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.
Most homeless people have mental and addiction problems.
Most poor people are stuck in a vicious cycle which they will not escape if they don't have the avenues through which they can better themselves....which is affordable education, subsidized daycare, low cost housing, etc.
The reason the U.S has the largest poverty rate in the developed world is because these important essential services are not easily available and so the vicious cycle of poverty continues.
So giving tax cuts to the rich and de-regulations is not going to help their situations, despite what talk radio spoon feeds you every day.
Most families getting food stamps DO work.** It's just that they have low-paying dead-end jobs. If the parents could get a better job, they would; in some cases, they just don't have the skills.
So let's say we go with your plan and stop providing EBT benefits and free lunch to their kids at school. And let's say that the working poor parents (many time it's just one parent and usually when that is the case, it's the mother) can't make up the extra funds to feed them without skipping out on their rent. What do you think the real-life consequences of this would be and what do you think should be done about it?
I'm thinking the consequences will be:
-hungry children
-hungry mom
-homelessness (in cases where mom pays for food rather than rent)
Solutions:
-just let kids be hungry (keeping in mind that they will do poorly in school, steal, get into fights, need more medical are, etc.)
-bring back child labor and put those kids to work
??
Since you're against feeding hungry kids, I'm not sure what other solutions you'd find acceptable. Helping mom get the education she needs for a better job is a great long-term solution, but it doesn't feed hungry bellies in the meantime. Also, people against feeding kids are also usually against providing childcare... so I guess mom wouldn't be able to go to school anyway, since she'd be working while the kids were at school.
Maybe I'm thinking about this the wrong way, though, and you have a solution in mind.
Most (not all) children aren't "planned" per se, if you don't know that, then you're naive
That's a rationalization to excuse irresponsibility.
1. Abortion is legal
2. If people don't wan't to/ don't believe in utilizing #1 as a backup to failed birth control....sex isn't like food or water. People don't have to have it to live.
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.
If they're poor, why are they having children?
