http://livingwage.mit.edu/places/1703114000
Are you defining $47K/year as wealthy?
Note that figure is for a married couple with 3 children.
http://livingwage.mit.edu/places/1703114000
Are you defining $47K/year as wealthy?
Note that figure is for a married couple with 3 children.
Tombstone1881
Senior member
- Aug 8, 2014
- 486
- 161
- 116
No, I am arguing this statement:
Apparently she ignored her own experience from having the first kid in abject poverty as well.D:
Apparently she ignored her own experience from having the first kid in abject poverty as well.D:
Do you deny that those in poverty have more children than those who are solidly middle class?
Hint... Many of these people were in poverty before they got knocked up to begin with... and they go out and do it 2x/3x more times.
Why do we reward those who can't keep their legs closed when already in poverty? I'm not talking about the widow with three kids who fell into poverty - the system should be there for people like her.
Don't you favor an environment where people who can afford (You don't have to be wealthy) to have children are having them? At least those kids have a chance at a better education and a chance to actually graduate high school.
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2011/09/knocked_up_and_knocked_down.html
and...
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/09/2593011/unintended-pregnancies-poor-women/
We allow that trend to persist and our country is in a world of hurt. The woman in the OP is a prime example of that.
So are you saying she was making a living wage working at McDonald when she only had one child?:hmm:
There is a huge difference between being wealthy and being responsible. I've always been responsible in my lifetime, but I've never been wealthy. Responsibility means : Taking care of my own problems, not placing that burden on everybody else around me.
Is the lady in the OP responsible? Doesn't seem like it. I don't care how wealthy someone is, and that is not a requirement for having children. But responsibility sure is.
I can guarantee you if I have a child, the tax payers are not going to be paying for it. My mother isn't going to be watching the kid all day either.
So what are you actually saying here? You've acknowledged that poorer people tend to have more children, yet you seem to be advocating taking away what little benefits they receive... but for what purpose?
Tombstone1881
Senior member
- Aug 8, 2014
- 486
- 161
- 116
Why do we reward those who can't keep their legs closed when already in poverty? I'm not talking about the widow with three kids who fell into poverty - the system should be there for people like her.
There lies the problem.
Why do we reward those who can't keep their legs closed when already in poverty?
I agree, yes there is abuse in the system, just like every other program, ie defense contractors or medical corporations that bilk the government for millions.
BUT:
I'm not talking about the widow with three kids who fell into poverty - the system should be there for people like her.
Which I whole heartedly agree. The problem I have with the right, is that "because of the abuse", they want to do away with those programs entirely, which would force people like that widow mother out in the cold. Her, AND her kids.
There lies the problem.
Why do we reward those who can't keep their legs closed when already in poverty?
I agree, yes there is abuse in the system, just like every other program, ie defense contractors or medical corporations that bilk the government for millions.
BUT:
I'm not talking about the widow with three kids who fell into poverty - the system should be there for people like her.
Which I whole heartedly agree. The problem I have with the right, is that "because of the abuse", they want to do away with those programs entirely, which would force people like that widow mother out in the cold. Her, AND her kids.
Well then maybe liberals should do something to fight abuse?
Of course liberals refuse to call a woman having multiple bastard kids with multiple baby daddies(some of whom are in prison) abusing the system.
Londo_Jowo
Lifer
Should mcdonalds be allowed to suspend all workers until they agree to work for less money?
If not, why are workers allowed to not do their job until they get more money?
If not, why are workers allowed to not do their job until they get more money?
If you don't understand the concept and history behind striking, a centuries old concept, then perhaps you should do some reading up on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_action
I'm pretty sure they can actually.
I am sure you can find record of many companies announcing across the board salary reductions.
Londo_Jowo
Lifer
No, there are minimum wage laws that employers/businesses must meet.
Why should employers be required to retain people that do not do the job they were hired to do?
Matt1970
Lifer
- Mar 19, 2007
- 12,320
- 3
- 0
No but most responsible people wait till they at least have an education or job skills behind them and maybe even build a nest egg. Are you really telling me that in the last 10 years the best job she could ever find or the highest skill she could ever obtain is a frycook?
You do realize we are talking about a woman that didn't figure out after having one child while living in poverty that having a 2nd one wasn't going to improve things right?
Matt1970
Lifer
- Mar 19, 2007
- 12,320
- 3
- 0
OILFIELDTRASH
Lifer
- May 13, 2009
- 12,333
- 612
- 126
I'm not advocating taking away their benefits. The problem is that even with access to free birth control, they still don't seem to practice safe sex... And look, I get that. I haven't always been safe 100% of the time either... But I wasn't living in poverty.
We have a system or we should say a "Web" of social programs that are problematic due to any number of issues.
- No hard limits on time in the system. There is an arbitrary limit of 60 months for some programs that is never enforced.
- We automatically bump benefits up with each child born. This I believe is different from state to state, and many have set limits.
- We automatically enroll every child born here to an illegal immigrant in Medicaid, and due to their status as natural born citizen the parents(guardians in the eyes of the law as they are illegally here) then apply for food stamps, etc in the name of the child but the benefits get paid/administered directly to the guardians.
- A weak record of job creation in this country over the last ten+ years.
I imagine I could make a list much longer than that. The core of the issue is that the liberals and even many conservatives say "But the Children!!!" suggesting that no cost is too high and that the child isn't at fault. Morally, that is correct. Many of those same children though make the same mistake their parents did. They become the next generation of welfare recipients in that family tree, they have children early and children they can't afford. I'm not saying that people on welfare are living well, but as long as we continue to not question how they got there and as long as we continue to minimize the penalty for their poor choices in life they'll continue to make those same choices along with their existing and eventual offspring.
There is no one answer for this. It is an entire system that needs to be ripped apart and built anew from the ground up. We need to stop rewarding corporations that work in sync with the gov't agencies to service those in welfare. We need to stop rewarding gov't by gauging their success on how many people are enrolled in a program and how large their budget has gotten( Seriously, the bureaucrats are rewarded and paid more the larger their fiefdom gets). We need to stop rewarding those having "anchor babies" here and those whose only ambition is to collect life long benefits from the moment they turn 18. These people are not contributing anything of value to our society, but many would at least try if they knew there were limits.
When my daughter was born 13 weeks early and we sat in the NICU with her for 79 days, I had been laid off. I had enough saved that we could afford to pay for health benefits via COBRA. Do you think it was fair for me to sit in the Hospital's NICU for 79 days with my daughter and wife while watching the various welfare queens in that NICU getting an entirely free ride... When they couldn't even be bothered to come to the hospital to visit their babies daily who were fighting for their lives? When my total bill came to $500k? That my insurance mostly paid? When I was unemployed and honestly had no light at the end of the tunnel in regard to a job? ( this was 2010- job market sucked).
My point is, everyone falls at some point. The system is so over ridden with lifers that it can't even help anyone with a seemingly temporary health issue or work issue. It requires you to be absolutely dirt poor before any safety net is cast. I believe that many citizens fall into poverty because the bottom feeders are sucking so much of the social system dry that there is no ability to handle those that truly need and are deserving of help... Instead we'd rather see them fall to the bottom as well.
As a side note, my daughter had a gov't issued Medicaid card until she turned three. You see, in her instance being born at 1 pound 4.2 ounces she fell below a federal weight threshold for a newborn which automatically qualified her for Medicaid. That said, my private insurance covered everything, but for three years I got to see all the Medicaid paperwork and notices... I'm glad it was there in case she needed it ( was one hell of an exception to what I noted above), but what an utterly horrible system it is.
The fanatical right... yes. I think the vast majority of those who identify as conservative don't want to eliminate programs... They just want to stop the practice of throwing money at something perpetually with the same results.
I have a big problem with the far right religious who rail against planned parenthood yet also bitch about those same patrons being on welfare. So they want more unwanted babies born, but they don't want to take responsibility of any sort when those same babies are part of the next welfare generation.
Zaap
Diamond Member
- Jun 12, 2008
- 7,162
- 424
- 126
Everything that is except walk across the street and apply at a non-fastfood restaurant as a waitress where she could easily double/ tripple what she makes. (If she has even the slightest bit of people-skills /language skills which heaven forbid you should have in the country you live in.)
But that requires taking responsibility for yourself, not demanding a magic solution for your problems provided magically by someone else, and no way were having any of that.
That would require walking though. She doesn't look like someone who does a lot of walking.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter