So Sad

[Pulsegleaner]

I hate to go anti-religion, but I'd say that many of the traditional faiths bear at least some responsibility. Not so much for being against abortion or birth control (I personally think this is asking for trouble, but I can at least see where they are coming from) as much for them STILL encouraging people to "be fruitful and multiply" and have as many kids as possible. Personally I think that having more kids than you have the ability to support should by any standard count as a sin, and a MAJOR one.

We REALLY need a new ethos in the world one that at minimum stops telling people that they need tons of kids to have a "full" life. There are already kids in need who could receive all of the love you could give them. Requiring they share your DNA should be irrelevant.

 

[seedcorn]

@Nyboy, disgusting video! She is infecting gene pool. Needs to be out of gene pool! Somebody needs to pay alright.

@Pulsegleaner, don't know of any religion, telling people to do this. Most teach personnal responsibility--something modern world rejects.

 

[w_r_ranch]

How is a woman with three small kids supposed to work at a minimum wage job when child care cost more than she makes? We need to stop assuming all those people who are getting government assistance are unwilling to work. Jeeze!

There are 86 social programs available to her... 86!!! It is ridiculous to assume she is not on at least 4 or 5.

Personally, I'm feel no sympathy for people that make multiple bad choices. I'm not the one that enjoyed the sex, nor am I the one that had sex without using birth control (which is also available 'free' via a taxpayer-funded social program). I'm not responsible for her or her predicament.

Cut all these 'social programs' off, including the SNAP cards (so they can't sell them on Craigs List). If they really need food, they can get 5lbs of beans, 5lbs of flour, 5lbs of rice & powdered milk. If they don't like it or they get tired of eating food that we taxpayers paid for, they can always get a job & buy their own.

 

[Nyboy]

My mother had 4 kids and worked full time job. Both my parents worked fulltime and jumped at any chance to work overtime.

 

[Pulsegleaner]

@Nyboy

@Pulsegleaner, don't know of any religion, telling people to do this. Most teach personnal responsibility--something modern world rejects.

Ask our former pope. Come to think of it, ask our current pope with his "your wasting love on your pets you could be giving to more children). Or not to keep it to one side, Orthodox Judaism, which actually considers celibacy a sin for married couples and requires a couple to have a boy and girl who reach adulthood minimum (and encourages couples to have as many kids as possible.) Many faith regard inability to have kids as grounds for divorce (not always optional divorce).

Yes, some religions teach personal responsibility, but others regard personal responsibility as a blasphemous lack of faith that "God will provide, if I follow the rules to the letter."

 

[seedcorn]

It's one thing to have kids you can support but entirely another to just keep having children knowing you can't support them. As far as those religions, can't discuss their teachings as don't follow or care. I'll take your word for it that you've studied with them and that is whole message they preach. Assume it's not just some media sound bites.

 

[Smart Red]

Lucky Sorry don't breed them if you can't feed them. If you cant afford to take care of kids, don't have them.

Again, we all have stories. One tenant, an only child who's mother died when she was very young, wanted a large family. She and her husband worked hard, bought one of our houses and had her third and fourth child. Husband got drunk, beat her up, then skipped the country. She's still working hard, but needs some assistance to care for the children 12 - 7 who are still at home.

One article described a 23 year old woman who was told she was the wage earner in the family. Her job? Have another child. Mom goes to court to get custody from "unfit" daughter. Mom gets foster payments and sends daughter out to earn more fostering payments with her body. The woman has had one child (6 at that time) after another since she was 16 and still lives at home with her mother and all the babies. The sole income is from government payments for foster care.

Who should get assistance? One seeks a helping hand to get back on her feet, the other seeks the hand out after hand out that she deserves. We all know who is getting the bigger benefits.

First Government said God is dead and tried to remove all mention from government policies, buildings, programs, etc. Then the Great Society took over the charity of churches and set rules that churches -- in good faith -- couldn't follow. Then programs popped up that rewarded mothers without husbands (the only job that gives raises for more children) and allowed boyfriends to cohabit, but not fathers. Men (fathers included) couldn't get the same benefits so they left the family and the responsibility to Government with the expectation that the kids would be better off.

This is followed by food subsidies, food stamps, heat assistance, rent assistance, free phone, free childcare, free lunches, before school care, after school care, free club memberships (YMCA, Boy/Girl Clubs, Big Brothers/Sisters and on and on and on. Now food stamps are demeaning and they get a credit card just like everyone who works has. What is left of charitable institutions runs food drives, clothing drives, school supply drives, toy drives, coat/hat/mitten drives so parents can arrange to have no responsibility at all for their offspring.

While it sounds like a good life compared to working for a living, it still creates an unhealthy sense of self-worth. That leads to abuse -- of alcohol, drugs, sex, physical and mental abuse that extends to their children. That leads to children leaving the home seeking love and understanding (ie sex and gangs) that perpetuates the lifestyle.

I fear/hope? Thomas Jefferson gets predicted his revolution(s), God is welcome back to society and government, and local control of all assistance programs is returned where it belongs. I fear the interim period will be hard on people and, as always, the children will bear the worst of it. I hate to sound like a prepper . . . okay, I don't mind sounding like a prepper, but don't want to sound like a doomsayer. Some people are prepared for this upheaval but most are not. It's gonna be tough.

The other option? Continue on this road into Third Worldom.

Sheesh! I gotta get back to cooking, cleaning, and GARDENING. I'm waxing weird here.

 

[Jared77]

Part of t problem with being poor is the logistics of being poor. Free daycare is great, how do you get your kid to daycare? are the daycares open 24/7? How many minimum wage no skill jobs are available to people when the daycare centers are open?

NYBoy your folks you said worked a lot who watched you or your siblings growing up?

To me simply saying "just go to work" is a cop out. Its not that simple.

Yes there are abuses we all see that however instead of propping people up on a day to day basis lets give them skills to prop themselves up. the whole teach a man to fish mentality.

Ive been through financial times. Married and a young child, lost a job (when Detroit went bankrupt) had 1 car because the other gave out, and couldnt afford to repair it, wife was on a medical leave because she had just had back surgery.

It sucked A LOT. My wife returned to work (shes an RN) I worked 2 jobs pulled 80-90hr weeks on the ambulance for almost 3yrs. We now have our house, 2 decent cars, things are better. Thing is I have skills (Im a Paramedic) so Im marketable. If I only had a GED or worse I have no doubt Id have been using my green thumb to grow weed because its profitable.

Im not nor have I ever grown it but with limited skills and very poor job prospects what else are my options.

I was recently asked if I was going to put in for a management position with the EMS service I currently work at. Its a great opportunity for me. The raise in hourly pay would be great, however the schedule would mean daycare and that would not only eat up the hourly pay raise, it would also cost me above what the raise is. So now Im losing money because I took a position.

What Im trying to explain is the logistics and realities because its never as simple as "just go to work".

For the record I respectfully declined the offer citing scheduling conflicts but was humbled that they thought to ask me to toss my name in.

 

[seedcorn]

@Jared77, we all made decisions based on being good parent vs. $. Did same thing many times over my life-don't regret any of the decisions when I value my kids. Still miss the jobs as they were what I trained my whole life for.

Respect your decisions. Don't respect people that don't prepare themselves (trade school jobs are as important as "college" jobs and much quicker and cheaper to get), then whine how tough it is after multiple kids. The other donor, gone with no responsibilities.

 

[Nyboy]

I suport goverment help when it is used to help someone get back on their feet. There are a lot of reasons, death,sickness, loss of job, old age. What I dont suport is when it is used for lifetime, because person doesn't want to work. Jared I guess with my parents it was another time, the oldest child watched the other kids. Today a 10 year old watching sibling after school while parents at work would be abuse.