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.
Access to abortion has been severely limited by the GOP. Even people that self pay for abortions are impacted by the reduction of clinics and the crazy GOP imposed rules that result in more unwanted kids.
Yep the sky is falling and it's all because liberals are encouraging women to get pregnant and go on welfare. Okay then. It does make that unpopular big tax cut for the 1% look even more ridiculous though doesn't it?
This is what happens when you set poverty standards to a national average and the rural, low cost of living areas will have more people qualify than the higher paying but higher cost urban areas.
That makes no sense. The highest poverty rate is in urban areas, not low COL rural areas.
The middle class have been squeezed out for decades now and the poorer, of course, even more so, hence more children on welfare. Yet, now there is in place tax cuts for the richest of the rich. They're getting richer, while everyone else gets relatively and abjectly poorer. I don't "blame" the poorer of us for their fate, but I don't applaud having children you can't afford either. It's irresponsible. Lack of education is part of the problem, but also a system that is, in part, rigged to favor those w/ money that perpetrates the problem. It' s complicated w/ no easy solutions.
You know how you'd reduce that massive amount of people on welfare? I'm thinking probably minimum wage increases. Everyone I know who works a minimum wage job who's over about 25, works two of them. It's not making much of a difference if more jobs are available if it just means that everybody's working two jobs.
Also, I'm pretty confident people aren't having fewer children because they're taxed more. They're having fewer children because college is expensive and college is becoming more popular, or because culture is changing. It's always been the case that the wealthier you are, the fewer children you have too. That's not a change in society. That's just how things have always worked. That's why there's such a big baby-boom in third world nations, but such small growth in wealthier nations.
Yeah, except it used to be that you would have all those kids and they would work to support the family. NOW, the taxpayers support them.
My experience, undocumented families do not want to be on welfare because they don't like to be on record.
My experience, they don't even like to have bank accounts, credit cards.
They deal with cash.
One of the biggest 'struggles' in some of the elementary schools I have been in are the families that won't apply for free lunch for the kids. The teachers know they would qualify and YES...even when the parents are undocumented and the kids are anchor babies....the parents will not apply for free lunch program because they don't want the govt. to have a 'record'.
At our church -- they wouldn't even become official 'parishioners because they feared that would be used to track them down.
They would sign their kids up for the lessons required by the Catholic church but they would not full on 'join' the church.
They always paid cash -- no checks, no credit cards.
I do appreciate that some states -- California for example - where this may not be the same trend...but I'm not sure the 'illegal resident in Kansas is running down to the welfare office to collect a few bucks.
What do you mean 'my experience'? So undocumented families come up to you regularly and tell you they don't want to be on welfare because they don't want to be on record?
I will agree with you that they deal in cash, but it's to avoid taxes. People always say let's pass immigration reform and all these people will pay taxes. BS. They are practiced at the art of NOT paying taxes.
Welfare fraud is alive amongst many ethnic groups...
Working with Orthodox Jews and other ethnic minorities all cash business, showing divorced on papers, turning their basements into “synagogue” to avoid paying property taxes, putting money under childrens name, etc. very common.
Many of those on welfare are poor on papers only..
So what to do with the children born to people who can't support them? Even though they had no say in being conceived by incompetent parents, they should suffer? Perhaps they should be treated like unwanted kittens and be put in a bag with a rock and thrown in the lake? No? Yes? Maybe another way that is more politically correct?
What determines whether a person is born to a wealthy family or a destitute one? Do we believe that there but for the grace of God go we? Or do we take our more fortunate accident of birth for granted because we deserve a better life than the others who were conceived at the same time by different parents?
Morality or expediency. Maybe they are the same thing.
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.
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.
