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.
Not true. You have to name the father unless you had legal proof doing so would endanger your life.
Yup. When I process an insurance application for a woman with children listed and no father, a question comes up that asks if her kids have a parent living outside the home and another that asks if she is willing to cooperate with the Child Support Enforcement Unit. If she says no to cooperating, she is automatically disqualified for Medicaid coverage. If she has "good cause" she will indicate that when she is contacted by CSEU.
There are probably a number of other relevant posts as well.
When I received welfare I was required to cooperate completely and it was said that we had to name the father or we would be denied benefits. I got a waiver because I had a DVO against him, but otherwise I would've had to cooperate.
When I received welfare I was required to cooperate completely and it was said that we had to name the father or we would be denied benefits. I got a waiver because I had a DVO against him, but otherwise I would've had to cooperate.
That's anecdotal, and the point is that's not a national thing, it's a state or local thing.
Yes a mother's irresponsible behaviors punish her offspring. But if we don't give her more welfare likely she won't have more offspring.
Takes a male and female and both are equally responsible for the outcome of unprotected sex.
The poorer the population, the higher the birth rate. Niger is the country with the highest global birth rate and no social Welfare System. In contrast, Iceland has a solid Nordic Welfare System and one of the lowest birth rates in the world.
The US birth rate is almost half of what it was in the 50’s, before LBJ’s War on Poverty. It is now at the lowest point since data has been recorded, 120 years ago. The decline crosses all races/ ethnicities.
Another theory often proffered is the fact that, in poor societies, children are both a form of labor, and a form of insurance. In agricultural societies children do a lot of the farm labor. Additionally, they are a form of old-age insurance to take care of you when you get older, in societies that have little or no safety net. It could be that poor people still carry the many-kids mindset with them for a while after having left an agricultural society.
Our, (u.s.) welfare, ss, system is set up so that the younger workforce payroll taxes, pay for the older generation ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
Not at all. Those who use medicaid to pay for their voluntary pregnancies and birth did come to me (me being government "we the people") asking for help because they did something they were not prepared for. So yes it is the business of "we the people" how tax dollars are spent.
Just like when one takes out a loan or applies for a government grant, your business becomes the lenders/givers business. Just like how a corporation conducts business is the business of its shareholder via the board of directors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
You know I said it is the citizens business what taxes are being used for. I did not say I want to tell the government what I want my tax money to go for, right. Do you see the difference.
^^ you just did. The tax system in your opinion, gives you the right to tell other people when they can and can not procreate ... They have to ask your permission.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMESMH
To you it's shaming.
To us merely being vocal about where our tax dollars are spent isn't shaming.
That you decided to refer to that as shaming doesn't make you correct.
But even if we agreed that it is shaming, shaming in and of itself isn't wrong. For one example, shaming the act of murdering people with the motivation of trying to prevent murders isn't wrong.
We are talking about money, not murder ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMESMH
So being a taxpayer of $1 puts someone in a higher class, eh ? (2mares only point was Taxpayer vs. Non-Taxpayer....not class).
No, it's not wrong.
Taking from the public trough gives taxpayers every right to critique the recipients.
If the trough wasn't there, then what? Would you still feel the same to encroach on other's family planning business ... ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dissenter
It takes money and stability to raise a child properly. Waiting until you are in a reasonable place with both is not “perfection.”
In life we all know the best laid plans can blow up on a person. Where as, you can be doing all things the right way in making a plan; then something happens ... always worried about the 'something', is no way to live ... scared and in fear. In the 30's those that fell on hard times, blamed themselves, thinking they had done something wrong ... 87 years later, people are going to make sure they believe it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
False. When an exponentially increasing population is welfare-dependent and not only doesn't contribute by paying federal income and payroll tax but further reduces resources by drawing welfare benefits, that's LESS tax revenue available to fund the next generation's retirement. It's simple math. HOW do you not understand that?
It is called taking a risk ... which stands to reason in this game of risk, less population, less workforce, less possibility of taxes being kept up to standards, which leave those in the workforce to pick up the slack and their payroll taxes will increase.
More children the greater possibility given the odds that some? will enter the workforce as opposed to the none, you'd like to see?
My children are paying for my retirement, you nor yours don't enter the equation. The people not having babies are putting a strain on the system.
Once again, we are all slaves in this tax system. When the government approved welfare (taking care of its citizens), they created the fight among the classes and an excuse for people to believe they could rule over other's lives. And that is fine by all those of you who do not think it is your life being effected by the outcry of the other slaves ... Rather than come together in support of one another, the government created a (money) division among the citizens by creating the poor, the middle and the elite classes, distinct, where as, in all reality no one is any better than the other in this world, we just think we are; you've been brainwashed, through government bureaucracy.
The u.s. use to believe in the family ... what happened? btw: not doing so will end us.
Takes a male and female and both are equally responsible for the outcome of unprotected sex.
The poorer the population, the higher the birth rate. Niger is the country with the highest global birth rate and no social Welfare System. In contrast, Iceland has a solid Nordic Welfare System and one of the lowest birth rates in the world.
The US birth rate is almost half of what it was in the 50’s, before LBJ’s War on Poverty. It is now at the lowest point since data has been recorded, 120 years ago. The decline crosses all races/ ethnicities.
Birth rates have dropped significantly since the 1960s. More people were having kids before the beginning of the welfare state than they are now. We just hear about this more than before. I have my own hypothesis on this. When someone says "welfare queen", there are people who are concerned about the overuse of welfare, as it applies to tax dollars. However, the term "welfare queen" is also a dog whistle term. When some people say "welfare queen", it's usually Black women, and some cases Hispanic women some people are thinking of.
There is another factor to consider. It's hard to get the man to be held responsible if he's not working and can't be tracked donw easily. And many "dead beat dads" are in prison for unrelated crimes. In alot of cases, the only people who do suffer are the kids. But when the dead beats are found, they get put through the wringer. Wages garnished due to child support, and then prison for failure to pay child support. There are ways that men pay. But at the end of the days, the kids are already being punished. They're being brought into a situation that isn't ideal. Punishing the mother won't stop the mother from having multple kids out of wedlock over and over. Some women just leave the kids with grandmother.
At the end of the day, when individuals cannot control their urges, and are reckless, the results will speak for themselves.
It is called taking a risk ... which stands to reason in this game of risk, less population, less workforce, less possibility of taxes being kept up to standards, which leave those in the workforce to pick up the slack and their payroll taxes will increase.
It's a loser bet. 70% of those born poor/low-income will remain poor/low-income for life. All that is accomplished is an exponential increase in the welfare-dependent class. It's not sustainable.
It's a loser bet. 70% of those born poor/low-income will remain poor/low-income for life. All that is accomplished is an exponential increase in the welfare-dependent class. It's not sustainable.
Neither is 0 births, so now what?
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.
So being a taxpayer of $1 puts someone in a higher class, eh ? (2mares only point was Taxpayer vs. Non-Taxpayer....not class).
