Welfare bonanza: 72 births per 1,000 single women in poverty compared to 15 per 1,000 single women at 400% plus poverty (how much, elect)

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by lovecrowds

Seems like alot of poor, single females are going from relationship to relationship having a baby as a trophy for each man and expecting hard-working Americans to pay every single penny for their massive housing vouchers, free utility bills, four-digit monthly food debit cards and respite daycare if they decide to make the welfare office happy by working in hour or two once in a while.

Very simple. An infant is a profit center. They get more expensive as they get older, unless the mother has no plans to do anything with or for the child. Which may well be.

[Jstarling]

Originally Posted by Rachel976

I guess it depends on how poor. My dad, my he RIP, was born during the Depression to poor LEGAL immigrant parents WHO NEVER TOOK A DIME OF RELIEF. But he never went hungry. And he grew up to earn an advanced degree and live an upper-middle class lifestyle. I'm glad he was "put in the place" of a poor child.

The issue, which I believe we both agree on, is whether poor people should expect, or are entitled, to have other people support their children, and on the same level as working-class parents earning their own. EverythingI have suggested to bring down the costs has been poo-poohed here:

I said that welfare-dependent single mothers with one or two young children should be "doubled up" in 3-bedroom apartments, even if it means three kids have to share a bedroom. (When I grew up in, that wasn't uncommon.) All sorts of excuses came out from liberals.....what if the mothers don't get along, it's not fair to put three kids in a bedroom, and so forth.

I also suggested having food vouchers redeemable for only fresh meat, veggies, fruits, milk, eggs, and bread. Again the liberals attacked, saying Inhad no right to decide what other people could eat....and how would I like it if people restricted what *I* ate? (Never mind that I am paying for my own food.)

Sorry, but people who live off of other people's money are not ENTITLED to live as working-class people who support themselves.

Please provide links to your accounts that “liberal excuses”? Are you talking about law makers?

[Jstarling]

Originally Posted by Oldglory

That's only the far right Christian radicals. Most conservatives don't have a problem with using birth control but not using abortion as a form or method of birth control. No, we're not confused. Many of us believe that abortion is morally wrong but do not have a problem with preventative measures to stop a pregnancy from occurring prior to engaging in sex. People living in poverty should never take that risk.

But it is the conservative gang defunding planned parenthood contraceptive funding. It has long been federal law that federal money will not fund abortions.

[Ceece]

It's like we've been saying all along...

[censusdata]

The solution steps on the toes of both left and right. Birth control and (yes) abortion access must be improved to poorest people. But the left also needs to acknowledge that the welfare system is broken and rewards bad behavior. An unemployed single mother gets probably $50,000+ annually in welfare benefits plus great insurance. The person working 3 minimum wage jobs makes half that income lacks any insurance. People will always do what puts the most money in their bank account. Quite frankly you'd be stupid to work minimum wage when you get far more money to stay at home.

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by censusdata

The solution steps on the toes of both left and right. Birth control and (yes) abortion access must be improved to poorest people. But the left also needs to acknowledge that the welfare system is broken and rewards bad behavior. An unemployed single mother gets probably $50,000+ annually in welfare benefits plus great insurance. The person working 3 minimum wage jobs makes half that income lacks any insurance. People will always do what puts the most money in their bank account. Quite frankly you'd be stupid to work minimum wage when you get far more money to stay at home.

An unemployed single mother gets probably $50,000+ annually in welfare benefits plus great insurance.

Tell me how is that done exactly? Please, inquiring minds want to know.
PS: Benefit cap: single mothers make up 85% of those affected, data shows

"The latest figures also show that 120,297 single claimant women had their benefits capped, compared with just 13,743 single claimant men over the same period. The vast majority of those women had dependent children." (my emphasis)

Equality ...

[Rachel976]

Originally Posted by Ellis Bell

They're not.

We're running out of a workforce population and I project that will have more of an impact on you all, in about 25 years.

Yes, and that is why we need educated foreigners to migrate here, or at least those with a high school diploma. Swamping the country with adults who didn't complete 8th grade simply places a burden on tax-paying Americans.

And the $1,000 or so they pay in sales tax doesn't put a dent in the $45,000 - $60,000 a year it takes to educate their 3 - 4 kids and tens of thousands of $ we cover to birth new anchor babies.

UNLESS YOU QUALIFY FOR ASYLUM (and 90%+ of these migrants do not), NO ADULT WITHOUT A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA GETS IN. We have plenty of high school dropouts as it is.

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by Rachel976

Yes, and that why we need educated foreigners to migrate here, or at least those with a high school diploma. Swamping the country with adults who didn't complete 8th grade simply places a burden on tax-paying Americans.

And the $1,000 or so they pay in sales tax doesn't out a dent in the $45,000 a year it takes to educate their kids and tens of thousands we cover when their both new anchor babies.

UNLESS YOU QUALIFY FOR ASYLUM (and 90%+ of these migrants do not), NO ADULT WITHOUT A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA GETS IN. We have plenty of high school dropouts as it is.

Assuming what you say is true ... they're dropping in, not dropping out. Seems to me, we no longer want to make fishermen of men ... that's sad, really. You do know that migrants are not having babies either right? A u.s. replacement rate of 1.77 does not sustain a society. PS: if it wasn't for the migration thus far, the u.s. would not have the workforce that it does.

[Oldglory]

Originally Posted by Jstarling

But it is the conservative gang defunding planned parenthood contraceptive funding. It has long been federal law that federal money will not fund abortions.

That's because they have been known to perform abortions. IMO, if you're going to engage in sex and don't want to get pregnant then provide your own contraceptives the taxpayer shouldn't have to pay for them.

[2mares]

Originally Posted by aileesic

More to it than that. There are much higher rates of birth in poor countries, no money or resources involved. They just do.

Well yes I think everyone agrees poor people have generally always had more children than wealthy or well off people. That doesn't change the fact that expanding medicaid covers those who arent so poor. Poor being unemployed single women with no partner, therefore you cant really say that there are more poor unemployed single women with no partner (sloots as some would judge them) having more kids. While still the poor are having more children that the non poor, more pregnancies are covered under medicaid for unmarried couples or married couples falling within an inflated poverty guideline. I dont know that I would consider an uninsured married couple with one child earning 51K/year poor.