Liberalism, Poverty, and Babies

[Steven_R]

Turn off the free money. Tell girls they are on their own if they get knocked up so they better think about who they are opening their legs for because that's the guy who will have to pay for their baby so choose wisely.

Revamp the divorce and child support laws. Getting a divorce shouldn't be akin to winning the lottery these days. If one partner wants to walk out of the marriage, fine, but it should mean the other half losing half his shit in the process from that point forward. Stop allowing parents to use the kids as pawns in support cases or demanding a father pay ludicrous amounts of child support but never allow the father to have any contact with the kids.

If you turn off all the free money involved in having kids, that means not only all money that goes to the poor,

but also all money that goes to anyone else in the form of tax credits, deductions, exemptions etc., that people get by claiming their kids as dependents.

No, it does not. Leaving what the person earned and not robbing him/her from those earnings is not equal to giving somebody who did not earn anything a free handout.

Yes it is because all money is really the government's to give out or something.

 

[NYcarbineer]

well, if you want to lower the rate of poverty - stop incentivizing the poor to have babies from teenage years - cut the welfare for the single mothers to 3-5 years with an obligation to finish school and/or acquire skills and find work and limit help to 2 kids only.
You will be amazed how educated in birth control and abstinence the poor immediately will become.

All you'll get from that is a country full of really really really poor people.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What's your plan to make things better?

Actually, the remedy is fairly simple....

1. Note the following:

a. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

b. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

c. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

d. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

e. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

f Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
These are all stated goals of the communist party. The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

Strangely, they coincide with the aims of Democrats, Liberals, secularists.


Each and every one must be reversed, and erased for our culture.
That would be a good start.

 

[Jroc]

Out of wedlock births the norm here in Detroit. I do get pissed off when mothers hold baby showers for their pregnant unwed teenage daughters..Drives me crazy... Where's the baby daddy?

 

[Vox]

None of the above actually. I am a National Socialist not a leftist moron. You obviously didn't read the stuff she posted.
.

national socialism is a leftist idiocy

According to you. Nationalism is a rightist ideology...Socialism when its just socialism is leftist National Socialism is neither. Its a 3rd position.

Not according to me, but according to it's economic form which is socialism with government protectionism of selected private entities. It existed only 12 years and 5 of that was during the war - way too short of the time to evolve into the standard socialist model

but that is way too much for you to comprehend on your current stage of infatuation.

 

[National Socialist]

national socialism is a leftist idiocy

According to you. Nationalism is a rightist ideology...Socialism when its just socialism is leftist National Socialism is neither. Its a 3rd position.

Not according to me, but according to it's economic form which is socialism with government protectionism of selected private entities. It existed only 12 years and 5 of that was during the war - way too short of the time to evolve into the standard socialist model

but that is way too much for you to comprehend on your current stage of infatuation.

National Socialism is a 3rd way. Not left or right.

 

[Vox]

If you turn off all the free money involved in having kids, that means not only all money that goes to the poor,

but also all money that goes to anyone else in the form of tax credits, deductions, exemptions etc., that people get by claiming their kids as dependents.

No, it does not. Leaving what the person earned and not robbing him/her from those earnings is not equal to giving somebody who did not earn anything a free handout.

Yes it is because all money is really the government's to give out or something.

sure. the government is the ultimate brain and caregiver - only the enemies of the government resist it's care of YOU

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What's your plan to make things better?

Turn off the free money. Tell girls they are on their own if they get knocked up so they better think about who they are opening their legs for because that's the guy who will have to pay for their baby so choose wisely.

Revamp the divorce and child support laws. Getting a divorce shouldn't be akin to winning the lottery these days. If one partner wants to walk out of the marriage, fine, but it should mean the other half losing half his shit in the process from that point forward. Stop allowing parents to use the kids as pawns in support cases or demanding a father pay ludicrous amounts of child support but never allow the father to have any contact with the kids.

If you turn off all the free money involved in having kids, that means not only all money that goes to the poor,

but also all money that goes to anyone else in the form of tax credits, deductions, exemptions etc., that people get by claiming their kids as dependents.

Dems need poor as a steady voting block, poor and non-living are Dems 2 biggest voting blocs

 

[Vox]

According to you. Nationalism is a rightist ideology...Socialism when its just socialism is leftist National Socialism is neither. Its a 3rd position.

Not according to me, but according to it's economic form which is socialism with government protectionism of selected private entities. It existed only 12 years and 5 of that was during the war - way too short of the time to evolve into the standard socialist model

but that is way too much for you to comprehend on your current stage of infatuation.

National Socialism is a 3rd way. Not left or right.

there is no third way. it is either-or
National Socialism is a typical socialist way.
Which is the left side of the spectrum.

 

[Steven_R]

No, it does not. Leaving what the person earned and not robbing him/her from those earnings is not equal to giving somebody who did not earn anything a free handout.

Yes it is because all money is really the government's to give out or something.

sure. the government is the ultimate brain and caregiver - only the enemies of the government resist it's care of YOU

Are you saying Government isn't mother? Government isn't father?

I may need to report you to [email protected] for such insolence. A few months in the Re-education Camps will show you the errors of your ways.

In time, you too will love Big Brother.

 

[Vox]

Yes it is because all money is really the government's to give out or something.

sure. the government is the ultimate brain and caregiver - only the enemies of the government resist it's care of YOU

Are you saying Government isn't mother? Government isn't father?

I may need to report you to [email protected] for such insolence. A few months in the Re-education Camps will show you the errors of your ways.

In time, you too will love Big Brother.

you are so very kind - few months of free food and free housing for such a heresy is a reward, not a punishment

 

[Jackson]

Political Chic, that was a most depressing post. Enough to start thinking of a social experiment. What if...

In the curriculum, LIfe Classes begin: Ways out of Poverty; Education is the Way; Strong Families; When to have Children; Career Choices; Life Mates; Financial Decisions, Your reputation; etc.

If we have to teach these things we have to! A controversial section in one class would be having girls (with parents permission) implanted with IUD's in 9th grade.

I have always been against social engineering in the schools. Schools are for academics. But things are not getting any better in the lower class. Students are not learning the positive things they should at home. So, I guess, it's up to the schools.

But the warning is out. The social learning should increase the school day and it does not include the liberal ideologue!

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's your plan to make things better?

Actually, the remedy is fairly simple....

1. Note the following:

a. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

b. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

c. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

d. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

e. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

f Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
These are all stated goals of the communist party. The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

Strangely, they coincide with the aims of Democrats, Liberals, secularists.


Each and every one must be reversed, and erased for our culture.
That would be a good start.

So, wouldn't the best way to discourage homosexual promiscuity be to promote, legalize, and mainstream same sex marriage?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Turn off the free money. Tell girls they are on their own if they get knocked up so they better think about who they are opening their legs for because that's the guy who will have to pay for their baby so choose wisely.

Revamp the divorce and child support laws. Getting a divorce shouldn't be akin to winning the lottery these days. If one partner wants to walk out of the marriage, fine, but it should mean the other half losing half his shit in the process from that point forward. Stop allowing parents to use the kids as pawns in support cases or demanding a father pay ludicrous amounts of child support but never allow the father to have any contact with the kids.

If you turn off all the free money involved in having kids, that means not only all money that goes to the poor,

but also all money that goes to anyone else in the form of tax credits, deductions, exemptions etc., that people get by claiming their kids as dependents.

Dems need poor as a steady voting block, poor and non-living are Dems 2 biggest voting blocs

Then why do Republicans put so much effort into keeping people poor? Seems counterintuitive to me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Political Chic, that was a most depressing post. Enough to start thinking of a social experiment. What if...

In the curriculum, LIfe Classes begin: Ways out of Poverty; Education is the Way; Strong Families; When to have Children; Career Choices; Life Mates; Financial Decisions, Your reputation; etc.

If we have to teach these things we have to! A controversial section in one class would be having girls (with parents permission) implanted with IUD's in 9th grade.

I have always been against social engineering in the schools. Schools are for academics. But things are not getting any better in the lower class. Students are not learning the positive things they should at home. So, I guess, it's up to the schools.

But the warning is out. The social learning should increase the school day and it does not include the liberal ideologue!

Perhaps we should remember this, too:

"Let’s use this anniversary to set the record straight. No Supreme Court ruling has ever banned prayer or the Bible from public schools. As legal guidelines issued in both the Clinton and Bush administrations make clear, students have a First Amendment right to pray alone or in groups, bring their scriptures to school, share their beliefs with classmates, form religious clubs in secondary schools and in other ways express their faith during the school day — as long as they don’t disrupt the school or interfere with the rights of others."
Supreme Court?s 1963 school-prayer decision didn?t ban school prayer | First Amendment Center ? news, commentary, analysis on free speech, press, religion, assembly, petition

 

[PoliticalChic]

What's your plan to make things better?

Actually, the remedy is fairly simple....

1. Note the following:

a. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

b. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

c. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

d. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

e. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

f Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
These are all stated goals of the communist party. The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

Strangely, they coincide with the aims of Democrats, Liberals, secularists.


Each and every one must be reversed, and erased for our culture.
That would be a good start.

So, wouldn't the best way to discourage homosexual promiscuity be to promote, legalize, and mainstream same sex marriage?

As long as the citizens of a state vote for same,...fine.

But no judges imposing their will over that of the people.



Now then....would you care to comment on the list of aims of the communist party....and how they parallel the aims of your party?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am married and have 3 kids still poor...so that says to me this "expert" is full of shit.

That man is rich whose pleasures are the cheapest.

Henry David Thoreau

 

[Vox]

If you turn off all the free money involved in having kids, that means not only all money that goes to the poor,

but also all money that goes to anyone else in the form of tax credits, deductions, exemptions etc., that people get by claiming their kids as dependents.

Dems need poor as a steady voting block, poor and non-living are Dems 2 biggest voting blocs

Then why do Republicans put so much effort into keeping people poor? Seems counterintuitive to me.

it is the dimocrap party which put all the effort to keep people poor, not the pubs.

 

[PoliticalChic]

None of the above actually. I am a National Socialist not a leftist moron. You obviously didn't read the stuff she posted.
.

national socialism is a leftist idiocy

According to you. Nationalism is a rightist ideology...Socialism when its just socialism is leftist National Socialism is neither. Its a 3rd position.

Which would be never as things continue to get more expensive. I would rather be poor but make sure my blood line continues .

And you bring what to the table?

I don't need to bring anything to the table. I have 3 white kids who will make sure our bloodline and race continue to live on. That's enough for me.

1. 'The Left embraces socialism, the herd mentality of slavery. Socialism and the other totalist modes offers the incalculable benefit of freedom from thought. There are no more disquieting choices, no contradictions, there is the simple act of submission to the herd, in which the ideas of all are the same, and, therefore, equal.'
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge."



2. Liberals claim the center by placing socialism on the left and national socialism on the right, even though Lenin/Stalin and Hitler/other Nazis had much in common as they centralized power and preached hatred. A more accurate spectrum would place totalitarians of many stripes on the left and defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom on the right.
WORLD | Let's admit who we are | Marvin Olasky | July 17, 2010

 

[PoliticalChic]

Political Chic, that was a most depressing post. Enough to start thinking of a social experiment. What if...

In the curriculum, LIfe Classes begin: Ways out of Poverty; Education is the Way; Strong Families; When to have Children; Career Choices; Life Mates; Financial Decisions, Your reputation; etc.

If we have to teach these things we have to! A controversial section in one class would be having girls (with parents permission) implanted with IUD's in 9th grade.

I have always been against social engineering in the schools. Schools are for academics. But things are not getting any better in the lower class. Students are not learning the positive things they should at home. So, I guess, it's up to the schools.

But the warning is out. The social learning should increase the school day and it does not include the liberal ideologue!

Does this fit your 'Ways out of Poverty' course?

Brookings whittled down a lot of analysis into three simple rules. You can avoid poverty by:
1. Graduating from high school.
2. Waiting to get married until after 21 and do not have children till after being married.
3. Having a full-time job.
If you do all those three things, your chance of falling into poverty is just 2 percent. Meanwhile, you’ll have a 74 percent chance of being in the middle class.


Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/edi...three-rules-staying-out-poverty#ixzz2iqVGRPKw



BTW....did you notice how difficult Obama has made step 3?

"There are now 28 million people working part time versus 116.2 million full-timers. Once all the incentives of the ACA kick in by 2015, those figures could switch by perhaps as much as 10 million, turning into 38 million part-timers versus 106.2 million full-timers—bringing a noticeable decrease in the total number of productive hours workers spend on the job."
More Part-Time Jobs With Obamacare - WSJ.com