- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 27, 2013 at 1:56 am #794529
elikapekaParticipantYou still say some very ugly things, WFHooper
July 27, 2013 at 2:26 am #794530
WFMemberwhat is ugly about what was said elikapeka?
July 27, 2013 at 3:20 am #794531
JoBParticipantWF
i know this is difficult for you to grasp
not having the right equipment and all
but being “enabled” by the state doesn’t produce children
nor does being “enabled” by local churches…
the notion that your balance statement defines your ability to parent is ______
elikapeida is right..
it’s ugly.
July 27, 2013 at 3:50 am #794532
WFMemberjob i did ok as a parent (zoo, museums, parks soccer games); my kid is in college now.
college has become very expensive due to the government failing to fund education as priority #1 that it supposed to be. they instead spend money on welfare to enable bad choices that tend continue the pervasive cycle of poverty. stop welfare and you stop the the enabling, without welfare adoption becomes the most viable alternative.
what is ugly about what i stated, you don’t like the frank discussion?
July 27, 2013 at 4:47 am #794533
elikapekaParticipantOops, double post
July 27, 2013 at 4:48 am #794534
elikapekaParticipant@WF, the fact that you even ask the question is indicative of a lack of even a minimally functional empathy chip. It doesn’t matter why a child has a disability or special need. Those kids have an even tougher road to walk to get ahead in life. Trust me when I tell you that a normal person’s reaction is how to help and support those kids to have the best life they have, not to flippantly pile on with prejudice and judgment. That’s why it’s ugly.
July 27, 2013 at 5:09 am #794535
JoBParticipantWF..
they didn’t stop spending money on education so they could spend it on welfare..
they handed out tax breaks like they were candy..
the real welfare queens live in houses in gated communities
July 27, 2013 at 5:30 am #794536
WFMemberjob state tax revenue has gone up faster than inflation and population. the legislature made poor choices and gutted education funding (that has hit the middle class, the ones paying the taxes, very hard). yes getting rid of tax breaks makes sense as does taxing soda pop and foods containing high fructose corn syrup that are another topic onto themselves.
and elikapeka what is ugly is bringing a person into this world without resources to properly care for them and then expect the state to pay via welfare. that is very ugly. and if a person is pregnant and taking drugs that is very very ugly (criminal) that significantly raises the likelihood of challenged children
yes i feel for the kids, but have no empathy for the people who made the bad decision to bring a kid into this world without waiting until they have reasonable resources to care for a child. there is BC and adoption; thus there is no excuse to allow this to continue! and the cycle of poverty is thus severed!
July 27, 2013 at 1:43 pm #794537
BreezyParticipantJoB, I agree with post #82, right up until
“the real welfare queens live in houses in gated communities”
No, I don’t live in a gated community, never have, and have never collected welfare or other public assistance, but I have friends and family members who have or are living in gated communities and they are definitely not welfare queens. They just happened to find a condo, apartment, or home for sale/rent and it’s behind a locking gate. I find them (the gates, not the friends or family) to be a P.I.T.A. because of the punch in numbers thing then hope the gate moves, but whatever. When I delivered Meals on Wheels there were several of our clients who lived in gated communities.
Just a note of caution before typecasting a group of folks based on where they live :)
Keep on typing, I enjoy reading.
July 27, 2013 at 3:09 pm #794538
JoBParticipantBreezy..
i didn’t mean to imply that everyone who lives in gated communities is a welfare queen..
only that the real welfare queens are those living in gated communities who have quadrupled their wealth while blaming society’s ills on the those in need.
the choices isn’t between welfare and education
the choice is between society’s welfare and the profit margin of profiteers
thank you for making me clarify that.
July 27, 2013 at 3:12 pm #794539
JoBParticipantWF..
I think it is ugly to bring children into this world and teach them that the advantages you gave them have nothing to do with their success.
July 27, 2013 at 3:23 pm #794540
WFMemberjob – i think it is extremely ugly to bring a child into this world without the resources to properly take care of them without public assistance (aka tax dollars) that is the start of the cycle of poverty. eliminate the support system and you break the cycle! post #72 is an example very ugly, no resources and had the gull to have 4-kids. this is the very definition of ugly and you are defending this? the system is as it is does not work it is broken and more money will not fix it; all it does is feed the bureaucrats and the broken system.
and once again you need to remember taxes in washington have gone up factoring for both inflation and population growth! it is how the tax resource has been spent has changed for the worse.
July 27, 2013 at 3:58 pm #794541
kgdlgParticipantLets cut to the chase, shall we? WF is stating that poor people should not have children. And to support this argument he uses the tired frame of “personal responsibility”. Because all poor people are poor because of their own lazy bad decisions. Thus, it is easy for him to state that “welfare” aka HIS tax dollars are being used to prop up these welfare queens.
Of course, the truth is far more complicated. This is a dastardly line of reasoning to propagate right now, when income inequality has grown and upward mobility shrunk with the last several decades of policies, due to both Repubs and Dems.
Your assumptions make me kind of sick WF and they not only display your lax of empathy but also your gross privilege. I never should have shared my story for you to judge. One child was a preemie and one had a learning disability. She was a straight as an arrow actually. A very good mom from that perspective. But in your world, I guess the poor are never allowed to make mistakes huh? Because you know how many high income drug addicted and dunk moms and dads I have known in my life? LOTS! But since the don’t live on your tax dollars they can procreate as much as they want.
Your reasoning disgusts me. Welfare didn’t make the problem of poverty. Poverty has been created by our capitalist system and every one of our gated communities to some extent depends on it. It isn’t welfare vs education, it is the us vs them of rich and poor that is killing our country. The vilification of the most vulnerable among us, no matter how much you hate their choices, is sickening and will fester inside of our culture like an open sore, keeping us from truly becoming an advanced nation. Job is right, we have all been fooled into WF’s reasoning – that it is the poor and middle class fighting for the little of the pie we are given while the richest of the rich enjoy all the spoils of what should be reinvested into our great country via education, infrastructure AND the social safety net. It makes me sick so I have to peace out of this thread now!
July 27, 2013 at 4:15 pm #794542
WFMemberkgdlg – i agree the truth is more complicated, but the point of this thread is that there are way too many teen births in this country (i do not believe any one argues this point). the discussion of mechanisms to resolve the resulting challenge is the debate of this thread.
kgdlg – 1 mistake happens; but 2, 3 and 4 are simply not right. everyone makes mistakes but most learn from them and do not repeat the mistake.
i have argued that the current system does not work (i have not heard anyone say it is working) and identified adoption and removing the current, enabling, broken system as alternative to the current broken system.
and other have argued that throwing more $’s at the problem will somehow fix the problem (it hasn’t to date).
actually welfare has exacerbated the problem of poverty. reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan
i do not disagree that the top 1% need to pay higher taxes (but this does not raise that much revenue) and tax loop holes be removed. remember at the state level tax revenue has risen factoring for population and inflation.
July 27, 2013 at 4:28 pm #794543
miwsParticipanti think it is extremely ugly to bring a child into this world without the resources to properly take care of them without public assistance (aka tax dollars) that is the start of the cycle of poverty. eliminate the support system and you break the cycle! Etc,etc! and on and on! yadda yadda yadda! ad infinitum!
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
WFhoop, if you aren’t going to come up with any new material for your comedy act, could you at least work on the delivery?
I realize that not everyone has this knack, but at least these two guys’ routine is as funny the 10,000th time hearing it, as it was the first.
Mike
July 27, 2013 at 4:41 pm #794544
WFMembermiws i did not hear any alternative and the current system does not work’; and throwing more money at it is not the answer.
regardless the sun is out it is time to do yard work
July 27, 2013 at 4:53 pm #794545
waynsterParticipantI know lets bring back the chastity belt have them required for all teen girls and single women we can even make them electronic and tamper proof and snip all men who try and remove them…. cut off all public assistance so theses children who are born because their parents had sex… oh my they are sinners… then we can build that perfect world the religious right so wants…..lets go backwards a few hundred years why not just so the rich could comment crimes against the poor….give me a break people can’t be having sex just because they are poor… you want the gov out or in your bedrooms….if your poor then they are in if your rich they are out…
July 27, 2013 at 5:04 pm #794546
miwsParticipantGood idea, waynester. We should bring back debtor’s prisons too, that would be Utopia in the World of WFhoop.
Mike
July 27, 2013 at 6:28 pm #794547
WFMembermiws/waynster i want to know what the heck is wrong with personal responsibility? having a kid without the resources to raise it is simply not right (from the teen pregnancy data; no other country in the world has such a high rate of teen pregnancies as in the US; thus something is definitely broken) failing to save for a rainy day is stupid (if you can afford a cell phone you can afford to save).
i am not against anyone (i am firmly against the government providing any financial support to able bodied and minded people), my old man grew up dirt poor (he did have 2-caring parents) and reminded us kids every day with the need to work hard, save and be self reliant.
July 28, 2013 at 5:45 am #794548
JoBParticipantWF..
where is your personal responsibility in this discussion?
more than one alternative solution has been ventured and you chose to dismiss, belittle or ignore them while continuing to promote an ideological impossibility.
the only thing that removing government assistance from people you think don’t deserve support would do is remove all possibility that the children they would produce would ever have the opportunity to escape the poverty of their parents.
you know.. the opportunity that allowed your father to escape the cycle of poverty and allowed you to bring your children up with advantages.
July 28, 2013 at 6:13 am #794549
JanSParticipantI had my daughter when I was 33. Yes, I was married, and yes, my husband was employed, although we certainly weren’t rich. If we had waited , as you say, WF, until we were totally financially set, we would never had a child. It’s that simple. I did not work for the first 5 years of her life, instead choosing to be a stay at home mom with no outside income. When my husband’s company went belly up, I had to scramble. I wasn’t a massage therapist then. I cleaned houses…half days. We managed, but it was a struggle until he found another job. But, it takes money to raise a child, as you well know, and we kept our heads above water, but only barely. Would you have removed my child from my home, since I wasn’t financially well off?
Ms. Sparkles…you stated that you would let the child decide if they wanted to go to the school/orphanage. How does a 5 month old decide that? a 2 yr. old? a 5 year old? They don’t have the where with all to decide to leave their parents, who they love, and go live in a barracks like place away from their home, which they love and parents who they love, despite not having a lot.
This topic is very saddening…people deciding what’s best for those people who you feel are wrong..sort of like the government deciding things in your life. How dare we decide for others! Esp. when it comes to taking their children away.
July 28, 2013 at 2:50 pm #794550
TanDLParticipant“…my old man grew up dirt poor (he did have 2-caring parents) and reminded us kids every day with the need to work hard, save and be self reliant.”
And there’s the lens through which you continually view the world today. I know someone who’s old man grew up dirt poor (with 2 caring parents), who became an alcoholic and taught his kids nothing about how to live as productive adults in the world. I also know someone who’s old man grew up wealthy, but lost it all due to bad luck and a devastating accident. He didn’t have a chance to teach his kids much of anything as he died while they were young after losing everything. His wife became a single mother and worked hard on minimum wages just to feed her kids. There are millions of “my old man” stories we could all tell. Some of those stories have happy endings and some don’t.
You should fall to your knees and thank your lucky stars – also any god that you might worship – that your “old man” was resilient and lucky enough to be able to survive his dirt poor circumstances in order to enable you to live the life you are living today. Your early teaching might have resulted in a more well-rounded lens today if you had also been taught compassion for those less fortunate along with personal responsibility and self-reliance. It’s not to late to learn though.
July 28, 2013 at 3:44 pm #794551
WFMembertandl – compassion for those that truly are unlucky is there. but i have little compassion for people that make bad decisions and then ask for government aid to facilitate the bad choice.
a teenager having a kid without resources is a bad decision (USE BC; adoption). welfare to provide assistance for a parent who loses a spouse to an accident yes. and sure if a spouse turns out to be a dead beat temporary assistance makes sense. these items do not relate to teenagers that have a kid with no resources to start with.
job you mentioned alternative solutions, please reiterate them. the state has already cut education funding (essentially added a huge tax on the middle class for college), funding for parks even though revenue has risen factored for inflation and population growth.
please clarify what alternative that does not involve more resources (ok i know you have said tax the wealthy, close loopholes). but at this time this option has not happened; thus identify options within the current available budget?
my options to break the cycle of poverty associated with teens are:
– make BC much more readily available with education
– make adoption the most viable choice
– eliminate government support of this bad decision,
– ostracize the decision – other countries have a way lower teen pregnancy rates why!
JoB or others your listing of options so it is very clear to my pea brain.
July 28, 2013 at 5:05 pm #794552
TanDLParticipantOK… reasonable enough. Could you define bad luck vs. bad decisions for me? The kids who were the spawn of the alcoholic dad experienced bad luck to be born from this guy. No one taught them how to be self-reliant or gave them the tools needed to deal well with finances and they ended up making some of the same bad decisions as he did.
The guy who lost everything made bad decisions (or was it just bad luck) by investing in companies that went belly-up. Then he experienced bad luck by dying in a hunting accident, although if he had been more careful or not gone hunting that day, he would not have died. Bad luck or a bad decision? His wife had to work extra to feed the kids (bad luck – but she didn’t finish her education to marry this guy – bad decision). The kids had little parental supervision because she had to work so much so they made bad decisions as teens because they didn’t have the guidance or teaching to know how to handle life well.
Who gets the help and why?
July 28, 2013 at 5:20 pm #794553
WFMembera person getting killed on a hunting trip, getting hit by a drunk driver are bad luck.
having a kid without resources to take care of them is a bad decision.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.