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.
They are actively choosing to perpetuate it. So is the government.
Harsh words I know. But reality is like that.
Why mothers?
Why don't men stay home? Why is it OK for men to hand over raising their children to other folks? Surely having both parents at home is best for the children!
40.5% single mothers?
42.0 born on Medicaid?
Damn, these hit and runs are costing the taxpayers big time. No wonder we're in the shape we're in.
No kidding!
These numbers shock me. Can't believe it is this bad.
My belief is that if they continue after one child that their benefits not be increased for the next one or (ones). You would see a decrease in this ridiculous behavior as it would not be being rewarded for being irresponsible. They need to grow up.
“welfare” should not be families ongoing career choice.
Just like everything in this country, the politicians and their supporters claim it is a complicated issue. No, it is not.
For illegal immigrants, all you have to do is enforce the immigration law
For the irresponsible people who keep on having children, Have all the kids you want but welfare should cap benefits at 1 kid, and the children must have a DNA test proving they have a known father who is also not able to financially care for them.
There is a big difference between enabling and empowering.
Not a handout. They are just maximizing their tax benefits within the legally allowable means. You do too every year when you file your taxes. I call bs if you truly do not utilize every possible tax credit or deduction you qualify for. If the benefits were equivalent to married couples as unmarried, they'd have no problem marrying in a heart beat. It is not their fault that the current system that is set up punishes marriage. Back in the day that was not the case at all, so spare me this bs about "back in the day people felt more shame". Back in the day, there were actual real tax advantages being married, not anymore.
You said:
“This way they are getting free pre-K and probably a bunch of other benefits. They have been living like this together for years now.”
Sounds like this is more maximizing tax benefits. It’s gaming the tax payers.
These numbers shock me. Can't believe it is this bad.
My belief is that if they continue after one child that their benefits not be increased for the next one or (ones). You would see a decrease in this ridiculous behavior as it would not be being rewarded for being irresponsible. They need to grow up.
“welfare” should not be families ongoing career choice.
Just like everything in this country, the politicians and their supporters claim it is a complicated issue. No, it is not.
For illegal immigrants, all you have to do is enforce the immigration law
For the irresponsible people who keep on having children, Have all the kids you want but welfare should cap benefits at 1 kid, and the children must have a DNA test proving they have a known father who is also not able to financially care for them.
There is a big difference between enabling and empowering.
1. The government should incentivize marriage through the tax code. Right now, in a lot of cases, it is unprofitable to legally marry.
2. The government should actually incentivize US citizens having MORE kids, not less, since the United States has negative birth rates.
“This way they are getting free pre-K and probably a bunch of other benefits. They have been living like this together for years now.”
Sounds like this is more maximizing tax benefits. It’s gaming the tax payers.
It is not gaming anything if it is perfectly legal. It is the duty of every American citizen to pay as little taxes as possible, and to extract the most benefits as possible, within legal means. That is what everyone is trying to do since the founding of the colonies, and you are a hypocrite if you deny this fact, because I know for a fact you are doing the same exact thing. What the government should do is harmonize tax code and benefits, so that there wouldn't be any difference or monetary punishment if you decide to marry. This was the case in the past, but not anymore. Right now, there is a government incentive for people not to marry each other, as a result marriage rates are declining.
My family went on welfare to supplement what my mom, someone with a master's degree but 10 years out of the workforce to raise children plus a few more years working school hours, could make when my dad became disabled. It's idealistic bordering on a trip to see your therapist to think it would only take a few years to build back a career after years out of the workforce to a level where you can support a family. That may work out in some places, but definitely wasn't the case for most women returning to work where I grew up - and I grew up somewhere *ridiculously* affordable to live.
No one is jumping for joy about living on welfare. It's embarrassing and not nearly enough to eek out a meager existence. That so many people are choosing that over waiting until they can afford kids on a middle class salary when they're 40 is telling.
I fully understand you don't see an issue with any of this. No desire to fix the problem. Just keep enabling it. And then complaining about it. And then enabling it. And then complaining about it.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Keep the victims drowning in their victim status.
PS> Don't have kids till you have a partner who is sticking around. Pretty simple. But I do understand that isn't part of the agenda. Families with 2 parents.
Beyond that, don't have kids until you are married.
What did the kid do to deserve having parents who aren't married ?
The answer is nothing.
I'm agnostic, but I was brought up/socialized with the value that having children out of wedlock is something that low class people do, that it is socially unacceptable.
I didn't knowingly meet anyone who had been born out of wedlock (and, ironically, she went to Catholic schools growing up) until I was 28 (I'm in my early 60s), and I lived for over 27 of those 28 years in coastal California metros.
1. The government should incentivize marriage through the tax code. Right now, in a lot of cases, it is unprofitable to legally marry.
2. The government should actually incentivize US citizens having MORE kids, not less, since the United States has negative birth rates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz
It is not gaming anything if it is perfectly legal. It is the duty of every American citizen to pay as little taxes as possible, and to extract the most benefits as possible, within legal means. That is what everyone is trying to do since the founding of the colonies, and you are a hypocrite if you deny this fact. What the government should do is harmonize tax code and benefits, so that there wouldn't be any difference or monetary punishment if you decide to marry. This was the case in the past, but not anymore.
It is not gaming anything if it is perfectly legal. It is the duty of every American citizen to pay as little taxes as possible, and to extract the most benefits as possible, within legal means. That is what everyone is trying to do since the founding of the colonies, and you are a hypocrite if you deny this fact. What the government should do is harmonize tax code and benefits, so that there wouldn't be any difference or monetary punishment if you decide to marry. This was the case in the past, but not anymore.
Deciding not to marry because you can present yourself to the government as a single mother in need of free pre-k and other benefits is gaming the system.
My family went on welfare to supplement what my mom, someone with a master's degree but 10 years out of the workforce to raise children plus a few more years working school hours, could make when my dad became disabled. It's idealistic bordering on a trip to see your therapist to think it would only take a few years to build back a career after years out of the workforce to a level where you can support a family. That may work out in some places, but definitely wasn't the case for most women returning to work where I grew up - and I grew up somewhere *ridiculously* affordable to live.
No one is jumping for joy about living on welfare. It's embarrassing and not nearly enough to eek out a meager existence. That so many people are choosing that over waiting until they can afford kids on a middle class salary when they're 40 is telling.
Apparently many consider staying eligible for welfare as sound financial planning. Babe — we can’t really afford kids but if we keep you eligible for poor single mom benefits we can!
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.
