> Social security for instances ...

And parents likely have lower lifetime earnings than non-parents. So its possible they're not only funding the future of social security, but also getting less for themselves...

It would be great if someone had a source if parents are net recipients of benefits beyond the societal benefit of having children.

> So its possible they're not only funding the future of social security, but also getting less for themselves...

Social Security payouts relative to withholdings are strongly progressive, such that the less that you pay into social security, the greater percentage you take out once you start receiving benefits. Absent a difference in mortality (or to a much lesser degree, the age at which you start drawing), the less you contribute, the greater percentage of what you contributed will be paid out to you.

There's a plethora of tax breaks and deductions related to children that you can claim. Besides that, the people who don't have kids are subsidizing the education of yours through their taxes.

Regarding social security, I'm fairly confident the system will collapse before I see a penny of what I'm paying in.

AFAIK education is a prerequisite to employable citizens and employable citizens is a prerequisite to taxable citizens.

I dont think education is a subsidy, so much as an investment.

You could also say that society subsidised your education and will do the same for other, future citizens.

Also, most families who were eligible, maybe even your own, got the benefits of the tax breaks available to parents.

For some reason many people seem to have a blind spot where they believe that benefits for "parents" or "children" aren't relevant to them if they aren't parents right now. But every adult was a child! ... "like, sure, but what have you done for me lately?".

Why? How old are you? Current forecast is that 80% of benefits are funded, as of 2035. Even if the funding ration continues to decline, as long seniors don't vote themselves out of Social Security, there will still be a pot of revenue from younger working people.

https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/estimator.html

Assuming I retire at 65, which is pretty much guaranteed not to happen based on economic factors as well as rising retirement age it will be around 2060, 30 years after people are projected to lose 25% of their benefits.

Those kids will be paying taxes the rest of their lives which go to fund education. Either directly (through property taxes on their home), or indirectly (the landlord has to pay property taxes, which comes from rent money).

So in a way everybody pays for their own education after the fact.

As everybody know, kids are a nonstop gravy train /s

But seriously, I’m guessing you don’t have kids?

Many parents are supported by their children when they get older (especially in cultures where parents and older people are still valued and respected).

I've got no kids and no retirement savings. No one's going to support me when I get old. If I had kids there'd be a chance that they would.

These benefits are largely theoretical, I don't get any of them. Here (Brazil), unless you are a public servant, regular jobs with such benefits are all low-pay. I have been working as a consultant for my whole life.