Also getting more money when you have another child is being REWARDED... It is certinaly not a deterrent, and The gov. is not regulating how they spend that money so they can provide their children with absolutly nothing and buy whatever they want.
ALso everybody seems to foget about that 20% that is on welfare for over 5 years.
Well, my point is, maybe i'm just being picky, but I dont always view it as, or refer to it as a REWARD. I consider it HELP most of the time. Your idea of a REWARD is evident from the other threads where you stated that you think many people get pregnant solely to get 'rewarded'.. its not always the case.
Yes, that 5 year number is ridiculous. Something needs to be done about that!
My wifes school gives out Power Packs (weekend meals) to students,
Wait... your wife is a teacher?
So why do I have to pay her salary? I don't have kids. You obviously agree that I should pay lower taxes since I don't and won't have kids and I have no not only pay for welfare but I also have to pay YOUR WIFE to teach them.
Also getting more money when you have another child is being REWARDED... It is certinaly not a deterrent, and The gov. is not regulating how they spend that money so they can provide their children with absolutly nothing and buy whatever they want.
ALso everybody seems to foget about that 20% that is on welfare for over 5 years.
Well, my point is, maybe i'm just being picky, but I dont always view it as, or refer to it as a REWARD. I consider it HELP most of the time. Your idea of a REWARD is evident from the other threads where you stated that you think many people get pregnant solely to get 'rewarded'.. its not always the case.
Yes, that 5 year number is ridiculous. Something needs to be done about that!
Unemployment has been exteneded to 99 weeks. That just about 2 years. That is an extremely long time to find a job.
I view it as a reward because they are given a check for having another child. Thats not helping these people, and how many jobs are going to hire you when your pregnant? Maybe regulate how the money is given to them, maybe give a small ammount of money and the rest can be vouchers for diapers, formulate, baby supplies, etc. They shouldn't just be given a check and expected to make the right decisions concerning their child. We need to have an incentive to get off welfare and a dis-incentive to be on welfare. Its should be used as a program to get you back on your feet, not a lifestyle.
My wifes school gives out Power Packs (weekend meals) to students,
Wait... your wife is a teacher?
So why do I have to pay her salary? I don't have kids. You obviously agree that I should pay lower taxes since I don't and won't have kids and I have no not only pay for welfare but I also have to pay YOUR WIFE to teach them.
Then by your logic I should not have to pay for police and fire since I don't use them...
You need to quit with this argument. If you don't want to pay taxes that go to education than thats fine. But what are you going to do with children who parents can't afford private schools.
taking on the burden and the hassle and the 20 plus year commitment to raising another kid, and getting money for food is a reward?
does anyone really think that a poor woman is going to say "ok, i need to get more money. what can i do? oh yeah, let me get pregnant where i might have life threatening complications, and then i am going to have to commit to raising ANOTHER kid on my own, AND i get paid for it??? YEP, SIGN ME UP!!!"
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
ignorance is bliss... Because I want peoople to have responsibility and consequences for their actions makes me not care for other people??? Great job addressing the post... Do you even have a family??? children?
All I have ever asked for was more regulations Money/time when it comes to welfare recipiants, thats all... Yet you make it seem like I am against social services, just because you disagree with me does not make you any more correct on this issue...
no, you have flat out called for ending unemployment and cutting/ending welfare, drug testing for welfare recipients, lowering taxes, etc. yet you complain of how your wife's school does all of these things to help the poor students. i have an idea, why not just have your wife not participate in these home visits? then neither of you will not be donating your time to helping the less fortunate, because let's face it, you aren't getting any satisfaction out of it by the sounds of all of your previous posts.
it sounds to me like you want people to have more personal responsibility and you want to have less responsibility for other people in this society. sounds fair enough,, but we do not live in an ayn rand utopia, and that is never going to happen. you should maybe just worry about you and yours, because the anger in your posts is just raising your blood pressure, and that is not a good thing.
and as far as my family/kids, leave them out of this.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Then by your logic I should not have to pay for police and fire since I don't use them...
You need to quit with this argument. If you don't want to pay taxes that go to education than thats fine. But what are you going to do with children who parents can't afford private schools.
Then tell us... where do you draw the line.
You're upset because you have to pay for kids that aren't yours if their parents are on Welfare. I'm just taking your argument to an extreme... which is "if it doesn't personally and directly benefit me, screw you."
I DO want to pay taxes to education because I think it's my responsibility to help raise the next generation.
Now you ask me "what are you going to do with children who parents can't afford private schools" and I ask "what are you going to do with children whose parents can't afford food and rent?"
something that is completely lost on this site is personal responsibility - If you can't take care of your self don't worry well force someone to, you can have everything they have for free or reduced cost and don't worry about taking responsibility for your children/homes, well take other peoples money to ensure you don't have to make any sacrifices of your own.
Thats just ridiculous. It isnt lost man. Some of us are upset that some people cant be responsible, but we actually care more that their kids are starving, wearing rags, or cant get medical help.
Yes... You clearly care so much about the kids... If you care so much about children then why do you support people who can take care of their own food/shelter/clothes having children. Not only that but they get PAID / Rewarded...
And actually kids aren't staving/ wearing rags and they most certinly do get medical help.
My wifes school gives out Power Packs (weekend meals) to students, Clothes through multiple programs (crayons to computers)... If their starving its because their parents aren't being parents and providing for their children with the gov. food stamps and monthly checks. But your right, its all about the kids, why allow a family who has starving kids to have more kids... That makes alot of sense...
Remember when you said you care so much about the kids, then you proposed that the kids be removed from the home if their parents can't provide for them? That was one of those posts you didn't respond to.
something that is completely lost on this site is personal responsibility - If you can't take care of your self don't worry well force someone to, you can have everything they have for free or reduced cost and don't worry about taking responsibility for your children/homes, well take other peoples money to ensure you don't have to make any sacrifices of your own.
Thats just ridiculous. It isnt lost man. Some of us are upset that some people cant be responsible, but we actually care more that their kids are starving, wearing rags, or cant get medical help.
Yes... You clearly care so much about the kids... If you care so much about children then why do you support people who can take care of their own food/shelter/clothes having children. Not only that but they get PAID / Rewarded...
And actually kids aren't staving/ wearing rags and they most certinly do get medical help.
My wifes school gives out Power Packs (weekend meals) to students, Clothes through multiple programs (crayons to computers)... If their starving its because their parents aren't being parents and providing for their children with the gov. food stamps and monthly checks. But your right, its all about the kids, why allow a family who has starving kids to have more kids... That makes alot of sense...
Blockhead, you have said INNUMEROUS times that poor people shouldn't be allowed to have kids and that people who want their kids to be fed are SUPPORTING their "decision" to have more children.
First of all, supporting existing CHILDREN is not in any way the same things as supporting the idea of a pregnancy.
Secondly, and I know I've asked you this a million times, but I'll ask again... How do you propose that we DISALLOW people from HAVING children?? Birth control in the water at housing projects? Chastity belts? You always say we should NOT ALLOW poor people to have children - but you have absolutely no solution for how to PREVENT poor people from having children. Hell, we can't even support poor people in their decisions to NOT have children in this country! So, please, let us all know your big solution - or, once and for all, stop saying we should do something that you know can't be done. (Hint: Denial of funding is not a contraceptive. Hint #2: Once children are born, you can't prevent their parents from having them.)
Also getting more money when you have another child is being REWARDED... It is certinaly not a deterrent,
Please show me any system where cutting welfare has led to decreased pregnancy rates among poor people. Everything I know about pregnancy rates indicates that they are generally LOWER in countries that spend more on social services and HIGHER in countries that spend less. How on earth, then, would it make any sense to follow in the footsteps of the countries that have increased rates of unintended pregnancy??
I'll tell you this... the most humiliating moment of my life was when I was 22, unemployed for months and finally had burned through all my savings (Which was pretty big considering my age), all the good will of friends and all my options.
I had been searching for a job the whole time but being just out of school, I had little experience in anything but waiting tables and those jobs were all filled by the hundreds of other people my age.
After enduring a demeaning interview where I explained that I hadn't even applied for Unemployment because I had savings and friends and family to support me, I had to practically beg for help so I wouldn't end up living on the street.
I got a job soon after that but being told I was lazy and just wanted a free money handout was so wrong, rude and just plain mean. you could tell the people were getting a kick out of watching me squirm.
taking on the burden and the hassle and the 20 plus year commitment to raising another kid, and getting money for food is a reward?
does anyone really think that a poor woman is going to say "ok, i need to get more money. what can i do? oh yeah, let me get pregnant where i might have life threatening complications, and then i am going to have to commit to raising ANOTHER kid on my own, AND i get paid for it??? YEP, SIGN ME UP!!!"
Nope. Even if we were dealing with completely selfish people whose only thought in the world was to make more money for themselves, it doesn't make mathematical sense that one could make money off the welfare system by having more babies. The cost of raising a child is MUCH more than the welfare income paid for each child. (But what do I know? I don't have children. :roll: )
Yeah, I'm still waiting for him to answer my questions too.
It's a very Tea Bagger attitude... "I don't wanna pay for anyone else... let them stave, make them suffer, take their kids away.... WHAT!?!?! You don't want to pay for ME?!?! Well, THAT's UNAMARIKUN!!!!"
Did you also catch when I said that my husband and I don't get the same tax breaks as him and his wife that his answer was "you don't have to be married?" Because... he does?
Yeah, I'm still waiting for him to answer my questions too.
It's a very Tea Bagger attitude... "I don't wanna pay for anyone else... let them stave, make them suffer, take their kids away.... WHAT!?!?! You don't want to pay for ME?!?! Well, THAT's UNAMARIKUN!!!!"
Did you also catch when I said that my husband and I don't get the same tax breaks as him and his wife that his answer was "you don't have to be married?" Because... he does?
Yes, I caught that. Sadly, I don't think he gets your point. (That's not a personal attack; I'm pretty sure he actually said he doesn't get your point, right?)
Comments
Well, my point is, maybe i'm just being picky, but I dont always view it as, or refer to it as a REWARD. I consider it HELP most of the time. Your idea of a REWARD is evident from the other threads where you stated that you think many people get pregnant solely to get 'rewarded'.. its not always the case.
Yes, that 5 year number is ridiculous. Something needs to be done about that!
Wait... your wife is a teacher?
So why do I have to pay her salary? I don't have kids. You obviously agree that I should pay lower taxes since I don't and won't have kids and I have no not only pay for welfare but I also have to pay YOUR WIFE to teach them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVVRD-nw_J0&NR=1
I view it as a reward because they are given a check for having another child. Thats not helping these people, and how many jobs are going to hire you when your pregnant? Maybe regulate how the money is given to them, maybe give a small ammount of money and the rest can be vouchers for diapers, formulate, baby supplies, etc. They shouldn't just be given a check and expected to make the right decisions concerning their child. We need to have an incentive to get off welfare and a dis-incentive to be on welfare. Its should be used as a program to get you back on your feet, not a lifestyle.
You need to quit with this argument. If you don't want to pay taxes that go to education than thats fine. But what are you going to do with children who parents can't afford private schools.
taking on the burden and the hassle and the 20 plus year commitment to raising another kid, and getting money for food is a reward?
does anyone really think that a poor woman is going to say "ok, i need to get more money. what can i do? oh yeah, let me get pregnant where i might have life threatening complications, and then i am going to have to commit to raising ANOTHER kid on my own, AND i get paid for it??? YEP, SIGN ME UP!!!"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
it sounds to me like you want people to have more personal responsibility and you want to have less responsibility for other people in this society. sounds fair enough,, but we do not live in an ayn rand utopia, and that is never going to happen. you should maybe just worry about you and yours, because the anger in your posts is just raising your blood pressure, and that is not a good thing.
and as far as my family/kids, leave them out of this.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Then tell us... where do you draw the line.
You're upset because you have to pay for kids that aren't yours if their parents are on Welfare. I'm just taking your argument to an extreme... which is "if it doesn't personally and directly benefit me, screw you."
I DO want to pay taxes to education because I think it's my responsibility to help raise the next generation.
Now you ask me "what are you going to do with children who parents can't afford private schools" and I ask "what are you going to do with children whose parents can't afford food and rent?"
Remember when you said you care so much about the kids, then you proposed that the kids be removed from the home if their parents can't provide for them? That was one of those posts you didn't respond to.
Blockhead, you have said INNUMEROUS times that poor people shouldn't be allowed to have kids and that people who want their kids to be fed are SUPPORTING their "decision" to have more children.
First of all, supporting existing CHILDREN is not in any way the same things as supporting the idea of a pregnancy.
Secondly, and I know I've asked you this a million times, but I'll ask again... How do you propose that we DISALLOW people from HAVING children?? Birth control in the water at housing projects? Chastity belts? You always say we should NOT ALLOW poor people to have children - but you have absolutely no solution for how to PREVENT poor people from having children. Hell, we can't even support poor people in their decisions to NOT have children in this country! So, please, let us all know your big solution - or, once and for all, stop saying we should do something that you know can't be done. (Hint: Denial of funding is not a contraceptive. Hint #2: Once children are born, you can't prevent their parents from having them.)
Please show me any system where cutting welfare has led to decreased pregnancy rates among poor people. Everything I know about pregnancy rates indicates that they are generally LOWER in countries that spend more on social services and HIGHER in countries that spend less. How on earth, then, would it make any sense to follow in the footsteps of the countries that have increased rates of unintended pregnancy??
I had been searching for a job the whole time but being just out of school, I had little experience in anything but waiting tables and those jobs were all filled by the hundreds of other people my age.
After enduring a demeaning interview where I explained that I hadn't even applied for Unemployment because I had savings and friends and family to support me, I had to practically beg for help so I wouldn't end up living on the street.
I got a job soon after that but being told I was lazy and just wanted a free money handout was so wrong, rude and just plain mean. you could tell the people were getting a kick out of watching me squirm.
Nope. Even if we were dealing with completely selfish people whose only thought in the world was to make more money for themselves, it doesn't make mathematical sense that one could make money off the welfare system by having more babies. The cost of raising a child is MUCH more than the welfare income paid for each child. (But what do I know? I don't have children. :roll: )
Yeah, I'm still waiting for him to answer my questions too.
It's a very Tea Bagger attitude... "I don't wanna pay for anyone else... let them stave, make them suffer, take their kids away.... WHAT!?!?! You don't want to pay for ME?!?! Well, THAT's UNAMARIKUN!!!!"
Did you also catch when I said that my husband and I don't get the same tax breaks as him and his wife that his answer was "you don't have to be married?" Because... he does?
Yes, I caught that. Sadly, I don't think he gets your point. (That's not a personal attack; I'm pretty sure he actually said he doesn't get your point, right?)