2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum.... illegitimate families on welfare—give all the kids up for adoption and execute the parents....
http://www.progressive.org/meet-romney-extremist-in-virginia"Look, there's always something you can do. You telling me people can't make a choice for a better life? We have to help all of them? No. I'll tell you what really need to do with these illegitimate families on welfaregive all the kids up for adoption and execute the parents."
I feel ill.
MercutioATC
(28,470 posts)I know two families that trouble me.
1) In their late 20's. Husband is pursuing his Master's degree. Wife doesn't work. While in this situation, they actively chose to have a baby. They're receiving multiple forms of government assistance.
2) Also in their late 20's . Husband works one job full-time. They have three kids, and wife stays home. They're already drawing on public support and they chose to have another baby (wife is pregnant).
I'm certainly not calling for forced adoptions or executions, but the system DOES need to be fixed.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)Religion says to go out and multiply
Willard says that it is better for one parent to stay home.
Religion says no to birth control
It seems that there are many mixed messages in this
MercutioATC
(28,470 posts)Proud Liberal Dem
(24,355 posts)"Get government out of our lives" but no abortion, no gay sex, and, pretty soon, no birth control.
"Cut taxes" but no tax cuts for middle-income or poor people. In fact, THEY should be paying MORE while "job creators" should pay less!
"We all need to sacrifice to balance the budget" but "you people" need to give up your Social Security, Medicare, etc. and we will give more money to defense contractors and cut taxes for "job creators"
We should start a compilation.
MercutioATC
(28,470 posts)I also believe in spending some of our money to provide opportunity for those who find getting ahead difficult.
I have a problem with people making the choice to not work and relying on government assistance AND THEN choosing to have more children. I see it as abuse of the system.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,355 posts)and I agree that we need to find some humane way to curb it however the Republican *solution* is to just get rid of it completely, which I just can't support. I also can't get too worked up over it either when their cronies suck WAY more money out of taxpayers than a few random people on welfare. Republican philosophy isn't *entirely* unreasonable but it IS unrealistic for the vast of majority of people who don't make the kind of money most Republicans do and they have done almost nothing to make it more realistic for more people (i.e. support higher wages, increased access to and affordability of health insurance, child care, etc.).
Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)We've tried every single "work incentive" or "means testing" scheme that politicians have been able to come up with over the past two decades or so. But the fact of the matter is, that unless you want to cut assistance in a manner that will involve more children going unfed, unclothed, and untreated, there will ALWAYS be anecdotal examples of people having kids when they're in no position to and using government assistance to support them.
I get that some people find this truly unfair and unjust, I really do. But it's an unfair fact of life just as much as the fact that some people like Mitt Romney get absurdly lucky and make millions in business whereas the rest of us don't.
If you want to reduce government assistance payments on a macro level, support access to birth control and abortion and support teaching real sex ed in school. Half of all pregnancies are unplanned. Reduce that number drastically and you will reduce the amount of government assistance payments drastically.
Yes, I know, there will be people who still intentionally get pregnant to get a welfare check. There's no short term solution to that problem that doesn't involve screwing over the child.
treestar
(82,383 posts)May as well just live with it. We can't deal with deciding who has kids and who can't without serious intrusion into very personal things.
People will always have babies and it is better they have them in their 20s. As a society there is some benefit to us to have another generation.
If they wait until their 30s there could be more problems. We already hear about the dangers of childbirth over 35.
Mopar151
(9,965 posts)Kicking for the morning crowd