I have two friends(former but they are still connected with me on Facebook) that recently just had their second child. Only one of them works and its a shitty job at a retail store(can't be more than $10/hr). It seems the whole pregnancy was this glorified celebratory experience when in reality these people are being grossly irresponsible. Why do we as a society celebrate stupid people with no money having children they cannot afford?

I don't think these people are bad parents, but they shouldn't be having children until they can afford it withstanding government support.

Thoughts? :thumbup:

China has laws against having more tyhan one child . If you have more than one girl you are in big trouble. What are going to tell spanish catholics when they believe birth control is a sin? They keep multiplying like rabbits in Ethiopa and places like that . I dont know that there is a solution .Not only is having more kids without proper means a strain on the American economy it is a world wide problem that has to be addressed. I dont like or believe in abortion because in my opinion often times it is murder of an infant that cant protect itself . I dont think the Roman catholic church or other major religions are liberal enough at this time to promote birth control. What will happen is there at one time will be a major pandemic that will wipe out major populated areas that are under developed . The CIA or the WTO/G8 might at some time get involved and unleash another aides type virus.

If they aren't using the system and my tax dollars, then by all means. You don't have to have a bunch of money to properly raise a child.

GoChiefs;1454712 wrote:If they aren't using the system and my tax dollars, then by all means. You don't have to have a bunch of money to properly raise a child.

You can raise 2 children and support a mom for $10/hr without using tax payer dollars? :laugh:

I think this is welfare reform. Today if you have kids it is pretty easy to get foodstamps. The poverty level for a single mother with two kids is pretty high I think . If a woman has two kids to a deadbeat father its easy to get a medical card and foodstamps. Sometimes woman abuse the system and other times there are legit good hard working people who have trouble . You can start a discussion on changing the medicare system or if you are a staunch conservitive you can discuss eliminating wefare altoghter. There are so many moral and ethical questions when it comes to raising kids without the proper means . So many times people cross lines with thinking liberal and thinking conservitive concerning child birth and welfare . A very conservitive person does not believe in abortion but that same person complains when a woman has children out of wedlock and adds a strain on the welfare system . I have both conservitive views and liberal views on contraception and abortion . As Ive said I dont like abortion . Especially late term abortion.However I do think conservitives need to open there minds up on the family planning aproach and not be so stringent on not passing out rubbers or having machins in high schools . Kids are going to have sex and then have children . Our society is not a moral society like maybe the 50's or before, and we have to live with it .

steubbigred;1454740 wrote:.... A very conservitive person does not believe in abortion but that same person complains when a woman has children out of wedlock and adds a strain on the welfare system . I have both conservitive views and liberal views on contraception and abortion . As Ive said I dont like abortion . Especially late term abortion. I do think conservitives need to open up on the family planning aproach and not be so stringent on not passing out rubbers or having machins in high schools . Kids are going to have sex and then have children . Our society is not a moral society like maybe the 50's or before, and we have to live with it .

I disagree. If we aren't a moral society, then society will pay the price....and we are. Not being a "moral" society isn't enough of a reason for a social conservative to bail on their core convictions. No thanks.

sleeper;1454715 wrote:You can raise 2 children and support a mom for $10/hr without using tax payer dollars? :laugh:

I've seen it done, yes. That was for a period of time though, a good couple of years. Not from the time the children were born until they were adults.

steubbigred;1454740 wrote:I think this is welfare reform. Today if you have kids it is pretty easy to get foodstamps. The poverty level for a single mother with two kids is pretty high I think . If a woman has two kids to a deadbeat father its easy to get a medical card and foodstamps. Sometimes woman abuse the system and other times there are legit good hard working people who have trouble . You can start a discussion on changing the medicare system or if you are a staunch conservitive you can discuss eliminating wefare altoghter. There are so many moral and ethical questions when it comes to raising kids without the proper means . So many times people cross lines with thinking liberal and thinking conservitive concerning child birth and welfare . A very conservitive person does not believe in abortion but that same person complains when a woman has children out of wedlock and adds a strain on the welfare system . I have both conservitive views and liberal views on contraception and abortion . As Ive said I dont like abortion . Especially late term abortion.However I do think conservitives need to open there minds up on the family planning aproach and not be so stringent on not passing out rubbers or having machins in high schools . Kids are going to have sex and then have children . Our society is not a moral society like maybe the 50's or before, and we have to live with it .

I think birth control should be 100% free and am willing to pay an increase in taxes to get it done.

Abortion is not birth control and therefore should not be free. If you get knocked up and have an abortion you have to pay for it. If you can't afford the child, let the state take it and you and the sperm donor go to jail for 5 years for child negligence. That would solve the problem over night.

sleeper;1454765 wrote:...

Abortion is not birth control and therefore should not be free.... .

Abortion is as much a control of the birth as is other forms. I do, however, agree that it should not be free when used as controlling the birth.

Con_Alma;1454768 wrote:Abortion is as much a control of the birth as is other forms. I do, however, agree that it should not be free when used as controlling the birth.

Then are you willing to pay for all these baby mammas and baby daddy's to endlessly pop out children that will grow up and be dumb fucks anyways and repeat the cycle? Because I sure as shit do not.

sleeper;1454772 wrote:Then are you willing to pay for all these baby mammas and baby daddy's to endlessly pop out children that will grow up and be dumb ****s anyways and repeat the cycle? Because I sure as **** do not.

I already am. What do you mean am I willing? I/we already are.

Would I rather not? of course. Would I rather pay for free birth control to avoid paying for the welfar of kids? That option already exists. Go to any free clinic and you can get condoms.

People who really want to have a choice. They choose the short-term easy route which is to have sex without birth control.

Do people still use condoms? LOL

sleeper;1454784 wrote:Do people still use condoms? LOL

If they did the issue you've outlined wouldn't exist. LOL

Con_Alma;1454792 wrote:If they did the issue you've outlined wouldn't exist. LOL

Sorry, but virtual any woman with half a brain in this country(I realize that's a small number) are on birth control(mostly the pill). I can't remember the last time I wore a condom because I simply won't have sex with a woman who isn't on birth control. There's 2 reasons behind this, #1 being I don't trust condoms and they suck so what's the point anyways? #2, a woman on birth control signals to me that she goes to get things checked out down there on the regular and actually gives a shit what enters her body.

sleeper;1454796 wrote:Sorry, but virtual any woman with half a brain in this country(I realize that's a small number) are on birth control(mostly the pill). I can't remember the last time I wore a condom because I simply won't have sex with a woman who isn't on birth control. There's 2 reasons behind this, #1 being I don't trust condoms and they suck so what's the point anyways? #2, a woman on birth control signals to me that she goes to get things checked out down there on the regular and actually gives a **** what enters her body.

You don't have to be sorry.

If you think impoverish women or men are seeing a doctor regularly you* are crazy. I don't think they truly care what "enters her body".

It's a lifestyle. It's an attitude. It's culture. We are paying for it. If they want to avoid pregnancy, they can. For free. Today. People don't care enough to do so.

I agree with you but your attitude needs some work. :thumbdown:

Actually there's generally accepted research that economic decline is directly related with an aging of the population. And when you build a social ponzi scheme, flat population growth or an aging of the population is problematic.

So even for people on welfare having kids, I think there's probably a decent ROI in terms of related welfare vs. the productivity and economic contribution that person has as an adult. The issue here is welfare begetting more welfare, but I think that's a different debate.

Anyway, we shouldn't tell people whether they can or can't have children (though in some cases it hardly seems like a horrible idea, lol). But what we can control is how much welfare we hand out. Breeding should not be a source of economic "prosperity".

gut;1454808 wrote:... But what we can control is how much welfare we hand out. ...

Agreed.

Con_Alma;1454810 wrote:Agreed.

To be blunt, we incentivize the stupid & lazy to breed. That's not particularly effective.

People who actually CAN afford to have another child are more likely to decide they can't afford to, and that's an example of how screwed up the social welfare system is.

The benefit should decline with each additional child, and if we don't eliminate negative tax liabilities we need to cap it.

Agreed again.

The actual costs per child is less to the parents with a floor on that decline. Government paid for cildren should not be a profitable venture.

gut;1454808 wrote:Actually there's generally accepted research that economic decline is directly related with an aging of the population. And when you build a social ponzi scheme, flat population growth or an aging of the population is problematic.

So even for people on welfare having kids, I think there's probably a decent ROI in terms of related welfare vs. the productivity and economic contribution that person has as an adult. The issue here is welfare begetting more welfare, but I think that's a different debate.

Anyway, we shouldn't tell people whether they can or can't have children (though in some cases it hardly seems like a horrible idea, lol). But what we can control is how much welfare we hand out. Breeding should not be a source of economic "prosperity".

Except these people breeding are having children that are going to suck from the teet their whole lives too. Shitty and irresponsible parents breed the future shitty and irresponsible citizens.

sleeper;1454827 wrote:Except these people breeding are having children that are going to suck from the teet their whole lives too. ****ty and irresponsible parents breed the future ****ty and irresponsible citizens.

Of course. It's a lifestyle. It's a culture. The cycle isn't going to be broken with birth control. Why would they choose to use birth control. There's no benefit for them to do so. No thanks.

I dont think abortion should ever be paid for by the taxpayer . By strict church doctrin you are supposed to wait for marriage to have sex . Good luck with that . Also some churches as Ive said before, do not agree with condoms,and then by chance a woman gets knocked up they are supposed to have the child or put it up for adoption. I think some young girls definitly have a tough moral issue when they get pregnant whether they want to abort or raise a child .Putting a child ip for adoption is the best way to do it IMO because the child will get a two parent home with the means to raise it. I think birth control pills should be free to whomever wants them . Same with condoms. To some people that is immoral. That is were we have a debate.

The problem is any time you try to bring up the welfare problem you get labeled a racist. You can't do anything in today's PC culture; it's a joke.

steubbigred;1454833 wrote:... I think birth control pills should be free yo whomever want them . same with condoms. To some people that is immoral. That is were we have a debate.

It doesn't solve the problem. The problem to those with whom you think the issue will be a debate isn't that contraceptives are immoal but rather that we have an immoral society as you put it. Contraceptives don't solve that problem...especially if they are free. No thanks.