- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,149
- Reaction score
- 24
- Location
- trackside
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Keep in mind that this is merely playing devil's advocate and that I, personally DO support same-sex marriage.
I have a theory and/or theories about why this is a sticky subject in Washington and a fervent issue with GW. It all boils down to economics.
Currently, there are 298, 947, 481 people in the US. Of these, married people number approx. 57,000,000. Married couples are entitled to: reduced health care costs, reduced income tax, spousal pension and life insurance benefits.
Now, consider that estimates state approx 10% of our population is gay. That would number 29.8 million. If the same number, percentage-wise gets married, that would be about 5 million. Those couples also would reap the benefits of reduced healthcare costs, reduced income tax, spousal pensions and life insurance benefits.
This would mean that employers of these gay people would have to pay out for their spouses, a 'perk' they have had in terms of pensions, healthcare and life insurances.
Who does our president most cater to? The hard-working? The struggling? Nope....CEO's....for example: Say old Bob dies. He's gay, no spouse. So, no pension. Old Bill dies, married, she gets his pension. Had old Bob been married to Harold, there's 2 pensions now being paid out, not one....see where this is going?
There is NO logical reasoning other than financial for big-money CEO's as to why same-sex marriage shouldn't be allowed.
Does it affect a hetero marriage? Only if CEO's(and the Internal Revenue Service) change the game rules midway....
To all other questions, no, it would have NO effect on anything.
I have a theory and/or theories about why this is a sticky subject in Washington and a fervent issue with GW. It all boils down to economics.
Currently, there are 298, 947, 481 people in the US. Of these, married people number approx. 57,000,000. Married couples are entitled to: reduced health care costs, reduced income tax, spousal pension and life insurance benefits.
Now, consider that estimates state approx 10% of our population is gay. That would number 29.8 million. If the same number, percentage-wise gets married, that would be about 5 million. Those couples also would reap the benefits of reduced healthcare costs, reduced income tax, spousal pensions and life insurance benefits.
This would mean that employers of these gay people would have to pay out for their spouses, a 'perk' they have had in terms of pensions, healthcare and life insurances.
Who does our president most cater to? The hard-working? The struggling? Nope....CEO's....for example: Say old Bob dies. He's gay, no spouse. So, no pension. Old Bill dies, married, she gets his pension. Had old Bob been married to Harold, there's 2 pensions now being paid out, not one....see where this is going?
There is NO logical reasoning other than financial for big-money CEO's as to why same-sex marriage shouldn't be allowed.
Does it affect a hetero marriage? Only if CEO's(and the Internal Revenue Service) change the game rules midway....
To all other questions, no, it would have NO effect on anything.