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.
Its not really a question of if poor people should be allowed to keep a pet more so the question would be, is it fiscally responsible for a person who is having problems affording food and care for their family be able to have a pet?
It seems to me that if folks are having a tough time supporting families on a low income then they probably can't afford a pet too.
This was recently highlighted in a thread in Non-romantic relationships where the persons puppy had been bitten by something that had caused his eyes to swell, the puppy was the center of a family problem and through all of this all she could see was that she was being victimized. The dogs welfare didn't seem to come into question until C-D posters asked why she hadn't taken the dog to a vet as it was obviously distressed, her answer ... because she was waiting for her check and couldn't afford it. So the dog had to suffer until she had the funds to take him to the vet for relief.
In that case she didn't seem to have even thought of contacting the blue cross or a vet for help, but without the funds that puppy suffered.
We have 3 dogs, 2 are rescues, all are loved and cared for we are blessed to be financially secure enough to pay their care and vet bills (latest rescue was diagnosed with cancerous tumour on his kidney 3 months after we adopted him, instant $1,000 bill) I have also in the past paid for medical treatment for a cat of a complete stranger so their companion could at least have a chance at a long happy life.
I cannot even begin to imagine life without a dog (or 3) but I only have what I can afford.
I agree that it is wrong to offer a pet completely for free ( unless you know the person is safe ) I cringe when I see free pets offered on craigslist and have in the past actually emailed the owners asking them to charge even a small fee. I worry that people will sell those animals to laboratories for animals testing or who know what else, however I really do think $300 is too much . I am sure they can offer shots and neutering for less than that.
Puppy mills are another subject altogether. They are awful and need to be shut down.I am glad you have rescued a puppy mill breeding dog.What a relief it must have been to her to be fixed and what a joy it must now be to be loved.
A buddy gave me a kitten to replace an elderly cat (Big Bear) I had for 14 years who died (Cat was FIV+, according to my vet, he lived a relatively long life considering.
Anyway. I have a great vet who does very good work for a very reasonable price. To give Valentin (new cat) a full set of vaccinations was, I think, about $200. And that is the "brother-in-law" price.
I have not had him "fixed" yet, that will probably round it up to close to $300.
I'm not arguing that people who can't pay $300 should not have a pet, but, just to make an "honest citizen" out of my new cat appears to be costing me about that amount.
Someone who has intact cats breeding and these cats not having at least rabies vaccinations - not a desirable situation. Particularly cats, they can have 2 generations in a calendar year and each litter is easily 6 new kittens. They are cute but do the maths - in a couple of years you are up to your eyeballs in cats!
Many healthy but unwanted dogs and cats are euthanized every year because nobody wants to adopt them. Many no kill shelters say they do not have room to save them because they have trouble finding homes for the ones they already have and yet they often charge expensive adoption fees that many cannot afford.
Those adoption fees are to help off set the expenses the rescue has paid. They do NOT make money on the adoption fees. Spay/neuter costs money. Food costs money. Vet care costs money. If you can't afford $200-300 to adopt a pet, how can you afford food and vet care? Just the basics - annual visit and vaccines - can costs hundreds of dollars. Add in flea, tick, and heartworm preventative and you're looking at a few hundred more.
This month alone, I have spent over a thousand dollars on 2 medical procedures for 2 dogs of mine. This year I have spent over 2 grand on our 3 dogs and it's only April. And none of the cats have been to the vet this year yet.
Too many cats and dogs exist because don't spay/neuter! They buy pets they think are cute as puppies, but then that lab puppy grows into a 90 pound dog that wants attention and everyone ignores the poor thing.
I know a person who is just getting by on Social Security Disability check and food stamps ... confined to a wheelchair and hasn't much mobility or a social life. The cat means so much to him! Therefore my answer is yes.
I don't think it's a question of rich or poor, but rather can you provide at least a certain amount of love and support so that the pet will be happy and not suffer. A pet may not need gourmet food, but it has to be fed and watered, basic shots and spaying and neutering. I'm not sure all of the surgeries and life extending actions are necessary particularly if you can't afford it. An animal should not be allowed to suffer and you have to be able to euthanize it in a manner that does not cause it to suffer. You have to spend time with your pet and make them a part of the family or you don't deserve one.
Someone who has intact cats breeding and these cats not having at least rabies vaccinations - not a desirable situation. Particularly cats, they can have 2 generations in a calendar year and each litter is easily 6 new kittens. They are cute but do the maths - in a couple of years you are up to your eyeballs in cats!
This literally made me laugh out loud! Hilarious! I love the visual! But, also because this was my childhood!!! My parents were not real "go-getters" and while we weren't exactly poor a lot went ignored in our house. I don't even remember how we got the first cat...but soon we had 4...a few months later 6...a few months later 12...I can't remember how many cats we had over the years, but at one point in time we had 14 cats. 14 cats. We loved them. Snuggled them. Played with them. But they were everywhere. Looking back, they were basically feral cats that had the good fortune of being born indoors.
Location: Scott County, Tennessee/by way of Detroit
3,352 posts, read 2,824,565 times
Reputation: 10348
Its not really a question of if poor people should be allowed to keep a pet more so the question would be, is it fiscally responsible for a person who is having problems affording food and care for their family be able to have a pet?
It seems to me that if folks are having a tough time supporting families on a low income then they probably can't afford a pet too.
I believe this also...As a single parent, my son wanted pets but I couldn't afford the bills that come along with a cat or dog..he had hamsters...fish and salamanders.....made him happy just to have something!!!!
2/3rds of Americans are just 2 paychecks away from being homeless, and that includes members of the deep-in-debt middle class as well.
A ferret, the 3rd most popular pet in America today, is a good choice for the poor, as they're very economical to feed, very intelligent, they don't bark or make any noise to disturb neighbors, they're easy to potty train (put a paper down in every corner of every room), they're small enough to fit into backpack, and they can be easily leash trained and walked like dogs, for up to 6-8 blocks.
And there's also hamsters, gerbils and rats one can have for pets, and I once met someone who has leash-trained his rat!
Guinea pigs are good pets for folks who don't have a lot of money to spend on pets. As well as rabbits. Both can eat weeds and grasses during the summer and hay and leftover vegetable bits over the winter or sprouted grains. None of which is expensive feeds and the pets themselves aren't expensive, either. Rabbits can be trained to come when called and can be a house rabbit using a litter pan. They're quiet, guinea pigs will squeal sometimes.
You can also keep animal maintenance costs down by checking to see what shots and medicines are available at feed stores. Not everything needs to be done at the vet and you can clip toenails, brush their teeth and groom their coats yourself.
Actually, for poor people, they could get an angora rabbit so they can harvest the wool three times a year and sell it. Angoras make between one and five pounds of wool per year and that can be sold for five dollars per ounce. The animal will more than pay for itself and it will set them up in a small money making operation while they have a cuddly pet, too. The wool is either combed off when the animal molts such as with the English angora or is clipped off with scissors such as with the German or Giant angoras. The wool can be sold on Etsy or to anyone in their neighborhood who does spinning or felting.
And where do you draw the line in deciding who is rich enough to own a pet?
You don't.
That is a decision each person who wants to own a pet must make for themselves.
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.
