around 55 years of age. While feminists are demonizing men for benefiting from all liberties and rights they have constructed, they have oddly remained silent over the fact that anonymous male tax payers are paying women to exist. Read that sentence again.

newz3The fact that feminists want a stronger government is not a coincidence. While historically, women had to choose a wealthy husband for resources, they can now stay single, be lesbians, marry a poor man, or use the sperm bank, and the state will still transfer male taxes to them. Interestingly, within 10 years of women’s suffrage, the government doubled their tax revenue and expenditure in the USA. The government has somehow become the new providing husband, by taking money from anonymous men who have no say about their money. While women are still strongly financially dependent on men, men are simply unable to use the money they make for their own interests.

These findings show just how simplistic the notion of privilege is. While men make more on average, it allows women to have access to education, health, and services. The patriarchy is pretty generous after all.

Postscript; However with the advent of Tromp as the next US President, is rampant political correctnesss about to be relegated to the back seat and will all this largesse finally come to an end ?

E N D

 

References:

[1] “The Distribution of Income and Fiscal Incidence by Age and Gender: Some Evidence from New Zealand.” Published April 30th 2013  http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=090103100025097122122126094007067127036021052020003021097012120098072089095111085067107009018111044039116068003097004015026018030078032034039077091118026099013066031049073020031090065068094025001007006027010113007015108030009112091123104067015022122&EXT=pdf

 

Advertisements
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: