Jessica Irvine, National Economics Editor, bids farewell to the baby bonus and warns of more spending cuts to come.

OPINION: Don’t expect me to pay for your choice to have a child. Ever. There, I said it.

The world is already overpopulated, just ask Bindi Irwin.

You might be wondering why the rant?

The idea stems from a ludicrous opinion from American journalist Reihan Salam, who believes childless citizens should pay more taxes, while those with kids should pay less.

Salam reckons that in order to give working families a fair go, those without children who earn over the average wage bracket (AU$57,400) should cough up the extra cash.

Those with a family, he says, should pay approximately $5000 less.

“By shifting the tax burden from parents to non-parent, we will help give America’s children a better start in life, and we will help correct a simple injustice,” he writes.

“We all benefit from the work of parents. Each new generation reinvigorates our society with its youthful vim and vigour.”

MORE: READ SALAM’S ‘TAX THE CHILDLESS’ STORY

MORE: SHOULD AUSTRALIANS TAX THE CHILDESS?

Meanwhile, closer to home, Wendy Tuohy explored the idea of an Australian version of the tax with some sobering statistics.

According to a study by the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, the pinch of a tighter economy means it’ll cost you around $400,000 to raise a child until the age of 21.

Middle-income families were hit with the biggest increases, with spending up by 50 per cent from 2007.

It’s a noble gesture and Salam has good intentions, but my heart bleeds for the infertile couples out there who shouldn’t be punished for circumstances beyond their control.

The notion is as insensitive to those couples as the amendment to the Racial Discrimination Act is to minorities.

HAVE YOUR SAY VIA FACEBOOK OR TWEET @MATTYOUNG

Let’s get real here. I will not fork out any more of my hard-earned dollars because you chose to have a child.

Why more, you ask? Because I already am forking it out. And so are you.

While the days of the Baby Bonus are well and truly over, the Federal Government replaced the one-off payment with a rate increase of the Family Tax Benefit.

This means that as of March 1, 2014, parents receive a $2000 payment for their first child. For any subsequent children the payment is a lesser $1000.

Wonder where that’s coming from? Oh that’s right. My tax dollars. Our tax dollars.

Then there’s Paid Parental Leave, where a new parent is allowed a maximum 18-weeks off work at a minimum wage salary of $622.10 per week.

Then there’s the Parenting Payment for single parents or guardians, and the Dad and Partner Pay scheme, which gives dads two weeks of government-funded pay based on minimum wage.

None of which is available in the United States.

So while it’s all fine and dandy to lump the financial woes of family onto those without, it’s important to note that we’re already doing our bit — and paying a higher marginal tax rate while we’re at it.

That’s not the tax we pay on the extra bits; public schools, parks, health care and childcare subsidies.

While I empathise for those families feeling the pinch, it’s not my job to fix your finances.

It’s simple, really. If you can’t afford to have a child, don’t have one.

Here’s what you had to say on the issue. Tweet your thoughts to @MattYoung

@MattYoung @wtuohy I don't think it's a fair idea but the author had good intentions with it — Steph Chard (@stephchard) April 2, 2014

@MattYoung I do think we need to invest more in social infrastructure (rather than just tax concessions) to better support *all* families. — Sen Raj (@senthorun) April 2, 2014

@MattYoung @newscomauHQ @wtuohy ah that would be a resounding no! What support do we get from the govt - none at all! — Justine L (@juzzie305) April 2, 2014

@MattYoung @wtuohy the old conservative touch stone of family values should not be deployed to the detriment of (aspirational) singles — Will Spence (@willthestudent) April 2, 2014

@MattYoung @newscomauHQ @wtuohy the choice not to procreate should not result in paying more tax so others can. — Rebecca George (@bek_george) April 2, 2014

@MattYoung @newscomauHQ @wtuohy I think that not having kids would be less of a burden on the taxpayer so we don't need to contribute more — David (@undeactiv8) April 2, 2014