Single Mom's are making us broke--column. (illegal, Hispanic, compared, claim)
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.
The fastest way to poverty is being single parent.
Lefties say "well then, kill them before they're born!"
As if there are only two choices....tax payers must take responsibility for your lack of such, or tax payers must pay for you to murder your child in utero.
Not only that, they teach and brainwash the children, that government is their savior, by setting an example all through life and it moves to the next generation. Sucking even more and more from the tax base.
For starters, not all single mothers are without the baby's father. The article makes no mention of that, so we just don't know. Also, how many of these single mothers are actually divorced mothers who married and had children young?
The article seems to talk only about single mothers, but does nothing to talk about the fathers of these children. I would say the best advice would be to push the education with girls when they are in school that the better the eduction they get, and waiting till marriage before having children, as well as teaching them about safe sex would decrease these numbers.
One has to first admit there is a problem and find the cause of that problem before they suggest ways to remedy it.
Your first paragraph tries to find reasons to explain the issue so as not to label it a problem.
Your second paragraph proposes a solution to a problem you have defined as lack of sex education.
J. K. Dowling was a single mom. Halle Berry is one, too. But I get what they are talking about. Celebrity worship has opened the floodgates of unprotected sex. Women don't even WANT men to do it with protection. There's some mental disconnect about raising kids in some sort of stable environment. That would mean NOT NECESSARILY having the dad (who sometimes, frankly, is a complete loser) around. It just means an ability to pay for housing and food and clothing. To conceive without the shred of a plan for the survival of the kid is sociopathic. I'm pretty liberal, but this is just one more sign of social degeneracy (along with bankers who strip wealth from thousands of people for luxuries they don't need). I'm way less concerned about "bankrupting us" than I am about how such a society can move forward and solve the challenges we can't dodge. It insures a population unable to function on a family level. And that gets reflected in things like our elections. It is quite possible our national paralysis is nothing more than a sign of where incompetence on a root level has left us. We are "drugged" by too many toxic things, and a body like that loses survival functions.
For starters, not all single mothers are without the baby's father. The article makes no mention of that, so we just don't know. Also, how many of these single mothers are actually divorced mothers who married and had children young?
The article seems to talk only about single mothers, but does nothing to talk about the fathers of these children. I would say the best advice would be to push the education with girls when they are in school that the better the eduction they get, and waiting till marriage before having children, as well as teaching them about safe sex would decrease these numbers.
Sounds great on paper. Watching the mayhem that follows, is the experiment.
That's a sobering statement. People who cannot see what this is doing to the country I think need to gain some perspective.
Maybe marriage is on the way out, maybe in 100 years some other arrangement will guide our children. I don't know but what we are doing now is not working.
See though this is where I lose it with left wing kooks
If people remain single, because government entices them to, through social programs like welfare, which punishes couples for being married, then why wouldnt they believe that government tax rates would entice people to change their spending/investment habits..
Its like they live in some imaginary land of utopia
For starters, not all single mothers are without the baby's father. The article makes no mention of that, so we just don't know. Also, how many of these single mothers are actually divorced mothers who married and had children young?
Single mothers who divorced would be collecting alimony to support their children, and thus wouldnt make us broke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
The article seems to talk only about single mothers, but does nothing to talk about the fathers of these children. I would say the best advice would be to push the education with girls when they are in school that the better the eduction they get, and waiting till marriage before having children, as well as teaching them about safe sex would decrease these numbers.
There is no need to discuss the fathers because the topic is single moms. Now of course you dont want to discuss the effects of polices you support.
the problem of course is in todays society we arent required to live with the ramifications of poor choices we make.
You can get Latin Kings baby wear for your future gang members now single moms. The US Government and California will subsidize this criminal enterprise by raising the children up to the age when they can become a soldier for the Latin Kings. What a system.
If you want me to just be blunt about it, people who have kids before they 21 or 22 almost always have serious issues, whether it be mental illness, addiction or histories of abuse. The idea of even getting married at that age is a poor one for most, much less popping out kids.
Again, the solution here is empowering women - Educating them for good jobs, showing them that self-worth is not tied to procreation and changing the culture of "babymaking." I can tell you exactly about that culture living in the rural Midwest and I will bet it's very similar in HappyTexan's neck of the woods.
Not only that, they teach and brainwash the children, that government is their savior, by setting an example all through life and it moves to the next generation. Sucking even more and more from the tax base.
Yeah, it's pretty bad. But you don't see it in suburban schools.
I didn't when my son was in school.
And when I first started going into the poverty area schools couldn't believe it myself.
But 3 years and several school districts later..this is their way of life.
And the kids are being brought up with this sentiment.
In your suburban school you show up on the first day with your supplies.
In your inner city school you just show up..school provides all your supplies.
Yeah..I know..they are poor, they need school supplies, it's only fair.
That kid toting the iPhone and wearing designer clothes really can afford pencils and notebooks.
The priorities are so misplaced and out of whack that it's beyond sad.
We pay for free lunches and they toss them in the garbage and buy from the snack counter day after day after day. We have the janitor saving the whole fruits (apples) which some of the teachers take home to feed their livestock so not all of the food is going to waste.
Go ahead and label me what you want. This is what I see day after day.
And these kids don't even realize what they are becoming. They don't know this is an "entitlement mentality". They think this is the way life is.
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.
