Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-08-2017, 06:51 PM
 
Location: DFW
40,952 posts, read 49,213,992 times
Reputation: 55008

Advertisements

We can fix any animal so they won't reproduce but not a human. Some need to be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2017, 06:53 PM
 
7,235 posts, read 7,042,475 times
Reputation: 12265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
We can fix any animal so they won't reproduce but not a human. Some need to be.
But you don't favor "Big Government", right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 06:53 PM
 
4,540 posts, read 2,787,818 times
Reputation: 4921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cantabridgienne View Post
But you don't favor "Big Government", right?
Faux conservative, this forum is full of them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 06:55 PM
 
7,235 posts, read 7,042,475 times
Reputation: 12265
Quote:
Originally Posted by War Beagle View Post
I don't think its an immoral idea since it is completely voluntary. It just wouldn't eliminate poverty. American "poverty" isn't at all the same thing as international poverty. American poverty is relative to how other Americans are doing financially. The concept of American poverty is a useful, highly flexible tool for politicians to utilize to push for their preferred policy programs.

One could already make the argument that there is no true poverty in the US. No one is starving to death. All Americans can get basic clothing if they need it. Relatively few Americans are truly homeless through no fault of their own.

How are you defining "truly homeless" and "through no fault of their own"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 06:56 PM
 
6,393 posts, read 4,117,869 times
Reputation: 8252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevdawgg View Post
But in a generation or so, 2k a month would be pennies.
Then increase the amount. This part of the point is moot.

The main point of the thread isn't about how much the basic income is. It's the general idea of voluntary sterilization in exchange for a basic income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 06:59 PM
 
7,235 posts, read 7,042,475 times
Reputation: 12265
Or, extra money for when you are done having kids and want a vasectomy/tuba ligation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 07:03 PM
 
8,275 posts, read 7,952,048 times
Reputation: 12122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cantabridgienne View Post
How are you defining "truly homeless" and "through no fault of their own"?
By the homeless I'm referring to people living on the street.

By "through no fault of their own", I am referring to people who did all the things they are supposed to do, but still ended up homeless. What I am not including are drug addicts, alcoholics, the work-shy, people who decided to reproduce with jerks knowing full well they are jerks, etc. In other words, many homeless people in some way contributed to their own homelessness through their actions.

Obviously, people with severe mental illnesses are not at fault, which also is a significant portion of the homeless population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 07:04 PM
 
Location: USA
18,502 posts, read 9,170,177 times
Reputation: 8532
Sounds like a good plan to me.

No one who is unable to support themselves should be allowed to have any more children. It's not fair to taxpayers or the children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 07:06 PM
 
6,393 posts, read 4,117,869 times
Reputation: 8252
Quote:
Originally Posted by katzpaw View Post
Poverty is not a gene.
I guess I should have expected kneejerk reactions.

Anyone who has ever worked with the poor knows that the attitude of poverty gets passed from generation to generation. Pull a random social worker aside and ask her for her observation. She will tell you that it's always the same people across generations applying for benefits. Teen girls see no other path in life except get pregnant and apply for benefits. Teen boys see no other alternative but to sleep around and impregnate girls.

Here are some links for info on generational poverty and how learned helplessness gets passed down from generation to generation.

Understanding the Nature of Poverty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycle_of_poverty

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...c-performance/

Wisconsin's black children remain trapped in poverty, study says

NCCP | Child Poverty and Intergenerational Mobility

Here is a study on the chances of staying in poverty after being born into it.

New reports shows 70% of those born poor stay poor - Economy

So, please no more kneejerk reaction. As I have stated many times before, the problem of poverty cannot be solved by throwing money at it. We have been throwing money at it for over 5 decades. It's doing the same thing over and over expecting different results even though we keep getting the same results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2017, 07:09 PM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,462 posts, read 7,096,830 times
Reputation: 11708
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroWord View Post
In another thread, someone suggested the following solution to poverty. I can't remember who this person was, so if you think this was your idea please speak up.

Here's the solution. Basic income for life of about ~$2000/month to anyone with one condition: voluntarily submit oneself to sterilization. Within a generation or so, the problem of poverty will be solved.

This suggestion was written on here a few weeks ago. On the outside, it sounds horrid, doesn't it? But I cannot find anything logically wrong with this policy. Put aside political correctness for a moment. What exactly is wrong with this solution?


Well for starters, how about there are people out there who work their a$$ off for $2000.00/month and their taxes would be paying for it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:34 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top