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 only Republicans would stop trying to block sex ed, contraceptions, and abortion, maybe we wouldn't have this problem. Oh well, common sense was never a GOP trait.
Just so the OP knows, as someone who has worked for nearly 4 years in a grocery store, most of the people on WIC weren't free loaders. They had either a father that impregnated the mother and then bailed after the birth, or were just a poor provider,abusive, etc.. or were military families and the father was out fighting the GOP's never ending wars.
What is it with republicans and their constant know it all, look down up on everyone attitude.
The OP rages over this thread over a program that barely costs any money but keeps families from starving to death.
Before I got into the Aerospace business, I worked for 8 years in the grocery industry. There is no possible way for you to know this information just by seeing WIC users come through the aisle. Not sure why you even tried.
And regarding this:
Quote:
If only Republicans would stop trying to block sex ed, contraceptions, and abortion, maybe we wouldn't have this problem.
You've bought completely into over-blown media-driven scare tactics. Try to refrain from this if possible.
We all try to limit mistakes. I used to tell my kids that. When they would talk about learning from mistakes, I'd say there are some mistakes it's just better not to make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nocontengencies
I don't think it's moot at all. Why not have all food hand outs required to be healthy food?
The funny (peculiar, not "ha-ha", as my friend's mother used to ask when we used that word) thing is, WIC is healthy food. There are people who rail on against food stamps (SNAP) b/c you can buy a lot of junk with SNAP. Go look at some food stamp threads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55
If welfare, food stamps, and WIC are unconstitutional, why do they exist? Why haven't republicans eliminated these entitlements when they had control of house and senate. Its republicans who rail against these programs, yet bush didn't eliminate them when he had the chance.
Yep. Actually, all the food programs are Dept. of Agriculture programs, so the farmers benefit, too. They are probably constitutional under the interstate commerce clause.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale
There is only ONE way.
That is by respecting our nations laws.
Read the Constitution.
Read the founders original intent when you don't understand something.
Read the federalist papers.
It is not illegal to get WIC. It is not illegal to get pregnant. No one can know what the Founding Fathers really meant about any issue. The Federalist Papers are not law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
Ah ok...so you're done now huh?
Pointless thread? Only if you abhor personal responsibility. Which you clearly do.
Do you have an answer for that? You should clear this up or forever be known as the anti-personal responsibility type. Because I can promise you it will stick if you hang around this forum spewing this kind of tripe.
Some, and I emphasize some, Republicans have made a mockery of "personal responsibility". You get laid off? You're responsible. ETC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nocontengencies
Just because you want something doesn't mean you should be able to get it at everyone elses expense and consider it to be an OK thing to do. I am for safety nets, but not for people planning their lives with the idea in mind of living on handouts. You don't have to be rich to have children and support them yourselves. Most of the poor families I know don't have one or two they have 5 or 6 kids. Where do you draw the line?
I posted a link, either in this thread or on another one yesterday, that said the average welfare family is three people, usually a mom and two kids. Do a search.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
Ok, if this is your perception of my thoughts, then riddle me this.
Tell me why you think that cutting off funding won't reduce the number of poor people who have children?
When the spigot is turned off, tell me why you don't think that this will have a positive effect on those who normally think in the back of their minds that the government will be there to subsidize their bad decisions?
If the money/benefits are not there, why would you think that most would keep making bad decisions?
If you're going to twist and contort my assertion, i'd prefer that you be able to back them up.
Q1: It never has in the past. Family sizes are smaller now, the birth rate is lower now, and teen pregnancy is lower now than at any time in the past.
I may have confused you with one of the other posters who acknowledged to using WIC. But that doesn't take away from the fact that you have not provided any logic as to why this isn't a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY issue?
When will you hold people accountable for thier actions? EVER?
When have you ever stood up and said "Enough is enough. It's time for people to STOP what they're doing and get control of themselves for the good of this nation?"
Since you say you're full of good ideas....lets hear them. And you can start by telling us when you've drawn a line in the sand as I have done on this thread.
Oy, I just keep getting dragged in...
How do YOU know I have never said "enough is enough"? How do YOU know that I don't think some people on these programs are being irresponsible and something should be done about them? Again with the assumptions...
I have my issues with these programs, the people who abuse them, and the people who seem okay w/ "generational welfare". Such programs are excellent safety nets when times get tough, but no one should be on them for decades or raising multiple generations using them (I read stories in the news when Cabrini Green was torn down of people who were seemingly raising their children in the same Sec. 8 apartments their mother got decades ago and was disgusted).
Pity you couldn't suggest some ideas of your own since you brought up the topic, but my suggestions are as follow:
-life time cap on ALL so-called "welfare" programs-WIC, SNAP, Section 8, TANF, etc. Perhaps a 5 year cap would do. Some of these, specifically TANF, may already have a cap on them. Exceptions on a case-by-case basis (e.g., disability, long term recession/depression that make finding a job harder, etc)
-no additional increases if you have two children while on these programs. Small increase if you have one additional kid while on them (accidents do happen), but you must enroll in an all encompassing sex education class and shoe proof that you are working on getting off the program (e.g, enrolling in a voc-tech or college program, interning somewhere to gain job skills, etc). Honestly, I think that, after the second or third year, you should have to do this anyways.
-regular check ups to make sure people who claim a certain income aren't being subsidized by a live-in lover or relative.
-hold deadbeat dads more accountable for their children. Garnish wages, tax refunds, and hold any employer who pays them under the table responsible. It does take two to make a baby after all.
-more emphasis on school lunch programs and decreasing the amount of WIC/SNAP a family receives if the child is a part of a school lunch program. If your child is getting breakfast and lunch at school, then you don't need as much money to prepare food at home. Obviously, the amount would change over the summer or times when the child is out of school.
-more community based programs to help feed low income programs. For example, turning vacant lots into community gardens, after school and summer programs that feed kids that rely on school lunch programs, etc.
-Once again, an all encompassing sex education is important. Teaching kids about birth control, natural family planning, and abstinence (basically, covering all the bases) is key in making sure they know ways to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.
-Better access to birth control, especially for lower income women.
-Changes to the program so illegal immigrants can't benefit. I honestly don't know yet how to do so w/o affecting the legal children of illegals, but a way should be found. Other programs (like school lunch programs), churches, and charities should pick up the slack for illegal children or it could vary by state.
These are some ideas that I have off the top of my head. They may not be 100% feasible as stated, but it's a start. The biggest issue is, of course, making sure the children don't suffer for the irresponsible adults mistakes, but, again, I don't think most people on these programs are irresponsible. Some made mistakes, some may be ignorant to their options. Education is key and would help decrease the number of people on such programs (as would more jobs, but that's a bigger, different issue).
Yes, I realize that I may be talking to a rather dense wall, but at the same time, somewhere very, very deep within the original post, I think an interesting point/issue can be found and should be addressed. Sad that Aeroguy couldn't have done more to do so since, like I said before, it would be an interesting debate and he may find that many people, including myself, DO have issues w/ these programs being abused and people irresponsibly having children that can't care for.
We all try to limit mistakes. I used to tell my kids that. When they would talk about learning from mistakes, I'd say there are some mistakes it's just better not to make.
The funny (peculiar, not "ha-ha", as my friend's mother used to ask when we used that word) thing is, WIC is healthy food. There are people who rail on against food stamps (SNAP) b/c you can buy a lot of junk with SNAP. Go look at some food stamp threads.
Yep. Actually, all the food programs are Dept. of Agriculture programs, so the farmers benefit, too. They are probably constitutional under the interstate commerce clause.
It is not illegal to get WIC. It is not illegal to get pregnant. No one can know what the Founding Fathers really meant about any issue. The Federalist Papers are not law.
Some, and I emphasize some, Republicans have made a mockery of "personal responsibility". You get laid off? You're responsible. ETC.
I posted a link, either in this thread or on another one yesterday, that said the average welfare family is three people, usually a mom and two kids. Do a search.
Q1: It never has in the past. Family sizes are smaller now, the birth rate is lower now, and teen pregnancy is lower now than at any time in the past.
Q2: I don't think that's ever worked, either.
Q3: Because people always have.
Your name: Katiana
Flows through my lips like a strong, but subtle Merlot
This is the point that we keep trying to make to Aero, but he seems to think pregnancies are going to stop if you cut-off WIC. We keep trying to tell him that its going to still and he keeps say that parents should practice responsibilty but hasn't given a solution to prevent people from having sex.
Again, why do you twist and contort my assertions?
A "solution to prevent people from having sex?" You're kidding right?
I have in no way, shape, or form asserted that people should stop having sex.
If you're going to skew my words, please exit the thread.
The crucial missing link in your argument: It's not HARD to NOT get pregnant. Whether it happens or not is irrelevant. The point is that it DOESN'T have to happen.
Personally responsible people make sure it doesn't happen. In fact, millions of people every year are successful in not getting pregnant. I give them credit for doing what they needed to do, whether it be doubled up on birth control or abstinence....it matters not to me. The point is that they were successful.
I know......These basic truths are hard for you guys to understand. They shouldn't be though.
Everybody on this forum agrees with you that poor people SHOULD NOT have kids they can't afford and poor people SHOULD practice personal responsiblity. In a PERFECT WORLD only rich people would have kids, but its not a perfect world. We are living in REALITY. The reality is poor people are going to have kids with or without assistance. What we are saying is that because of the REALITY that poor people are going to have kids, we want WIC exist so that KIDS do not suffer because they were born into a tough situation.
You provided 2 links and all of sudden your the Fact Queen? LOL
I dismissed your entire post because from the outset....the very first sentences of your rant......were fallacies and I told you WHY they were fallacies.. So why should I give credence to the rest of your post? I shouldn't and I didn't.
You don't get your way that easy on my threads. Come forth and bring it, or take your ball and go home.
No you didn't, but I agree w/ the comments of many here and elsewhere: pointless trying to get through to you.
What if you are a Catholic that believes birth control is a sin and it's therefore against your religious beliefs to prevent pregnancy and you suddenly find yourself needing services such as WIC? What you consider to be irresponsiblity when it comes to family planning, might be a faith based requirement.
What if you are a Catholic that believes birth control is a sin and it's therefore against your religious beliefs to prevent pregnancy and you suddenly find yourself needing services such as WIC? What you consider to be irresponsiblity when it comes to family planning, might be a faith based requirement.
Just tossing it out there......
I can already tell you, that logic will not fly with this guy.
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.
