OK right wingers. I need you to treat me like a 6yr old!!(pt 1)

[BluesLegend]

Faced with the actual results of decades of Democratic party rule of the inner cities, riots, looting, poverty, high school drop out rates, minority unemployment 30%, decay, crime, its amazing any Democrat can pretend it wasn't their fault.

It was our capitalists that used up our cities and then abandoned them

Well that didn't take long ^^^. So how is electing Wall Street Hillary going to change anything?

 

[CowboyTed]

OK. I need some one to explain exactly how liberal policies destroyed families.

I heard a claim that public assistance chase the male parent out of the home--how exactly?

I really need some clarity on this claim. Is there some special rule to receiving that penalizes families with both parents? Is there some other argument?

Serious replies, please

Families might stay together if they are economically dependent on the male bread winner since the female is left to raising the kids the male is left to bring in the money. The traditional family structure really doesn't exist anymore but if you think of the family unit as that then welfare may end that economic dependence on the male. She then leaves when she realizes that their is another option than staying with him.

First, I don;t see any evidence this actually happens. Second, you really want to starve a family a couple of hundreds of dollars a month to teach them a lesson?

Obviously conservative policies have destroyed families.

That is one thing that is said in Europe. America doesn't support the family values...

Family Values to us are:
Longer Holidays to spend with kids
Shorter Working to spend with the family
Parental Leave especially in the child's early years (this is 80% pay for 4 day week as a right in most cases)
Paid Pregnancy leave.. Min 13 weeks, Sweden has 480 days pregnancy leave on 80% pay.
Highly paid teachers, if you want the best for your child prepare to pay the best.
Affordable Health Insurance...

The list goes on... But this is what family values are actually about...

 

[rightwinger]

OK. I need some one to explain exactly how liberal policies destroyed families.

I heard a claim that public assistance chase the male parent out of the home--how exactly?

I really need some clarity on this claim. Is there some special rule to receiving that penalizes families with both parents? Is there some other argument?

Serious replies, please

Families might stay together if they are economically dependent on the male bread winner since the female is left to raising the kids the male is left to bring in the money. The traditional family structure really doesn't exist anymore but if you think of the family unit as that then welfare may end that economic dependence on the male. She then leaves when she realizes that their is another option than staying with him.

Families used to stay together when there was a male breadwinner

When manufacturing left the cities, families were left behind with few employment opportunities. Welfare then becomes the solution, not the cause

 

[amrchaos]

Stop

I am serious trying to find out how liberal policies destroyed the American family.

After some research, I found that the majority of single family homes DO NOT receive public assistance. About 30% lives under the poverty line.(At first, I thought it was the other way!)

So the liberal policies that supposed to be the key culprit in destroying the American family is something else.

Can someone identify which policies these are.

Once identified, can some one explain exactly how these policies undermine the American family?

(PS--if someone suggest public assistance, understand that without public assistance, not only will the parents split up, the kids would be displaced. Seems like PA does more to hold a family together than break it apart. I don't think this is the policy.

Also, are not poor single families more the result of the man running away from his responsibilities?)

 

[Wyatt earp]

OK. I need some one to explain exactly how liberal policies destroyed families.

I heard a claim that public assistance chase the male parent out of the home--how exactly?

I really need some clarity on this claim. Is there some special rule to receiving that penalizes families with both parents? Is there some other argument?

Serious replies, please

Families might stay together if they are economically dependent on the male bread winner since the female is left to raising the kids the male is left to bring in the money. The traditional family structure really doesn't exist anymore but if you think of the family unit as that then welfare may end that economic dependence on the male. She then leaves when she realizes that their is another option than staying with him.

First, I don;t see any evidence this actually happens. Second, you really want to starve a family a couple of hundreds of dollars a month to teach them a lesson?

Obviously conservative policies have destroyed families.

That is one thing that is said in Europe. America doesn't support the family values...

Family Values to us are:
Longer Holidays to spend with kids
Shorter Working to spend with the family
Parental Leave especially in the child's early years (this is 80% pay for 4 day week as a right in most cases)
Paid Pregnancy leave.. Min 13 weeks, Sweden has 480 days pregnancy leave on 80% pay.
Highly paid teachers, if you want the best for your child prepare to pay the best.
Affordable Health Insurance...

The list goes on... But this is what family values are actually about...

I suggest you stick with something you know.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

OK. I need some one to explain exactly how liberal policies destroyed families.

I heard a claim that public assistance chase the male parent out of the home--how exactly?

I really need some clarity on this claim. Is there some special rule to receiving that penalizes families with both parents? Is there some other argument?

Serious replies, please

Families might stay together if they are economically dependent on the male bread winner since the female is left to raising the kids the male is left to bring in the money. The traditional family structure really doesn't exist anymore but if you think of the family unit as that then welfare may end that economic dependence on the male. She then leaves when she realizes that their is another option than staying with him.

First, I don;t see any evidence this actually happens. Second, you really want to starve a family a couple of hundreds of dollars a month to teach them a lesson?

No, we want people to not have children they can't afford to/aren't willing to support.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Not surprisingly, single motherswith dependent children have the highest rate of poverty across all demographic groups (Olson & Banyard, 1993). Approximately 60 percent of U.S. children living inmother-only families are impoverished, compared with only 11 percent of two-parentfamilies.
Single-parent Families in Poverty - The University of Akron
The University of Akron › readings › sin...

 

[P@triot]

OK. I need some one to explain exactly how liberal policies destroyed families.

The list is endless...

• Liberalism promotes homosexuality (that destroys families)

• Liberalism promotes abortion (that destroys families)

• Liberalism promotes promiscuity (that destroys families)

• Liberalism promotes pornography (that destroys families)

• Liberalism promotes fiscal recklessness (that destroys families)

• Liberalism promotes atheism (that destroys families)

• Liberalism promotes reliance on the state (that destroys families)

If you can think of a liberal position - chances are it is detrimental to the family. That's not by coincidence. A strong family prevents reliance on the state. And liberals need people to be reliable on the state.

 

[amrchaos]

OK

I think I found a right wing group that can identify and explain how different and actual policies are destroying the American family.

A snippet from a magazine using the site as reference:

"For the next few decades, means-tested welfare programs such as food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, day care, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families penalized marriage. A mother generally received far more money from welfare if she was single rather than married. Once she took a husband, her benefits were instantly reduced by roughly 10 to 20 percent. As a Cato Institute study noted, welfare programs for the poor incentivize the very behaviors that are most likely to perpetuate poverty. Another Cato report observed:

“Of course women do not get pregnant just to get welfare benefits.... But, by removing the economic consequences of out-of-wedlock birth, welfare has removed a major incentive to avoid such pregnancies. A teenager looking around at her friends and neighbors is liable to see several who have given birth out-of- wedlock. When she sees that they have suffered few visible consequences ... she is less inclined to modify her own behavior to prevent pregnancy.... Current welfare policies seem to be designed with an appalling lack of concern for their impact on out-of-wedlock births. Indeed, Medicaid programs in 11 states actually provide infertility treatments to single women on welfare.”

The marriage penalties that are embedded in welfare programs can be particularly severe if a woman on public assistance weds a man who is employed in a low-paying job. As a FamilyScholars.org report puts it: “When a couple's income nears the limits prescribed by Medicaid, a few extra dollars in income cause thousands of dollars in benefits to be lost. What all of this means is that the two most important routes out of poverty—marriage and work—are heavily taxed under the current U.S. sinstituteFrom Front-page magazine

The group referenced is the Cato institute

OK, thanks for being patient with, RWs. I will go to the Cato Institute and other rw think tanks to get a fuller answer and solutions to what is needed to stop the destruction.

 

[Boss]

OK. I need some one to explain exactly how liberal policies destroyed families.

I heard a claim that public assistance chase the male parent out of the home--how exactly?

I really need some clarity on this claim. Is there some special rule to receiving that penalizes families with both parents? Is there some other argument?

Serious replies, please

The reason liberal public assistance programs fail to actually "help" people is because they all lack an element of motivation. You're never helping someone if you simply enable without motivating. We send entirely the wrong message to people when we simply send them a check without any expectations in return.

First of all, we need to understand, there is no Constitutional obligation of the Federal government to assist people in need. This was supposed to be the job of churches, communities, individual philanthropy. We've somehow gotten it in our heads that the government is supposed to do this.

In 1902, Galveston, Texas was wiped off the face of the Earth by a massive hurricane. Do you know how many dollars of Federal disaster assistance they received? ZERO! They rebuilt their entire city and recovered all on their own.

But today, a catastrophe happens and the "bleeding hearts" appeal to us for government to do something. And the problem with liberals is, they believe Washington D.C. has some mystical endless pile of money to draw from. There is never any concern about the money running out. IF we run out, we can always borrow some or print some more.

We've changed the dialogue... Once was a time, if you were needy, you could apply for "relief" ...you would get a "relief" check from the government. As time went on, this was changed to "assistance" ...now you'd get "government assistance" ..you're "on" something... "on assistance" ....it's no longer relief. More time passes and assistance becomes "entitlement."

The real problem is, there is never an expectation for the hand out. You're not obligated to pay it back or do anything to earn it. There is no motivation to do anything to help yourself, you're the poor victim and "entitled" to be cared for by government. And since the liberals know no limits on spending, this situation spirals wildly out of control. Generations are raised up believing the government is there to take care of them.

 

[AntonToo]

The list is endless...

• Liberalism promotes homosexuality (that destroys families)

Lol wtf?

Was your family destroyed by homosexuality perhaps? Maybe some liberal told you about how gays ought to be able to marry, so the forbidden temptation became too great for you to pass up?

 

[Wyatt earp]

The list is endless...

• Liberalism promotes homosexuality (that destroys families)

Lol wtf?

Was your family destroyed by homosexuality perhaps? Maybe some liberal told you about how gays ought to be able to marry, so the forbiden temptation became too great for you to stick around?

Society was.
Please..Like we never caught on to your grand plan

Right from alinsky 1971 play book.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

OK

I think I found a right wing group that can identify and explain how different and actual policies are destroying the American family.

A snippet from a magazine using the site as reference:

"For the next few decades, means-tested welfare programs such as food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, day care, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families penalized marriage. A mother generally received far more money from welfare if she was single rather than married. Once she took a husband, her benefits were instantly reduced by roughly 10 to 20 percent. As a Cato Institute study noted, welfare programs for the poor incentivize the very behaviors that are most likely to perpetuate poverty. Another Cato report observed:

“Of course women do not get pregnant just to get welfare benefits.... But, by removing the economic consequences of out-of-wedlock birth, welfare has removed a major incentive to avoid such pregnancies. A teenager looking around at her friends and neighbors is liable to see several who have given birth out-of- wedlock. When she sees that they have suffered few visible consequences ... she is less inclined to modify her own behavior to prevent pregnancy.... Current welfare policies seem to be designed with an appalling lack of concern for their impact on out-of-wedlock births. Indeed, Medicaid programs in 11 states actually provide infertility treatments to single women on welfare.”

The marriage penalties that are embedded in welfare programs can be particularly severe if a woman on public assistance weds a man who is employed in a low-paying job. As a FamilyScholars.org report puts it: “When a couple's income nears the limits prescribed by Medicaid, a few extra dollars in income cause thousands of dollars in benefits to be lost. What all of this means is that the two most important routes out of poverty—marriage and work—are heavily taxed under the current U.S. sinstituteFrom Front-page magazine

The group referenced is the Cato institute

OK, thanks for being patient with, RWs. I will go to the Cato Institute and other rw think tanks to get a fuller answer and solutions to what is needed to stop the destruction.

I love how you're pretending to be "searching" for an answer from the right while trying to make God knows what point from the left. Funny and sad.

 

[blackhawk]

I have never heard the claim that public assistance chases the male parent out of the home.

 

[Wyatt earp]

 

[AntonToo]

The list is endless...

• Liberalism promotes homosexuality (that destroys families)

Lol wtf?

Was your family destroyed by homosexuality perhaps? Maybe some liberal told you about how gays ought to be able to marry, so the forbiden temptation became too great for you to stick around?

Society was.
Please..Like we never caught on to your grand plan

Right from alinsky 1971 play book.

No it wasn't, stop saying crazy nonsense..

Gay people getting married did not break up your, or anyone else's marriage.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The list is endless...

• Liberalism promotes homosexuality (that destroys families)

Lol wtf?

Was your family destroyed by homosexuality perhaps? Maybe some liberal told you about how gays ought to be able to marry, so the forbiden temptation became too great for you to stick around?

Society was.
Please..Like we never caught on to your grand plan

Right from alinsky 1971 play book.

No it wasn't, stop saying crazy nonsense..

Gay people getting married did not break up your, or anyone else's marriage.

Oh God...again it is society.


Your ilk has been chipping away at the fabric little by little for the past 50 years.

 

[P@triot]

The list is endless...

• Liberalism promotes homosexuality (that destroys families)

Lol wtf?

Was your family destroyed by homosexuality perhaps? Maybe some liberal told you about how gays ought to be able to marry, so the forbidden temptation became too great for you to pass up?

Hey dumb-shit....two women cannot have children. Two men cannot have children. It is impossible for homosexuals to reproduce. If they can't reproduce - they can't have a family. The inability to continue families destroys families.

God Almighty the things that have to be explained to liberals. Now wonder they need government to survive. How do these people even tie their shoelaces in the morning?

 

[P@triot]

Gay people getting married did not break up your, or anyone else's marriage.

A tremendous illustration of what simpletons the liberal minions are. He actually thinks family = gay marriage. Two completely and totally separate concepts.

You do stupid like nobody else antontoo. If I were a liberal, I would cringe every time you posted. Sadly though, most of them are too stupid to realize how embarrassing your posts are to the ideology.

 

[CrusaderFrank]