Single Mom's are making us broke--column. (wage, dollar, Australia, percentage)

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

Not to give single moms any break, but things like bailing out banks is making us more broke than single moms.

Bailing out the banks actually generated a profit to the taxpayer, so it didnt cost us a dime, and no, I didnt support it either.

[Beenhere4ever]

A lot of corporate welfare is illegal, too. The single moms can't pay to have theirs covered up. Welfare Queens were a PR invention to distract attention from the runaway ripping off of taxpayers by the rich through government payments programs. We need to give equal attention to both problems.

[Beenhere4ever]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Bailing out the banks actually generated a profit to the taxpayer, so it didnt cost us a dime, and no, I didnt support it either.

Which corporate media site told you that? Because it is a lie.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know...-bailout/3309/

[cometclear]

Before some of you go down the road with the, "They're all just looking for welfare checks," you best examine the culture in which you live. Is it one of those cultures that treats a baby born to a 17 year-old as a "blessing from Jaysus?" I'll bet many of you do. I know I live in such a culture. Let's be honest: There really isn't a good reason for people below their mid-twenties having kids. Some of our cultures still make it acceptable and, perhaps, even encouraged. It is not a blessing when a kid pops out to a 20 or 21 year-old. The vast majority of people that age aren't even equipped to be married, much less raising kids.

[susankate]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Ding ding ding..

but cohabitating with the father, and then collecting benefits without claiming him IS ILLEGAL...

So you are suggesting they are breaking the law..

No, I am merely pointing out that not all unmarried women are single mothers.

Also, not all those unmarried women, whether cohabiting or single mothers, are claiming benefits.

When the writer of the article says this:

that more than six out of 10 women who give birth in their early 20s are unmarried.

That doesn't automatically mean those 6 out of 10 unmarried mothers in their early 20s are claiming benefits.

Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to be getting the impression that some on here are interpreting:

that more than six out of 10 women who give birth in their early 20s are unmarried.

as meaning:

that more than six out of 10 of all women who give birth are single mothers on benefits.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

Which corporate media site told you that? Because it is a lie.

That big left wing media site called the US Treasury..
Bank Bailout Returns 8.2% Beating Treasury Yields - Bloomberg

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...t-on-tarp.html

But I suppose I should take your word for it over those who actually lent them the money..

The news is only like 3 years old, so I can see why you wouldnt know that.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by susankate

No, I am merely pointing out that not all unmarried women are single mothers.

Also, not all those unmarried women, whether cohabiting or single mothers, are claiming benefits.

When the writer of the article says this:

that more than six out of 10 women who give birth in their early 20s are unmarried.

That doesn't automatically mean those 6 out of 10 unmarried mothers in their early 20s are claiming benefits.

Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to be getting the impression that some on here are interpreting:

as meaning:

Once again, the discussion of the thread is SINGLE MOTHERS ARE MAKING US BROKE, so this would be discussing those who actually ARE claiming benefits. The fact that some arent, doesnt mean that no one is.

I dont care if it says 6 out of 10 are unmarried, and only 4 of them are collecting, thats far more than acceptable and doesnt need people to justify it.

[Beenhere4ever]

Quite true. That is what the Religious Right has been saying for years. Every baby is a divine blessing. We should be GLAD to pay and pay for the cost (which continues to rise by leaps and bounds). That's just about how blind the Religious Right is. They either don't believe unmarried childbirth is bankrupting us, or they do but can't follow through with the appropriate response because that would lead to solutions that their own beliefs condemn.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by cometclear

Before some of you go down the road with the, "They're all just looking for welfare checks," you best examine the culture in which you live. Is it one of those cultures that treats a baby born to a 17 year-old as a "blessing from Jaysus?" I'll bet many of you do. I know I live in such a culture. Let's be honest: There really isn't a good reason for people below their mid-twenties having kids. Some of our cultures still make it acceptable and, perhaps, even encouraged. It is not a blessing when a kid pops out to a 20 or 21 year-old. The vast majority of people that age aren't even equipped to be married, much less raising kids.

I agree. 16-17 are not out looking for welfare checks. They are not thinking that far in advance and that was NOT the reason they got pregnant to begin with.

As far as "a blessing from Jaysus" culture ? I really don't know. My town is not that religious. I don't go to church and in the 3 years I've been here no one asked "What Church do you go to ?" But I have been in towns where that is the first question out of their mouths.

[ellemint]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Ding ding ding..

but cohabitating with the father, and then collecting benefits without claiming him IS ILLEGAL...

So you are suggesting they are breaking the law..

Why are you assuming that co-habitating couples are collecting benefits?