Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-24-2014, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Chicago
3,391 posts, read 4,482,291 times
Reputation: 7857

Advertisements

I think the question itself is misguided.

Instead of asking why poor people have children, we should instead ask why so many people in the U.S. are poor. Remember, people who survive solely on welfare are not the majority of the poor. The majority of poor people have jobs--sometimes more than one job. Why is okay that in the wealthiest country on earth, so many people can work and still be poor?

We would do well to stop paying so much attention to the bad decision poor people make and pay more attention o why so many people are put in a position where they have to make those decisions in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-24-2014, 02:39 PM
 
62,959 posts, read 29,141,740 times
Reputation: 18589
Yes, it is wrong to bring kids into the world you can't support yourself and then lay the burden on the other taxpayers to provide for them via our taxes!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 02:51 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
The US is # 123 of 224 nations when in comes to the fertility rate.


https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2127rank.html

Nations that do nothing for pregnant women and children have substantially higher birth rates than those in the developed world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 03:20 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,856,573 times
Reputation: 18304
Morally I can't say since they are supported by society ;mostly better than past. But the world has changed and a large number of children are not necessary a advantage financially for family unit like the past.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Pacific NW
9,437 posts, read 7,369,351 times
Reputation: 7979
Seems pretty immoral, greedy and selfish to live your life with the idea that everyone else will support you when you deliberately and knowingly make choices you can't afford.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
28,098 posts, read 29,963,441 times
Reputation: 13123
Quote:
Originally Posted by convextech View Post
I could say the same about the above.
My sentiments exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 04:12 PM
 
Location: USA
31,050 posts, read 22,077,427 times
Reputation: 19085
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
The US is # 123 of 224 nations when in comes to the fertility rate.


https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2127rank.html

Nations that do nothing for pregnant women and children have substantially higher birth rates than those in the developed world.
They have to since they often have the highest infant mortality rates.

List of countries by infant mortality rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Last edited by LS Jaun; 06-24-2014 at 04:26 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 05:39 PM
 
Location: St Thomas, US Virgin Islands
24,665 posts, read 69,703,004 times
Reputation: 26727
Quote:
Originally Posted by toryturner View Post
Feel better?
Yes I do, thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 05:51 PM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,018,970 times
Reputation: 2521
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm Retired Now View Post
Lots of people I know have lots of children but make very little money. When I asked them why they had so many children when neither the mother or father made much money, they basically told me that money and income should not be a consideration when deciding how large your family is. They say children are a gift from God and if the children are born everyone should welcome them to the world and society will help support them. They believe that even though they are poor financially they have just as much right to bring lots of babies into the world as someone who is rich.

If you are parents would you agree that society (taxpayers) have a obligation to help bring up your children because our country needs a younger generation from all kinds of people (rich and poor)? Would your financial situation impact your decision to have a larger family? In other words, should only rich parents be able to have a very large family?

(* The other side would say that it is wrong to have babies if they know the taxpayer is going to support them)
With that mindset, their church can help support the children they can not afford. NOT the taxpayers. This country needs people that take responsibility for their own actions, and that includes the financial aspect, short of a tragedy.

There was a time when folks had large families partly because not knowing any better, but also because they were farmers and needed the extra hands. Medically, not all of their offspring even lived to the age of 18. Now, with the advancement of medicine and only one percent involved in farming (at least here in the US), there is no excuse to have a large family if you can not afford to care for them.

We don't need any more dumb people in the world which you would have to be, to have a large family you can not afford.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2014, 05:56 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun View Post
They have to since they often have the highest infant mortality rates.

List of countries by infant mortality rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It's more than that. Since time began, people have been having children they cannot reasonably expect to feed , let alone shelter or otherwise support. The bible is full of the " be fruitful and multiply" thing. It also calls for rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground. But that's another story for another thread.

Generally speaking, life expectancy is lower in those areas with high birthrates. The lack of jobs, services, government aid, education and so on has done nothing to cause most people from having as many children as possible.

Producing children is viewed as the primary purpose/obligation of life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:02 PM.

© 2005-2024, 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