Do poor women have a right to have children

originally posted by: Farlander

It takes two to tango.



We can never conquer our human nature and I believe we were never meant to but to govern it, yes, maybe so, but how?

a reply to: JAGStorm

Do you have an actual job, working for a company? Or are you a business owner?
Doesnt matter really. Let's imagine for a few moments that we woke up tomorrow to learn that the govt decided to stop taking that 13 or whatever dollars from you to help the working poor.
First, if you are working for a company and are making good money that's great for you.. but how many employees of that company are making lower wages, how many in your own company are relying on those govt handouts that were just cut to help them feed and house their kids? Ya, I know, not your problem, right? They should have worked harder, made better decisions, all the other judgemental crap people say to justify not giving a crap about anyone but themselves. But, maybe it's the janitor, or the clerical workers, the people who are producing the products you are selling that are waking up discovering that they have a major problem and need to find a way to make more money. The first thing they are gonna do is ask for a raise, if they are at first ignored, they will get more demanding and will probably start sending out resumes which will result in the HR dept getting flooded with phone calls and letters checking their references. If that doesnt work, they might decide to be more demanding and call a strike. If they are successful somewhere along the way and the company decides they value their employees enough to give them a living wage... they will start looking for the money elsewhere in the budget... you think your salary will be safe from the cuts? Do you think your job will be safe.. do you think that you might possibly lose more than that 13 dollars in the long run.
Maybe you are a business person, either relying on consumers or business to buy your products or services...
You think you will not be affected?
Maybe you are a nurse, or doctor working in a hospital...
Boy, are you gonna be screwed! The percentage of revenue going into the healthcare system through the govt social programs is about as bad as the school lunch program!! Hows the hospital gonna cope losing 60-70% of their revenue? Will they really need you after they lose the patients that the govt propped up?
People will come up with what the need to live, to take care of their families, they will do whatever is necessary.. even resort to crime. So the crime rate increases. Which more inmates in jail, who, by the way, cost the taxpayer more money than just picking up the slack after their paychecks are exhausted.

Our economy is a dalicate balance which we have never perfected. Unemployment is necessary, otherwise labor costs skyrocket as businesses compete for too few workers. Whereas, too high unemployment, too many laborers hunting for jobs is in the employers benefit and the workers are competing by just how low a wage they will go. If that wage goes too low though, then, businesses lose customers and have to charge the consumers less for their goods if they want to sell the.
Our welfare system, if used wisely, can assist in balancing and stabilizing the system. It just hasn't been used wisely, its benefitted the businesses far too much.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: tanstaafl

What are you talking about?

It must be really horrible being you...

a reply to: tanstaafl

Now I'm curious. What were you referring to.

a reply to: JAGStorm

But that's the truth!
Our parents didn't had half what we got now, and they had children;
Today for us to consider having one, we start imagining a huge investiment and the things we need to have before we have children;
Our parent didn't had any of that and they made it work, we are here;
Its does not matter if poor people stop having children, i think thats totaly absurd, the only thing that can change that is education, in a country with the most teenagers being parents and theis parents pay for the bill it says it all.
So according to what you said, stupid people with money can and should have children, cause their daddys will pay for it, and their grand children will also have babies before they reach 16 ??!!
Well that's happening, and these teenagers used to not having any type of responsability or accountability will be the future... Honestly whats the worst thing?
Most 1st world countries are fighting the aging population, because right now we spend more money and resoursces with old people then with children, the governments are providing incentives for us to have children and we still dont, we have a mindset that we need to have a lot of things and safety to be able to have children. Its a serious thing, or we start bringing children from 3rd world countries which is alse already happening.
I would prefer helping a poor family raise their children, to become honest, working, humble people, that know the value of things because they had fight for them, then all these pseudo milenials that live of their parents all their lives, dont have any type of values and dont want to work.
As a team manager, the situation gets ridiculous the new generations dont want to take any responsability, they dont show up to work, and they dont have any shame in saying they can do it because they live with their family and they will pay the bills.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Nope.
I called you out for a reply that was completely irrelevant to a conversation I was having with someone else and now you're trying to back peddle out of it by telling me I dont know what you're talking about.

Let's see.

What does seizing ones property have anything to do with what I said? You're making an argument based off nothing. Stop making stuff up and assuming I'm advocating for that type of control.

The op was basically asking would it be ok to control poor peoples reproduction capabilities. Where did I ever advocate for what you're suggesting? If anything I'm saying it's wrong for such control. Because the only alternative to allowing people to have children is to tell them they cant. There really is no middle ground.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: tanstaafl

Nope.
I called you out for a reply that was completely irrelevant to a conversation I was having with someone else

Nope.
It was relevant - you just don't see how. Go back and read it again.

What does seizing ones property have anything to do with what I said?

Again - go back and read what you wrote in response to SeaWorthy, in context.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Yea and I wasnt disagreeing with him. Hence why I asked what his solution was. It's called a conversation.

But let's take this in your way of thinking. You dont want to feed children who's mothers are rather not well off, and want welfare to be gone. I'm assuming this.

When I clearly pointed out one of the major flaws in the welfare state, earlier. You have amazon paying employees wages that allow them for collect food stamps, amazon is litterally paying people while tax payers feed them.

That's just one example. So you going to keep making arguments for arguments sake because of how selfish you are?

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: tanstaafl

Yea and I wasnt disagreeing with him. Hence why I asked what his solution was. It's called a conversation.

Ok, I'll admit you could read what you wrote that way. I guess I'm just used to your TDS and ass-u-me-d that you were in favor of welfare motherhood.

If you are saying you are not, then my bad, apologies for getting it wrong.

When I clearly pointed out one of the major flaws in the welfare state, earlier. You have amazon paying employees wages that allow them for collect food stamps, amazon is litterally paying people while tax payers feed them.

That's just one example. So you going to keep making arguments for arguments sake because of how selfish you are?

See? You did it again. Selfish? I'm selfish for pointing out how wrong it is for a gang to steal from one person, keep 95% of it for themselves, then give the other 5% to someone who claims they 'need' it?

If so, then yeah, I'm selfish.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Why are you complaining about the 5% and not saying much at all about the 95% that is being taken from you "at gun point"? And do you agree that women who are in need of help should be forced to be on birth control?
Why wouldn't that be forcing a drug on them "at gunpoint"?

a reply to: tanstaafl

Yea TDs... I dont like the guy and never have, and talked crap about him long before he even became president. Suddenly I now have this made up tds thing?

Alao you seem to not understand that as much of a welfare state you live in. You also live in a society and nation. You should strive to thrive together and work from the bottom up. Oh well.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: tanstaafl

Why are you complaining about the 5% and not saying much at all about the 95% that is being taken from you "at gun point"?

I am. I always do. I was making a point.

And do you agree that women who are in need of help should be forced to be on birth control?

Of course not. Again, I merely object to being forced to pay for their bad choices at gunpoint.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: tanstaafl

Yea TDs... I dont like the guy and never have, and talked crap about him long before he even became president. Suddenly I now have this made up tds thing?

Made up? Yeah, TDS, but maybe only a level 3 or 4...

Alao you seem to not understand that as much of a welfare state you live in. You also live in a society and nation. You should strive to thrive together and work from the bottom up. Oh well.

I have no problem with 'striving to thrive together', I have a problem with being forced to provide charity for people I do not believe deserve it, at gunpoint.

Not sure why I'd want to work from the bottom up when working sideways and upside down works so much better.

Oh well...

a reply to: tanstaafl

Like how all those farmers made such a bad decision to plant their soybeans and now your taxes are being used to bail them out? I mean they should have foresaw that sooner or later a trademark would pop up and kill their business model.
You are making judgements about people you dont even know, failing to acknowledge the cause and effects that are at play in our economy, and, of course, not recognizing the contributions the lower wage workers who are finding themselves having to ask for help give to society.
You are just picking a small portion of the needy and casting them as being the most common portrayal of the whole.

About a week ago a story broke out about a "church group" called imperial valley ministries. A fine, upstanding charity group that had a rather good reputation for helping the homeless and addicted. Till a few of their leaders were arrested for various crimes which basically amounted to enslaving the homeless. I am trying to find out if this group got any funds from the govt in their "charity" efforts.

In Great Britain, there have been a few investigations through the years of the workhouses, the homes for unmarried pregnant women and teens, ect. In many cases, what their investigations found has been sealed from public view for decades but in many of them, mass graves were found. The Canadian schools for the native Americans, also run by "religious charity" groups also offered some barbaric treatment and I believe there were mass graves associated with them also. It seems like dropping a ton of govt funds onto the religious "charity" groups has much more horrific results than giving women the decision as to when to have, or not have children has produced.
And, as much as you hate having you tax money being used to help give a poor kid a school meal, I dont think would even come close to the outrage people would feel about their tax money being used to enslave the homeless.

a reply to: dawnstar

Like how all those farmers made such a bad decision to plant their soybeans and now your taxes are being used to bail them out? I mean they should have foresaw that sooner or later a trademark would pop up and kill their business model.

Yup it is the same thing...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



When someone tells me they don't work, they have 8 kids, and they can't feed them, I believe them. That is not judgement, that is fact. When someone says they have 3 kids, no job and have zero anything I believe them.

You are making judgements about people you dont even know, failing to acknowledge the cause and effects that are at play in our economy, and, of course, not recognizing the contributions the lower wage workers who are finding themselves having to ask for help give to society.

And, as much as you hate having you tax money being used to help give a poor kid a school meal, I dont think would even come close to the outrage people would feel about their tax money being used to enslave the homeless.

Believe it or not people are not the simpletons you make them out to be. Many of the problems with the poor in our society are multi-facet. I choose to expand on one aspect. Funny enough it is the one aspect that a person (short of being raped) can control themselves. This is being seen as cruel and unusual, and I have to laugh.
If a person has a child at 17, then 18, then 25, they 26, then 28, then 30 do you think they have as good of a chance of getting out of poverty as someone that waits until 31 and they are financially secure, and only has 1 or 2.


Just this weekend someone told me their kid (19) found out they were pregnant. They have a low paying job that is hard to do and they have zero insurance. They were told over and over to be careful. Now they are going to start their young life on public assistance. This is a case of youthful indiscretion, but there are many other cases where people just don't care. They know the government will take care of them so they refuse to be responsible for themselves. Very much like the who farm debacle.

a reply to: dawnstar

Do you have an actual job, working for a company? Or are you a business owner?

Let's just put it this way. When I was a very little girl my dad told me to always take care of myself and I would always be OK. Such simple words, yet so profound.
I have never needed government assistance. Even if there was an EMP, or major disaster I actually think I'd do OK.

I have gone though all the normal human tragedies, long job loss, hospitalization, moves, major family disruption, death in the family. Each of these things knocked the breath out of me but in the end it made me stronger.

I have worked for some of the richest people on earth, and along side with some very poor people (in America). I can tell you in an instant the only thing that separates the two are their ways of thinking.

a reply to: tanstaafl

No one is forcing you at gunpoint. Why do you keep assuming that will happen?

Capitalism is a model that should work from the bottom up, not top down. Can you bot see the issue from working top to bottom? It means there is an elite and controlling class system. That's literally feudalism. Is that what you want?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: tanstaafl

Like how all those farmers made such a bad decision to plant their soybeans and now your taxes are being used to bail them out?

Yes. Exactly like that. All corporatre welfare/subsidies need to be ended, immediately.

Of course, unlike some people, I understand that tax breaks/exemptions are not 'corporate welfare'.

You are just picking a small portion of the needy and casting them as being the most common portrayal of the whole.

No, I am merely pointing out the immorality of theft based 'charity'.

About a week ago a story broke out about a "church group" called imperial valley ministries. A fine, upstanding charity group that had a rather good reputation for helping the homeless and addicted. Till a few of their leaders were arrested for various crimes which basically amounted to enslaving the homeless. I am trying to find out if this group got any funds from the govt in their "charity" efforts.

No charity should receive any government 'funds'. Tax exemption is fine with me, but no funds.

In Great Britain,

Lets limit our conversation to this country, shall we?

And, as much as you hate having you tax money being used to help give a poor kid a school meal, I dont think would even come close to the outrage people would feel about their tax money being used to enslave the homeless.

Apples and orangutans.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: tanstaafl

No one is forcing you at gunpoint. Why do you keep assuming that will happen?

Apparently you are confused as to how taxation works.

Capitalism is a model that should work from the bottom up, not top down.

Really? Which version of capitalism are you referring to?

Free market capitalism definitely doesn't work from the bottom up.

Can you bot see the issue from working top to bottom? It means there is an elite and controlling class system. That's literally feudalism. Is that what you want?

No, I prefer free market capitalism. Too bad no country (ours included) has never really tired it - it would make what Trump has accomplished look like crumbs.