Child Poverty - Are "We" Stupid, or What?

[DGS49]

Concentrated child poverty worsens in Pennsylvania, study says

Here's the thing: If there were a "solution" to global warming that cost ZERO in terms of money or disruption, and was sure to work within a period of, say 12 years, wouldn't everyone get on board and support that solution? I would hope so.

We have a "crisis" now of "child poverty." OK. Granted. Too many poor kids. Poor in money, poor in culture, poor in opportunity, and so forth. Poor.

But although I'm 70 years old and have been shooting blanks for a loooooong time now, it seems to me that children are still the product of "unprotected" sexual intercourse. Correct me if I'm wrong on this. I know I'm out of touch on many cultural things.

And a woman (or a couple, depending on how you look at it) can easily PREVENT pregnancy, or even TERMINATE an unwanted pregnancy, albeit with some inconvenience. So there is no reason why a woman (or couple) should have a child that they cannot afford to nurture properly.

No reason.

And dare I point out that EVERY MIDDLE-CLASS couple in America, whether they think about it in these terms or not, engages in family planning of just the sort that I'm talking about. To wit, they do not have kids until they think they can afford them.

If you don't want to have a kid, or if you cannot afford to have a kid, then either (a) don't engage in reproductive behavior, or (2) engage in reproductive behavior with "precautions" to prevent pregnancy, or (3) terminate the pregnancy if it is unwanted and unanticipated.

The problem of child-poverty will be solved within less than a generation.

So WHY are "we" looking at expensive, intrusive, doomed-to-fail GOVERNMENT solutions to child-poverty, and REFUSING to address the simple, cost-free solution that is staring us in the figurative face?

I know I sound like Ebenezer Scrooge on this, but while I have sympathy for the kids, the parents are the Problem. Where is the national campaign to discourage people who cannot afford to nurture children from having children? It's not difficult or expensive to do the responsible thing.

 

[TNHarley]

Abortion

 

[MisterBeale]

While I agree with everything you have written, I believe a lot of the reason what appears to be a simple solution to you, may in fact be because it has been so long since you were young. Also, it may have to do with the fact that you are of a different socio-economic demographic.

Young, stupid, impulsive folks do not think ahead.

Once they ARE pregnant, they believe they have just as much right to have families as middle class and rich families.


The problem with the way modern society is structured, there just aren't enough economic opportunities for uneducated, dumb folks who only have simple reading and writing skills.

 

[Likkmee]

Peter North training vids

 

[rightwinger]

While I agree with everything you have written, I believe a lot of the reason what appears to be a simple solution to you, may in fact be because it has been so long since you were young. Also, it may have to do with the fact that you are of a different socio-economic demographic.

Young, stupid, impulsive folks do not think ahead.

Once they ARE pregnant, they believe they have just as much right to have families as middle class and rich families.


The problem with the way modern society is structured, there just aren't enough economic opportunities for uneducated, dumb folks who only have simple reading and writing skills.

In the long, long history of man......poor people have always had children

 

[Crepitus]

The solution is education and cheap, easily available birth control.

I'm not talking about sex ed in schools and condoms from Walgreens.

I mean nation wide advertising campaigns and and free or nearly free birth control on every street corner.

 

[MisterBeale]

The solution is education and cheap, easily available birth control.

I'm not talking about sex ed in schools and condoms from Walgreens.

I mean nation wide advertising campaigns and and free or nearly free birth control on every street corner.

So your implicit assumption is that everyone necessarily has the interest or ability to be educated for the available positions in the economy?

And after that, you all assume that if those people that do not have the ability to be educated, well they have no rights to have a family, is that it?


That sounds really elitist. Even the raccoons in the wild, the deer in the forest, and the birds in the sky are treated more humanly.

 

[Crepitus]

The solution is education and cheap, easily available birth control.

I'm not talking about sex ed in schools and condoms from Walgreens.

I mean nation wide advertising campaigns and and free or nearly free birth control on every street corner.

So your implicit assumption is that everyone necessarily has the interest or ability to be educated for the available positions in the economy?

And after that, you all assume that if those people that do not have the ability to be educated, well they have no rights to have a family, is that it?


That sounds really elitist. Even the raccoons in the wild, the deer in the forest, and the birds in the sky are treated more humanly.

Wow dude.

How did you get that outta what I posted?

I mean seriously, there is nothing even slightly resembling that in my post.

 

[MisterBeale]

The solution is education and cheap, easily available birth control.

I'm not talking about sex ed in schools and condoms from Walgreens.

I mean nation wide advertising campaigns and and free or nearly free birth control on every street corner.

So your implicit assumption is that everyone necessarily has the interest or ability to be educated for the available positions in the economy?

And after that, you all assume that if those people that do not have the ability to be educated, well they have no rights to have a family, is that it?


That sounds really elitist. Even the raccoons in the wild, the deer in the forest, and the birds in the sky are treated more humanly.

Wow dude.

How did you get that outta what I posted?

I mean seriously, there is nothing even slightly resembling that in my post.

View attachment 281235

Well. . . because you think that we can reduce the numbers of children in poverty by education and easily available BC.

I don't understand why you think that will stop the poor from having families.

Children in poverty are there because parents usually wanted families, not because of accidental pregnancies.

 

[Crepitus]

The solution is education and cheap, easily available birth control.

I'm not talking about sex ed in schools and condoms from Walgreens.

I mean nation wide advertising campaigns and and free or nearly free birth control on every street corner.

So your implicit assumption is that everyone necessarily has the interest or ability to be educated for the available positions in the economy?

And after that, you all assume that if those people that do not have the ability to be educated, well they have no rights to have a family, is that it?


That sounds really elitist. Even the raccoons in the wild, the deer in the forest, and the birds in the sky are treated more humanly.

Wow dude.

How did you get that outta what I posted?

I mean seriously, there is nothing even slightly resembling that in my post.

View attachment 281235

Well. . . because you think that we can reduce the numbers of children in poverty by education and easily available BC.

I don't understand why you think that will stop the poor from having families.

Children in poverty are there because parents usually wanted families, not because of accidental pregnancies.

Stop?

No.

Reduce?

Yes.

 

[Aletheia4u]

Concentrated child poverty worsens in Pennsylvania, study says

Here's the thing: If there were a "solution" to global warming that cost ZERO in terms of money or disruption, and was sure to work within a period of, say 12 years, wouldn't everyone get on board and support that solution? I would hope so.

We have a "crisis" now of "child poverty." OK. Granted. Too many poor kids. Poor in money, poor in culture, poor in opportunity, and so forth. Poor.

But although I'm 70 years old and have been shooting blanks for a loooooong time now, it seems to me that children are still the product of "unprotected" sexual intercourse. Correct me if I'm wrong on this. I know I'm out of touch on many cultural things.

And a woman (or a couple, depending on how you look at it) can easily PREVENT pregnancy, or even TERMINATE an unwanted pregnancy, albeit with some inconvenience. So there is no reason why a woman (or couple) should have a child that they cannot afford to nurture properly.

No reason.

And dare I point out that EVERY MIDDLE-CLASS couple in America, whether they think about it in these terms or not, engages in family planning of just the sort that I'm talking about. To wit, they do not have kids until they think they can afford them.

If you don't want to have a kid, or if you cannot afford to have a kid, then either (a) don't engage in reproductive behavior, or (2) engage in reproductive behavior with "precautions" to prevent pregnancy, or (3) terminate the pregnancy if it is unwanted and unanticipated.

The problem of child-poverty will be solved within less than a generation.

So WHY are "we" looking at expensive, intrusive, doomed-to-fail GOVERNMENT solutions to child-poverty, and REFUSING to address the simple, cost-free solution that is staring us in the figurative face?

I know I sound like Ebenezer Scrooge on this, but while I have sympathy for the kids, the parents are the Problem. Where is the national campaign to discourage people who cannot afford to nurture children from having children? It's not difficult or expensive to do the responsible thing.

Hey, I'm for ripping the womb from out of the woman that cannot afford a child. But I'm not for ripping up the child that is in the womb.But even though that these women that cannot afford to take care of a child, still can afford to buy drugs. So maybe it is the drugs that is the problem, but not the unborn. Well some people says that the female addicts will not always be an addict. That later on, she might want to start a family. But they will not consider that the aborted child will never have a second chance at life And so it is better to rip the womb from out of the women so that there will be no harsh feelings. But she still can have a child later on. All she have to do is save up some money and get a vaginal implant. At least it will not be polluted so badly like the old one.

Besides being incredibly hard on the physical and mental health, a meth habit is an expensive thing to have. A ¼ gram serves up about one dose, which can last anywhere from 4-24 hours, depending on the purity and the tolerance level of the user. Tolerance grows quickly though and someone heavily addicted can spend up to $400 a day on the drug. The Financial Cost of Drug Addiction and Alcohol Abuse


Lab-Grown Vaginas Implanted Successfully in 4 Teenagers

 

[rightwinger]

The solution is education and cheap, easily available birth control.

I'm not talking about sex ed in schools and condoms from Walgreens.

I mean nation wide advertising campaigns and and free or nearly free birth control on every street corner.

So your implicit assumption is that everyone necessarily has the interest or ability to be educated for the available positions in the economy?

And after that, you all assume that if those people that do not have the ability to be educated, well they have no rights to have a family, is that it?


That sounds really elitist. Even the raccoons in the wild, the deer in the forest, and the birds in the sky are treated more humanly.

Wow dude.

How did you get that outta what I posted?

I mean seriously, there is nothing even slightly resembling that in my post.

View attachment 281235

Well. . . because you think that we can reduce the numbers of children in poverty by education and easily available BC.

I don't understand why you think that will stop the poor from having families.

Children in poverty are there because parents usually wanted families, not because of accidental pregnancies.

Poor people have children, usually more than rich people

No way to stop it. They do not have much, but children are something they can have