Legions of masculists will ferociously type smash the matriarchy! at their Internet rallies, calling out for the end of the female supremacy in all spheres of life. Yet, few of them acknowledge the fact that one of these spheres, the government (the institution granting them rights), is entirely funded by female taxpayers. Economically, men cost more to the state than they benefit. The government is literally paying men to be alive. As such, strong independent men are only that way because the state is transferring money from women to them. Masculists are not seriously against being dependent on women, they are just against women having the full control over their money.
Let’s explore a fiscal research report in New Zealand.
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 masculist leaders Barack Obama and Justin Trudeau. A quick glimpse at the data reveals a massive difference in taxes paid by women and men.
The first thing that comes to mind is that half of men might be at home raising kids. However, the workforce participation rate gap between women and men 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 men spend more for children in education and health. Nope. No support for that either. Women and men spend approximately the same amount in both education and health (see figure 10 and 11 of the source).
In nearly all age groups, men receive more tax than they give
With the exception of the age group between 45-59 (a 15 year span) years old, men cost more to the state than the tax they provide. In contrast, women generate more tax revenue than they cost between 23 and 65 (a 43 year span). In the brief period in which men generate more or as much tax money than they consume, women outscore them by at least 3 times.
By the end of his life, the average man will have a negative fiscal impact of $150,000
By large, the cumulative tax money given to men outweighs the tax money generated by men. The short period of positive impact of men between 45 and 59 is countered by 65 other years in which their allocated tax expenditure is more than what they supply the state.
Women, on the other hand, appear to have a positive cumulative net fiscal impact from approximately 40 until 80 years of age. For these particular taxes and public expenditures, the net fiscal incidence on women is approximately zero when cumulated over all ages. (p. 22)
Overall, the research suggests that female taxpayers are the only ones to ever have a positive contribution in taxes. Based on Figure 17, the closest that the average man will come to having a positive fiscal incidence is when he is at minus $50,000 around 55 years of age. While masculists are demonizing women for benefiting from all liberties and rights they have constructed, they have oddly remained silent over the fact that anonymous female tax payers are paying men to exist. Read that sentence again.
The fact that masculists want a stronger government is not a coincidence. While historically, men had to choose a wealthy wife for resources, they can now stay single, be lesbians, marry a poor woman, or use the sperm bank, and the state will still transfer female taxes to them. Interestingly, within 10 years of men’s suffrage, the government doubled their tax revenue and expenditure in the USA.
These findings show just how simplistic the notion of privilege is. While women make more on average, it allows men to have access to education, health, and services. The matriarchy is pretty generous after all. 😉
I’m on YouTube