the poor need to wake UP and stop having kids

[bedowin62]

Then why is it.... that it is Conservative/libertarians on this very thread, calling for it and it is the liberals for the most part, fighting against it?

like i said; read a book. it's in the history of Progressives

Progressives or Liberals?

and isn't what is happening NOW with the conservatives on this board, more important than an era long past? Why are conservatives on this very thread calling for sterilization of the welfare women, and calling for their children to be taken away from them if they have more than 1 and they should be forced to take the birth control pill and CRAPOLA like that, coming from your right wing con friends?

Why haven't you CALLED THEM OUT on it? Do you agree with them?

i dont agree with them. not concerned with it though; they are a tiny minority. it is left-wing extremism that is MUCH more prevalent in today's society; and the much bigger problem

 

[koshergrl]

I have no interest in telling the poor (which includes me) what to do. I think they should do exactly what they want, as long as it's legal and does no harm to others. I think everybody should do exactly what they want, as long as it's legal and does no harm.

Everybody accountable for themselves, answerable to themselves. Fascinating concept. Apply it across the board. Support your own lifestyle.

Or change your lifestyle.

Pretty easy.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

so what would you do with the second child?

If they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

sounds wonderful you obviously like enlarging governmental powers , which departments of government would enforce your plan.How many children are available for adoption today and what do you think the numbers would be if your plan is implemented ?
How much would it cost the taxpayers?

They're already wards of the state. The only difference is the child would have a chance at being something instead of perpetuating the welfare chain. Weak ass argument...

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

so what would you do with the second child?

If they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

This is unmitigated idiocy and blatantly un-Constitutional – did you even stop to think this all the way through?

The state has no authority whatsoever to remove a child from the home because the family is perceived to be ‘too poor,’ or because a woman doesn’t use birth control.

Such a policy would violate the 4th Amendment’s right to privacy and the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause.

The ignorance of, and contempt for, the Constitution and its case law exhibited by you and most other conservatives never ceases to amaze.

So you dont give a shit about the childs welfare? You'd rather see them raised in the ghetto with zero chance of becoming a productive member of society.
Do it for the children...or in your case,do it to the children.
I promise you the child would be thankful when he/she reached adulthood and realized the chance he/she had been given.
A life in the ghetto,or a life with a family that actually cared about them and their welfare....hmmmmm.
My wife was adopted,and she thanks her lucky star everyday because of it.

 

[KissMy]

Immigration.

Won't work

Immigrants have more kids than anyone

Good point. Perhaps we should look for immigrants from first world countries?

[MENTION=27496]Publius1787[/MENTION]

We need to charge a $50k fast track immigration fee. That will net us productive immigrants like Elon Musk, instead of people at roadside stands slinging burritos.

Nobel prize winner Gary Becker Explains the Benefits of Setting a $50k Price for Immigration. It will generate $50 billion a year & restrict Riff-Raff.

 

[koshergrl]

If they're taking care of their kids, I have no interest in taking their kids.

People are amazingly resourceful, and they will take care of their own kids if forced to. The ones that don't will end up in prison or dead, and thus ends the chain of welfare and criminality.

 

[Care4all]

If they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

sounds wonderful you obviously like enlarging governmental powers , which departments of government would enforce your plan.How many children are available for adoption today and what do you think the numbers would be if your plan is implemented ?
How much would it cost the taxpayers?

They're already wards of the state. The only difference is the child would have a chance at being something instead of perpetuating the welfare chain. Weak ass argument...

FYI- In Massachusetts, my previous State, foster care pays out more than DOUBLE per child a month compared to welfare (TANF) for the child....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

sounds wonderful you obviously like enlarging governmental powers , which departments of government would enforce your plan.How many children are available for adoption today and what do you think the numbers would be if your plan is implemented ?
How much would it cost the taxpayers?

They're already wards of the state. The only difference is the child would have a chance at being something instead of perpetuating the welfare chain. Weak ass argument...

FYI- In Massachusetts, my previous State, foster care pays out more than DOUBLE per child a month compared to welfare (TANF) for the child....

At least it would break the chain of poverty and welfare dependence.
Which would pay for itself in the long run. And it would reduce crime.
That is what we're all after right?
Is it a little harsh? You bet,but the end result would be worth it.

 

[Care4all]

Policy Basics: An Introduction to TANF ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[koshergrl]

Do you have a point, care?

 

[Samson]

Policy Basics: An Introduction to TANF ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Do you have a point, care?

 

[koshergrl]

Sheesh.

 

[Samson]

If they're taking care of their kids, I have no interest in taking their kids.

People are amazingly resourceful, and they will take care of their own kids if forced to. The ones that don't will end up in prison or dead, and thus ends the chain of welfare and criminality.

Children are much easier to care for once they have full time jobs.

 

[Politico]

Agreed. Put em' to work no?

 

[MaxGrit]

So here we have a thread that is advocating forcible sterilization of *poor* women, and mandatory abortion....both of which have been identified as human rights violations.

But I'm the asshole for saying that progressives want to violate and kill women and children?

I'm so ready for the US to clean house.

It is not the progressives promoting sterilization. No one is violating and killing women. You are a sick person. Get help.

left-wing nutjobs are ignorant of their own history. Progressives; mostly left-wingers; have supported EUGENICS FOR a hundred years

racism and a desire for eugenics is at the heart of early Progressive ideology

it still is at the heart of Progressive ideology

Progressives want progress towards total State power, with the State in control of everything. Everyone that's not part of the upper echelons of government are beholden to the State.

Progressives want to use the State to enforce their beliefs of what Utopia should be like. Usually that involves killing a lot of the populace, population control through abortion and eugenics, and oppressing the populace with imprisonment and fear of death. Progressives love Eugenics

 

[koshergrl]

If they're taking care of their kids, I have no interest in taking their kids.

People are amazingly resourceful, and they will take care of their own kids if forced to. The ones that don't will end up in prison or dead, and thus ends the chain of welfare and criminality.

Children are much easier to care for once they have full time jobs.

Children who start working young tend to be much more responsible for themselves, this is true.

So of course progressives make it illegal for them to work.

 

[I.P.Freely]

If they're taking care of their kids, I have no interest in taking their kids.

People are amazingly resourceful, and they will take care of their own kids if forced to. The ones that don't will end up in prison or dead, and thus ends the chain of welfare and criminality.

Children are much easier to care for once they have full time jobs.

Children who start working young tend to be much more responsible for themselves, this is true.

So of course progressives make it illegal for them to work.

thats a very Muslim stance.

 

[priceless]

People are amazingly resourceful, and they will take care of their own kids if forced to. The ones that don't will end up in prison or dead, and thus ends the chain of welfare and criminality.

I recently read an article claiming that diminishing birthrates during the great recession are hindering economic recovery. This is exactly the view that prompts 'economic engineers' to promote childbirth as an impetus to subsidize the various industries of education, health care, and other entitlements. Once these kids are old enough to get jobs, they are either pushed to do so by parents and friends who love them enough to settle for them making the low wages of entry level jobs OR they are pushed into crime to bring in the really big bucks.

Now people are arguing that legalizing drugs would allow that industry to be taxed, but look at how it is taxed already: 1) keeping it illegal inflates the price of the product which means more money changing hands and stimulating GDP 2) keeping it illegal taxes it by tapping drug revenues to pay for legal defense, etc. for those arrested 3) once people have an arrest or conviction on their record, they are kept out of the job market which is as effective as taking their job away and giving it to someone else. In effect, the illegal drug industry converts poor youth into cash cows for fiscally stimulating the larger economy.

Then, considering how dangerous careers in drug commerce and other crime are, it makes sense to promote a culture of eroticism and parental irresponsibility to ensure maximum reproductivity and genetic diversification. If you were running a eugenics program with the intent of maintaining breeding stock, you would try to keep the average age of individuals as low as possible and maximize genetic variation by promoting the maximum number of different combinations of males and females. If you didn't care about the people as human beings, you could promote as much breeding as possible and then allow them to kill each other in prisons or criminality once they had parented a sufficient number of offspring. This is a very sad and cynical perspective, but how much of these practices, which would be ideal in a eugenics program are actually taking place purely as a result of popular culture?

I couldn't go as far as to call it an intentional conspiracy to commit eugenics, but if it isn't then what causes this coincidental similarity to what an ideal eugenics program would look like if it existed?

 

[Rshermr]

People are amazingly resourceful, and they will take care of their own kids if forced to. The ones that don't will end up in prison or dead, and thus ends the chain of welfare and criminality.

I recently read an article claiming that diminishing birthrates during the great recession are hindering economic recovery. This is exactly the view that prompts 'economic engineers' to promote childbirth as an impetus to subsidize the various industries of education, health care, and other entitlements. Once these kids are old enough to get jobs, they are either pushed to do so by parents and friends who love them enough to settle for them making the low wages of entry level jobs OR they are pushed into crime to bring in the really big bucks.

Now people are arguing that legalizing drugs would allow that industry to be taxed, but look at how it is taxed already: 1) keeping it illegal inflates the price of the product which means more money changing hands and stimulating GDP 2) keeping it illegal taxes it by tapping drug revenues to pay for legal defense, etc. for those arrested 3) once people have an arrest or conviction on their record, they are kept out of the job market which is as effective as taking their job away and giving it to someone else. In effect, the illegal drug industry converts poor youth into cash cows for fiscally stimulating the larger economy.

Then, considering how dangerous careers in drug commerce and other crime are, it makes sense to promote a culture of eroticism and parental irresponsibility to ensure maximum reproductivity and genetic diversification. If you were running a eugenics program with the intent of maintaining breeding stock, you would try to keep the average age of individuals as low as possible and maximize genetic variation by promoting the maximum number of different combinations of males and females. If you didn't care about the people as human beings, you could promote as much breeding as possible and then allow them to kill each other in prisons or criminality once they had parented a sufficient number of offspring. This is a very sad and cynical perspective, but how much of these practices, which would be ideal in a eugenics program are actually taking place purely as a result of popular culture?

I couldn't go as far as to call it an intentional conspiracy to commit eugenics, but if it isn't then what causes this coincidental similarity to what an ideal eugenics program would look like if it existed?

Jesus.