Gay people hurts the economy.

[Raging-Mormon]

Let me just start by saying that I AM NOT A HOMOPHOBE.
Lets hope that will keep the banstick away from me long enough to make my case :)

Anyways in Denmark(my country of origin and residence) there are too many elderly people and too few between 18-65 that can pay taxes and genrally support the society. There are not being born enough children and therefor there will be even fewer taxpayers in the future to support a growing number of old people.

Gay couples do not give birth to whole lot of children and are therefor less useful to society than a heterosexual couple.

Prove me wrong or acknowledge my superior intellect.

(This is all in good fun and this topic is not meant to inflame HATE towards anybody. Im just bored)

[Imperator]

Prove me wrong or acknowledge my superior intellect.

Are children the sole product that stimulates economy?

It's pretty much the same here, our baby boomers are old now, and there ain't enough younguns to support them.

But homosexuality has very little with the economy, as a nation full of kids doesn't really work either (China).

More children doesn't = more money...........

[Lhotun]

What is your point? You basically said "the amount of elderly people" hurt the economy, and then you shifted the blame gay people. Besides, you could blame single people and infertile couples.

Besides, gay people pay taxes, so they seem to be a benefit to the situation.

What about couples that just choose not to have children? Will you force ever person in Denmark to have atleast one child?

I don't know where you're going with this.

[Raging-Mormon]

Well actually it does.

Alot of old(65+) people = huge government pensions

Alot of taxpayers = alot of tax

In Denmark we have:

Alot of old(65+) people + too few taxpayers = huge deficit

More children would also mean more taxpayers.

You get?

[thebigo1081]

At 2/15/06 09:28 PM, Raging_Mormon wrote: Well actually it does.

Alot of old(65+) people = huge government pensions

Alot of taxpayers = alot of tax

In Denmark we have:

Alot of old(65+) people + too few taxpayers = huge deficit

More children would also mean more taxpayers.

You get?

So would less old people. So start switching medications with cyanide. Or trick your muslim buddies into suicide-bombing some nursing homes. Kill two birds with one asshole, you know.

[Montgomery-Scott]

More kids means more unemployed little vandals sapping the state welfare system. More gay guys means more highly paid designers who are spending hundreds of dollars on nice clothes and K-Y Jelly.

[MoralLibertarian]

True. Let's ban gay-dom.

[Politics]

At 2/15/06 09:21 PM, Raging_Mormon wrote: Let me just start by saying that I AM NOT A HOMOPHOBE.

lolkw/e

What about the millions they sink into the turquoise market? :P

[WolvenBear]

At 2/15/06 09:21 PM, Raging_Mormon wrote: Let me just start by saying that I AM NOT A HOMOPHOBE.
Lets hope that will keep the banstick away from me long enough to make my case :)

Anyways in Denmark(my country of origin and residence) there are too many elderly people and too few between 18-65 that can pay taxes and genrally support the society. There are not being born enough children and therefor there will be even fewer taxpayers in the future to support a growing number of old people.

Gay couples do not give birth to whole lot of children and are therefor less useful to society than a heterosexual couple.

Prove me wrong or acknowledge my superior intellect.

(This is all in good fun and this topic is not meant to inflame HATE towards anybody. Im just bored)

OK, here's your proving wrong. More people DOES equal more tax money, but more children means less. A married couple with no children pays more than a married couple with 2 children. Each child is a tax write-off. So for 18 years or so, they give their parents tax breaks, until they even get a job to tax. Then usually it is an entry level job that doesn't pay them enough to tax. AND married hetero-sexuals get marriage breaks too.

However, if a gay couple lives together and can have no children, they get NO tax write off, meaning that they pay more money. Hell, since most of them don't even get married in your country, they don't take enough marriage tax breaks to even matter. However, single mothers, heterosexual usually, get shitloads of money from the government and drain the coffers like crazy.

Hell, by this logic STRAIGHT people are terrible for the taxing system, not gay ones.

[Shadic-1]

THey adopt children from places that have too many people. Problem solved.

[Gunter45]

At 2/15/06 09:21 PM, Raging_Mormon wrote: Gay couples do not give birth to whole lot of children and are therefor less useful to society than a heterosexual couple.

Well, I suppose that 0 constitutes "not a whole lot"

[crjohn3230]

i see your point but i dont really think its making too much sense

[DaRKNeZz1]

At 2/15/06 09:21 PM, Raging_Mormon wrote: Let me just start by saying that I AM NOT A HOMOPHOBE.
Lets hope that will keep the banstick away from me long enough to make my case :)

Anyways in Denmark(my country of origin and residence) there are too many elderly people and too few between 18-65 that can pay taxes and genrally support the society. There are not being born enough children and therefor there will be even fewer taxpayers in the future to support a growing number of old people.

Gay couples do not give birth to whole lot of children and are therefor less useful to society than a heterosexual couple.

Prove me wrong or acknowledge my superior intellect.

(This is all in good fun and this topic is not meant to inflame HATE towards anybody. Im just bored)

Well I can tell you actualy thought about this. But you're wrong, sorry. Population growth is only do to immigrants (including illiegal). If the U.S. right now closed all borders, had the borders lined with tanks and artillerey for a year. You would see that our birth rates are not high enough to grow in population.

Good try though.

[A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot]

Following the logic, the most valuable members of society are women who have as many children as possible, regardless of their ability to take care of them.

Furthermore, Alan Turing, the guy who cracked the Enigma Code, ultimately did more harm than good because he was a fag.

Q.E.D.

[bakem0n0]

At 2/15/06 09:21 PM, Raging_Mormon wrote: Gay couples do not give birth to whole lot of children and are therefor less useful to society than a heterosexual couple.

Of course! and also, we should illegalize bachelorhood, since unmarried people are less likely to have children, they are merely burdons to society.

Prove me wrong or acknowledge my superior intellect.

I do acknowledge your superior opinion of yourself and inferior intelligence.

[Jose]

Considering gay couples often adopt. They are getting taking childing from the government and paying for their living. That is definately a benifit to the economy. Even if they don't adopt, they usually have more of a spending lifestyle, wbich pumps money back into the economy. Are those two good reasons?

[Evark]

Why stop at gay people? Those with infertility, all those under 10, priests (and all other members of a celebate order), any male with a vasectomy, and any female taking birth control hurt the economy.

If they can't or aren't interested in conceiving children, they're useless to society.

Let's turn it around using some stereotypes. Gay people stimulate the economy. They create another sub-genre of the largest media industry earth has to offer--pornography. They enjoy home decorating, fashion, health/beauty products and the like. Gays don't have to save anything for a wedding because for the most part they aren't allowed. Gays stimulate activists and hatred, which in turn raises sales of guns and other lynching materials. Gays are often disowned by their parents, which forces them into a longer worklife that starts earlier in their life. It's really all benefits, economically.

[Nevyn]

So, by not allowing them to marry, they will magicly turn into heteros, marry a woman, and have many, many children, for the good of society? I think not. If you don't allow them to marry, they still don't make children. They're just, you know, pissed of and un-married...

[Evark]

At 2/16/06 03:14 PM, AustrianSnowAngel wrote: oh my god. evark you live in massachusetts? suddenly i'm not so lonely anymore.

Yes. Hot BaKshi sex.