then why do a lot of them continue to keep having child after child, ignoring their financial situation? Tax payers should not have to support people who can have 8 kids but too lazy to get jobs.
2006-12-23 18:33:16 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
Has to do with the quality of living. Poor people can not afford to go to six flags so they **** instead.
2006-12-23 19:22:31 · answer #1 · answered by felixtricks 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As long as those kids are productive members of society, your taxes will have been a great investment, as you will be paid back by their services and goods - and taxes they produce to support you.
Ok - fair enough - you should be able to have your own kids, without working all the hoursto pay taxes with little left over.
IMO each kid heading towards being a productive member of society should be a source of income to a family as long as society needs them and people pay taxes.
In many part of Europe the native population will have been halfed though immigration and working working all hours and kids are a cost they cannot afford! Now there is something seroiusly wrong there!
2006-12-24 04:03:17 · answer #2 · answered by deepthroat 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Very simple answer. You've seen it in the other responses.
There is not one excuse that a politician or person will not give to a poor person in order to be liked by them.
Poor people do not ignore their financial situation. They are simply told repeatedly that "It is not your fault, you are a victim."
One particular political party in America actively promotes victimhood and government dependence every chance they get. They call it "compassion". It keeps people poor intentionally so they can maintain power.
Then there are really stupid people who believe when the government pays for something, it is 'FREE' - like the Canadian in the first post. It is a guilt-free way of stealing other people's money. You just get the government to do it for you. You can thank our school system for that.
Overall, it represents the slow steady eradication of personal and parental responsibility in favor of government servitude. It has happened everywhere else and it will happen here, also.
“Few men desire liberty. The majority are satisfied with a just master.”
-Sallust
.
2006-12-24 00:45:12 · answer #3 · answered by Zak 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's not the lazy parents you are trying to support. You should be trying to support the kids so they don't become lazy parents.
If you spend money carefully in education, health care etc. there will be a better chance that those eight kids will actually contribute to society rather than take away from it. If you don't pay for their education/welfare then you will pay when they rob you or break into you home looking for drug money.
Not very good alternatives, but I'd rather try to spend more money trying to fix the problem.
Peace
2006-12-23 23:40:07 · answer #4 · answered by zingis 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i'm happy you a minimum of reported maximum republicans and not all of them. this is glaring you're on drugs (MSLSD) and could believe something the state run media feeds you. single mothers with 2 jobs in all probability has scientific coverage from a million of them. the subject is she makes to lots funds working 2 jobs to qualify for counsel. Now if she had no interest she could have wellfare and foodstuff stamps, government housing and so on. does no longer that be large for her youngsters? Your needless to say a Bush hater yet I wont carry that against you. Your entitled to an opinion. yet while i desire to be an Obama basher, am I no longer entitled to mine?
2016-11-23 14:34:36 · answer #5 · answered by comella 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they also can't afford birth control. besides, if even 2 of those children live, they can help support the parents when they are old.
2006-12-23 18:41:34 · answer #6 · answered by judy_r8 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dam you Canada. I promised myself multiple times i would attack Canada with a huge army conquer it and rename it Danada since my name is Dan
2006-12-23 19:47:02 · answer #7 · answered by Ugly Duckling 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What have they got to lose? The fact is that all those children are the ones that will do your low wage labor.
2006-12-23 23:32:23 · answer #8 · answered by taxigringo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it has to do with a lack of education, not that they are dumb but they just don't know any better, kind of like the Canadians
2006-12-23 18:41:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
hey. its not their fault they dont have birth control. and the people with many kids dont have TIME to get a job. they're constantly taking care of kid after kid.
2006-12-23 18:38:06 · answer #10 · answered by rentalsocks 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋