Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 119

Thread: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

  1. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    While I don't necessarily disagree with single women having children, I do have a problem with these women giving birth on the tax payers dime.

    If statistics from 2002 still apply today and you account for additional births added about half of these women are using medicaid to give birth to children.

    That is absolute bull**** in my opinion.
    It's her bodey, her choice, remember?

    A woman's reproductive choices have absolutly NO impact on anyone else, remember?

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Yea, but you have 3 kids and are making $20k a year. That sucks.
    No no, that $20K is spending money.

    If you earn less than $20K and have 3 kids, you get ~$1.6K per child back when you file taxes, Section8 housing assistance valued at a maximum of ~$14.5K, medical coverage valued at $7.2K (assuming full coverage for a family of 4), food stamps valued at ~$7K...not to mention tuition assistance, TANIF, transportation assistance, mortgage bail outs, etc.

    If you earn less than $20K per year your home will bring in well over $53K per year.

    So, unless you land a dream job where you will jump from poverty to $53K+, you really have no incentive to make anything out of yourself.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    I don't know why this has spun into a debate about socialism...

    I've seen the claim here that women shouldn't be having kids if they can't afford them. If they are so poor, then charging them for the cost of delivering their child into the world is only going to set them back further. Do you actually think any of them will pay their hospital bills? Why make a child shoulder this debt for simply being born?

    Second... if you think they are so poor that they shouldn't have kids, then you should logically support abortion, since poverty is a primary reason why a lot of women get one in the first place. But oh, wait... social conservatives don't like abortion.

    So... basically, if the woman gets pregnant and wants the child, she is screwed; if the woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the child, she is screwed. It's all about punishing the mother.

    Great logic.

  4. #54
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    The incentive for minority women to become teenage parents doesn't come in the form of welfare; it comes through the strategic value of early childbearing in preventing labor interruptions later in life.
    lol

    Yea, I'm sure most 16 year olds getting knocked up by their baby daddy are doing it in order to avoid later disruptions in their career progression.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  5. #55
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    The likely reason that I sound like a "Marxist" to you is because of a crude understanding of political philosophy and economics that prevails among capitalists.
    Or maybe it's because you're posting cartoons from Bertell Ollman's "What is Marxism?"

    What is Marxism? A Bird's-Eye View < DIALECTICAL MARXISM: The Writings of Bertell Ollman
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I don't know why this has spun into a debate about socialism...
    Well if you would like to know, just ask

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I've seen the claim here that women shouldn't be having kids if they can't afford them.
    Right. People in general should have a healthy dose of common sense and a plan in mind.

    Any person who can not afford an expense, shouldn't create the expense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    If they are so poor, then charging them for the cost of delivering their child into the world is only going to set them back further. Do you actually think any of them will pay their hospital bills?
    Exactly. See, you do understand.

    If you're poor, don't create these expenses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Why make a child shoulder this debt for simply being born?
    Uhh, where did that come from? The child birth is the financial responsibility of the parent....as is every other expense the child has until they turn 18.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Second... if you think they are so poor that they shouldn't have kids, then you should logically support abortion, since poverty is a primary reason why a lot of women get one in the first place.
    Poverty? No. A feeling of economic insecurity, sure, and we don't even know if that feeling is real or imagined when they tell the truth on those surveys.

    Your average woman seeking an abortion is married middle class with at least 1 existing child, fyi.

    Anyway, abortion is an expense those on my side are telling people they shouldn't make if they can't afford it. The point is, if you can't afford the abortion, you shouldn't be creating a need for one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    But oh, wait... social conservatives don't like abortion.
    Mhmm, your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    So... basically, if the woman gets pregnant and wants the child, she is screwed; if the woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the child, she is screwed. It's all about punishing the mother.
    Wow, you have some personal issues shining through your posts here, I'll do my best to ignore them and stay on topic.

    The point is that if you can't afford the expense, then you shouldn't be creating the expense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Great logic.
    Why thank you

  7. #57
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I don't know why this has spun into a debate about socialism...

    I've seen the claim here that women shouldn't be having kids if they can't afford them. If they are so poor, then charging them for the cost of delivering their child into the world is only going to set them back further. Do you actually think any of them will pay their hospital bills? Why make a child shoulder this debt for simply being born?
    By that logic...

    Forcing them to pay for food is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    Forcing them to pay their rent while they can't work is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    Forcing them to pay for baby clothes/diapers/bottles/toys is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.

    Second... if you think they are so poor that they shouldn't have kids, then you should logically support abortion, since poverty is a primary reason why a lot of women get one in the first place. But oh, wait... social conservatives don't like abortion.
    I'm a huge proponent of poor people getting abortions (assuming they want them). I'd love to someday start a nonprofit that would offer people $5k to get vasectomies/tubal ligations.

    So... basically, if the woman gets pregnant and wants the child, she is screwed; if the woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the child, she is screwed. It's all about punishing the mother.
    No, it's about disincentivizing negative actions.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    By that logic...

    Forcing them to pay for food is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    Forcing them to pay their rent while they can't work is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    Forcing them to pay for baby clothes/diapers/bottles/toys is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    YouTube - obama fan - doesnt have to worry about mortgage payments and gas anymore

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I'd love to someday start a nonprofit that would offer people $5k to get vasectomies/tubal ligations.
    Oh man, sign me up

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    No, it's about disincentivizing negative actions.
    ...and that, Orius, is why we took a turn ranting against socialism,

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Forcing them to pay for food is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    Forcing them to pay their rent while they can't work is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    Forcing them to pay for baby clothes/diapers/bottles/toys is forcing them into debt and making the child shoulder the burden.
    It's not quite the same thing because the cost of birthing a child is relatively static, but at least the open market provides cheaper options for food, clothing, housing etc. It's not like there's a "cheaper" labour option, aside from going into labour at home without any help and potentially dying. I guess midwives are one option, they're a bit cheaper than hospitals. Central to this argument is a medical care issue, I'm not really including the cost of raising the child into the equation. Those costs can always be mitigated with financial planning.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I'm a huge proponent of poor people getting abortions (assuming they want them). I'd love to someday start a nonprofit that would offer people $5k to get vasectomies/tubal ligations.
    If that's the case, then I have no problem with you being against the government paying for children to be born. If women have the option to avoid this expense with abortion (which is cheaper than labour and aftercare), then they can't claim they had no way out.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    No, it's about disincentivizing negative actions.
    What is the "negative" action here? Giving birth?

  10. #60
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: US births break record; 40 pct out-of-wedlock

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    It's not quite the same thing because the cost of birthing a child is relatively static, but at least the open market provides cheaper options for food, clothing, housing etc. It's not like there's a "cheaper" labour option, aside from going into labour at home without any help and potentially dying. I guess midwives are one option, they're a bit cheaper than hospitals. Central to this argument is a medical care issue, I'm not really including the cost of raising the child into the equation. Those costs can always be mitigated with financial planning.
    I'm not particularly opposed to paying for the childbirth itself, because as you note, selection of the "cheaper" option will probably lead to increased costs due to birth-related deaths/defects. I'm just wary of justifying it on the grounds that we shouldn't be burdening children with debt via their parents.

    What is the "negative" action here? Giving birth?
    Someone choosing to have children that they cannot afford on their own.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •