U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-25-2019, 03:11 PM
 
3,955 posts, read 2,716,636 times
Reputation: 1983

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by roseba View Post
Kind of like the one child rule in China?
When people have multiple children that they can't afford to raise, we working taxpayers end up paying for the cost of raising these children.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 12-25-2019, 04:06 PM
 
Location: Confines of the 101 Precinct
25,299 posts, read 38,783,483 times
Reputation: 11084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoshanarose View Post
When people have multiple children that they can't afford to raise, we working taxpayers end up paying for the cost of raising these children.
Then we have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many children as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2,3 or even 10 children?

Obiviously without procreation the human race is dead. So we are now ok with allowing the choice of who gets to "go forward," so to speak?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: //www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-25-2019, 04:34 PM
 
3,955 posts, read 2,716,636 times
Reputation: 1983
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhFloor View Post
Then we have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many children as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2,3 or even 10 children?

Obiviously without procreation the human race is dead. So we are now ok with allowing the choice of who gets to "go forward," so to speak?
I am simply advocating for people to be responsible before they decide to have children
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-25-2019, 04:49 PM
 
Location: Confines of the 101 Precinct
25,299 posts, read 38,783,483 times
Reputation: 11084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoshanarose View Post
I am simply advocating for people to be responsible before they decide to have children
I'm advocating for people being responsible in general.

75K, ppl can make it work, its doable, maybe not the best conditions.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: //www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-25-2019, 06:10 PM
 
4,229 posts, read 1,544,311 times
Reputation: 5342
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhFloor View Post
Then we have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many children as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2,3 or even 10 children?

Obiviously without procreation the human race is dead. So we are now ok with allowing the choice of who gets to "go forward," so to speak?

Then we also have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many luxury cars as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2, 3 or even 10 Porsches? After all, a Porsche costs much, much less than raising a child. I believe the answer is that Porsches are expensive to make, and the majority of people are not capable of performing such valuable services for other people that can be bartered for 10 Porsches (or for resources needed to raise 10 children).



Obviously the human race has procreated far beyond its resources for survival, to the point of destroying its own habitat, and THAT is why human race will be dead in several hundred years, when the oceans completely envelope the earth. The human race has never been in danger of being dead from non-procreation in the known history or pre-history. There are almost 8 billion people in the world right now, which is about 7 billion more than is optimal for the human race with respect to its natural and artificial resources.



I really don't care how many kids anyone wants to have, as long as nobody is asking me to support their kids. Taxpayers should not be asked to support other people's kids. Procreation is a private matter, as long as parents are not asking for money, or dumping their kids on the society to raise them. I don't have an interest in somebody else's genetic material "going forward" (or even my own, for that matter :-), so why should I be required to fund that?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-25-2019, 07:00 PM
 
Location: NY
9,690 posts, read 2,747,778 times
Reputation: 6341
Quote:
Originally Posted by elnrgby View Post
Then we also have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many luxury cars as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2, 3 or even 10 Porsches? After all, a Porsche costs much, much less than raising a child. I believe the answer is that Porsches are expensive to make, and the majority of people are not capable of performing such valuable services for other people that can be bartered for 10 Porsches (or for resources needed to raise 10 children).



Obviously the human race has procreated far beyond its resources for survival, to the point of destroying its own habitat, and THAT is why human race will be dead in several hundred years, when the oceans completely envelope the earth. The human race has never been in danger of being dead from non-procreation in the known history or pre-history. There are almost 8 billion people in the world right now, which is about 7 billion more than is optimal for the human race with respect to its natural and artificial resources.



I really don't care how many kids anyone wants to have, as long as nobody is asking me to support their kids. Taxpayers should not be asked to support other people's kids. Procreation is a private matter, as long as parents are not asking for money, or dumping their kids on the society to raise them. I don't have an interest in somebody else's genetic material "going forward" (or even my own, for that matter :-), so why should I be required to fund that?

Excerpt:
There are almost 8 billion people in the world right now, which is about 7 billion more than
is optimal for the human race with respect to its natural and artificial resources.


Opinion: We are literally eating ourselves to death.
When only one species is left to survive........ extinction of that species is guaranteed.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-25-2019, 09:22 PM
 
3,955 posts, read 2,716,636 times
Reputation: 1983
Quote:
Originally Posted by elnrgby View Post
Then we also have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many luxury cars as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2, 3 or even 10 Porsches? After all, a Porsche costs much, much less than raising a child. I believe the answer is that Porsches are expensive to make, and the majority of people are not capable of performing such valuable services for other people that can be bartered for 10 Porsches (or for resources needed to raise 10 children).



Obviously the human race has procreated far beyond its resources for survival, to the point of destroying its own habitat, and THAT is why human race will be dead in several hundred years, when the oceans completely envelope the earth. The human race has never been in danger of being dead from non-procreation in the known history or pre-history. There are almost 8 billion people in the world right now, which is about 7 billion more than is optimal for the human race with respect to its natural and artificial resources.



I really don't care how many kids anyone wants to have, as long as nobody is asking me to support their kids. Taxpayers should not be asked to support other people's kids. Procreation is a private matter, as long as parents are not asking for money, or dumping their kids on the society to raise them. I don't have an interest in somebody else's genetic material "going forward" (or even my own, for that matter :-), so why should I be required to fund that?
I absolutely agree with you
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-25-2019, 09:41 PM
 
454 posts, read 220,532 times
Reputation: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by elnrgby View Post
Then we also have to ask the question why people cannot afford to have as many luxury cars as they want, what really prohibits a husband/wife from having 2, 3 or even 10 Porsches? After all, a Porsche costs much, much less than raising a child. I believe the answer is that Porsches are expensive to make, and the majority of people are not capable of performing such valuable services for other people that can be bartered for 10 Porsches (or for resources needed to raise 10 children).



Obviously the human race has procreated far beyond its resources for survival, to the point of destroying its own habitat, and THAT is why human race will be dead in several hundred years, when the oceans completely envelope the earth. The human race has never been in danger of being dead from non-procreation in the known history or pre-history. There are almost 8 billion people in the world right now, which is about 7 billion more than is optimal for the human race with respect to its natural and artificial resources.



I really don't care how many kids anyone wants to have, as long as nobody is asking me to support their kids. Taxpayers should not be asked to support other people's kids. Procreation is a private matter, as long as parents are not asking for money, or dumping their kids on the society to raise them. I don't have an interest in somebody else's genetic material "going forward" (or even my own, for that matter :-), so why should I be required to fund that?
A child is neither a Porsche nor a commodity of any kind but rather a person whose care is the right and responsibility of each couple and then more broadly of society. Taxpayers are asked to fund everything from nuclear weapons to street paint to animal shelters, because that's how any functioning human society works. And, frankly, from education to health departments you're already "paying for" other people to have kids. The entire "don't make me pay for your kids" meme is an empty soapbox because not only are you already paying for a billion things less important than children but you're actually already paying for children, too
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-26-2019, 06:55 AM
 
Location: Confines of the 101 Precinct
25,299 posts, read 38,783,483 times
Reputation: 11084
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeignCrunch View Post
A child is neither a Porsche nor a commodity of any kind but rather a person whose care is the right and responsibility of each couple and then more broadly of society. Taxpayers are asked to fund everything from nuclear weapons to street paint to animal shelters, because that's how any functioning human society works. And, frankly, from education to health departments you're already "paying for" other people to have kids. The entire "don't make me pay for your kids" meme is an empty soapbox because not only are you already paying for a billion things less important than children but you're actually already paying for children, too
Couldn't have said it any better
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: //www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Rate this post positively
 
Old 12-26-2019, 07:44 AM
 
3,541 posts, read 2,090,820 times
Reputation: 3875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Retired View Post
Opinion:
Agreed.
Let's not lose focus. The post asked if a family with 3 children can make it on $75,000 a year in N.Y.C.
not if a family with three children can make it on $75,000 a year in N.Y.C. along side of government subsidies.
No one gets any handouts on $75k per yr. None.
$6k per month is not poor,according to HRA or any other programs. Not even food stamps.

All that "my tax dollars " bs, oh brother.your taxes contribute to .00002 % of the economy, if that much.

Comfortable living? $200,000 per year affords a nice home mortgage, or bigger apartment and being able to save $$$ ,have 2 cars ,go on 2 vacays per year.
Rate this post positively
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.


Closed Thread



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 > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:54 PM.

© 2005-2021, 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