whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Apr 6, 2011 18:53:03 GMT -5
Yep, sure. But what if nothing was given to you, you earned it. Same logic should apply?
I will NEVER understand that logic. Are you saying that if I make $250K and you make $50K, I should pay more for the same pizza?
Generous or not, you don't like it, do something about it. To say that bc it's not generous enough, rich shouldn't complain holds no logic whatsoever.
Lena
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 6, 2011 19:03:49 GMT -5
Well said wvu!! I would like to see some measures put into place to stop some of the abuse that goes on when it comes to public assistance. I look at social safety net programs as a "There but for the grace of God go I" type of thing. I've never needed it. I hope I never do. But I also realize that I have been very blessed and lucky in my life, and you should never say never. I think people deserve a hand up, but not a lifestyle built on hand outs. Also well said. That's the thing - I'm not saying I'll never need welfare (although I hope I never do) but I do know that 1) I would exhaust every possible option before going on it, 2) if I were on it, that would indicate my life was in a shambles and 3) I would be doing everything in my effing power to get off it and back under my own power as quickly as I could. I might well have cause to be glad some welfare program or other is in place one of these days. But if I do, I'm going to be ashamed of myself for not planning better. I'm going to examine my role in creating my need for the welfare program, and I am going to freaking get myself off it as fast as humanly possible. Because I don't want to live like that, I find it shameful to depend on handouts for any longer than you absolutely have to. This isn't meant to be prescriptive necessarily, it's just how I see it. But I do wish more people viewed welfare as a safety net rather than a hammock (I liked that metaphor). Shanendoah, for the record I distinguish UE from things like food stamps. It may not be fair, but I do. So my welfare rants are not directed at UE recipients, although I think that the UE system could do with some adjustments also.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 6, 2011 19:06:37 GMT -5
Yep, sure. But what if nothing was given to you, you earned it. Same logic should apply? It's an interesting question because one feeds into the other. When you're given a lot early on, a lot is expected of you and, assuming you achieve some or all of it, more will be given to you. Same thing if you earn a lot early on. I don't know anyone who has a lot that didn't earn some of it and have some of it given to them. And this is a question I'm really struggling with at the moment. I will NEVER understand that logic. Are you saying that if I make $250K and you make $50K, I should pay more for the same pizza?Did I already mention you were a woman after my own heart?
|
|
|
Post by lulubean on Apr 6, 2011 19:25:18 GMT -5
I want the government out of my life, you give people things they take more and more. For example my niece has a 2 year old, she has housing and is able to stay home with her child, this is in the UK. Doesn't that chap your hide for all you working moms who some might want to stay home with their baby.
|
|
|
Post by lulubean on Apr 6, 2011 19:29:25 GMT -5
I am not saying that it is impossible but it quickly becomes almost an impossible task for a head of household with a couple of kids to try and make it without help on less than $40K a year.
Ah but this is what sticks in my craw, having children is a choice, you make 35k and want a baby get your ass some more education to get a better job, or find a better paying job. I really cannot believe I read that actually. Since when is having children an entitlement.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Apr 6, 2011 19:37:29 GMT -5
FB, I like you too. Lena P.S. I didn't forget about asking my DH about pics, I just didn't get a chance to do it yet, sorry!!!
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 6, 2011 19:41:38 GMT -5
Oh, no worries. I could definitely use the recommendation but nothing's final yet anyway, so take your time! ;D
I still can't believe I'm engaged. It feels so weird, like I'm a little kid playing dress-up.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 6, 2011 19:44:17 GMT -5
Ah but this is what sticks in my craw, having children is a choice, you make 35k and want a baby get your ass some more education to get a better job, or find a better paying job. I really cannot believe I read that actually. Since when is having children an entitlement.
Amen to that. I wish more people realized this.
They don't, though, and I don't want the kids to suffer for that. I have an acquaintance who has four children. Quite frankly, from a financial standpoint she should have stopped after one. But if it were up to her, she'd be having MORE children! She doesn't seem to realize that having kids is a privilege, and staying at home with them is an even BIGGER privilege.
But what can you do? You can't exactly stuff them back in.
|
|
|
Post by lulubean on Apr 6, 2011 19:51:53 GMT -5
I do, I believe that parents would buck up and take care of the child if they knew they wouldn't get a dime.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:07:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2011 19:54:52 GMT -5
Then you have never worked with underprivledged children...
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Apr 6, 2011 19:59:57 GMT -5
I don't believe that for a second.
I think some people just lack certain abilities. And some people just simply don't know any better.
What I do find amazing/sad/frustrating is that on one side we have NUMEROUS people who are capable and willing to support their children, but can't have any and on another side we have mothers who don't know who their kid's father is and don't take care of them. In a magical fairytale world people wouldn't be going through all kinds of medical procedures, but would adopt those unwanted kids, etc, bc no matter what any research says, children are not always better with their biological parents.
Lena
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 6, 2011 20:01:35 GMT -5
Some would. But some wouldn't. A lot wouldn't. Instead of stepping up they'd just let their kids pay the price.
|
|
|
Post by lulubean on Apr 6, 2011 20:01:55 GMT -5
Yes I have. I will clarify that I believe that they would in regards to food and shelter.
|
|
shanendoah
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:44:48 GMT -5
Posts: 10,096
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0c3563
|
Post by shanendoah on Apr 6, 2011 20:37:54 GMT -5
Firebird: We're getting UE, and we're going to keep getting UE as long as they'll give it to us, because that's the most financially beneficial situation for us. That doesn't mean that both DH and I don't think the UE system needs to be changed. We signed petitions against the latest extension. I don't believe that UE payments should be made if soldiers can't be paid, type thing. Most of our current social safety net programs could benefit from complete overhauls. Unfortunately, we don't have a government where that's currently possible. You have the people who want it gone completely and the people who afraid to do the overhaul for fear that once they start, the folks who want it gone completely will win. So, they defend the status quo.
Lena: I would like to move to your magical fantasy world. I agree that not all children are better off with their bio parents. Sadly, many of those couples that are willing to go to the ends of the earth to have bio kids are unwilling to consider children who aren't their bio kids. There's also the problem that most of the babies that get put in the foster care system right away have fetal alcohol syndrome or other severe problems, so many people aren't willing to take them. (I am not trying to pass judgement as we decided last year not to go through with the foster to adopt program in our state because DH isn't certain he can handle some of the more common issues, though we were considering older children, not babies. It just is.) The problem isn't just that bio parents or the state aren't willing to give up the children (creating supply) its that what demand there is is mostly for healthy white babies.
The foster care system in this country definitely needs work. However, as foreign adoptions are becoming more and more common, one of the things we are learning is that, flawed as foster care is, its is by far superior to institutionalization, when it comes to children's mental health and socialization.
|
|
Apple
Junior Associate
Always travel with a sense of humor
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:51:04 GMT -5
Posts: 9,938
Mini-Profile Name Color: dc0e29
|
Post by Apple on Apr 6, 2011 21:06:02 GMT -5
I also deferentiate between welfare and UE. Your employer pays into UE. You have to hold a job to get UE and how much you get is based on what you had earned and how long you had worked (to some degree), so I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with able-bodied individuals that choose not to work because they want to be lazy and live off the system. Those are the people that should be picking up litter, doing crap work, spending hours in a large building with nothing to do but better themselves or get bored enough that a job looks better than welfare.
I would rather see the government provide birth control than abortions. Many insurances still will not cover bc, when, in the long run, it's so much cheaper!
|
|
Apple
Junior Associate
Always travel with a sense of humor
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:51:04 GMT -5
Posts: 9,938
Mini-Profile Name Color: dc0e29
|
Post by Apple on Apr 6, 2011 21:15:13 GMT -5
Naggie, firebird, on many points. Some of you others too, but I'm too tired to go back and figure out all the names...
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Apr 6, 2011 21:19:02 GMT -5
I second everything in Shenandoah's post (and a lot of Phil's, too) The net vs. hammock analogy is spot-on. What I see the most of, probably because of my peer age group (mid-twenties) is a lot of having kids with zero forethought. If there was a way to disincentivize having a ton of kids one can't afford, short of sterilization, I would be 100% in favor.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 21:07:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2011 21:42:19 GMT -5
I think volluntary steralization would be ok... it isn't a violation of rights if you agree to it... right? So if we paid 20K to get your tubes tied? Would that work?
Or does that open up issues like paying for organs? ...
|
|
Apple
Junior Associate
Always travel with a sense of humor
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:51:04 GMT -5
Posts: 9,938
Mini-Profile Name Color: dc0e29
|
Post by Apple on Apr 6, 2011 21:47:32 GMT -5
Considering I paid to get my tubes tied, 20k compensation, or even just getting it done without cost to me would have been a dream (I was 25 and had already paid for the ex-husband to get fixed when he was 21 or 22, but he left so I had to do it for me). I honestly don't have an issue with voluntary steralization, but at the very least I think we should provide birth control. It's not the same as selling organs since someone else can't use your tubes while you go without.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Apr 6, 2011 21:48:05 GMT -5
Hmm, good question. I'm honestly not sure.
I read an article several years ago in one of the women's magazines (Good Housekeeping? LHJ?) about a one-woman crusade who paid some paltry sum ($200ish IIRC) to women on public assistance who agreed to be sterilized. Half the "expert" interviewees were hailing her as a hero, the rest saying she deserved to burn in hell. The interesting part of the article was the womens' reaction to the offer - some expressed relief to have the specter of unplanned/unaffordable pregnancy finally removed for good. I wonder if that would hold true across the board.
|
|
|
Post by sue on Apr 6, 2011 23:49:39 GMT -5
"Ah but this is what sticks in my craw, having children is a choice, you make 35k and want a baby get your ass some more education to get a better job, or find a better paying job. I really cannot believe I read that actually. Since when is having children an entitlement.
Amen to that. I wish more people realized this.
They don't, though, and I don't want the kids to suffer for that."
I don't think my kids are suffering. Maybe it's because I do live in a LCOL area? I couldn't imagine raising them on $25k in NYC, but for here? Nope, no suffering.
|
|
cronewitch
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:44:20 GMT -5
Posts: 5,974
|
Post by cronewitch on Apr 7, 2011 0:23:38 GMT -5
I think the children should suffer for the parents mistakes. They should get enough to eat, a safe home and education but I don't think they should get all the things parents want for them. When parents know the child will suffer from their mistakes it might make some of them try to do better. Some won't do better but hopefully the children will learn from the parents mistakes.
I knew a single mother who had been on welfare but got a job where I worked. Her little girl was 4 in subsidized daycare and living in an apartment with her mom. Nights she would read her stories, make brownies or other cheap activities. The little girl was starting to say things like her friends had swimming lessons and she thought she should have swimming lessons. The mother was really worried about providing things like that her daughter would need in the future like a computer she couldn't afford. This meant the mother only had a few more years to get her life to where she could afford some of what she wanted for her daughter. Her daughter shouldn't be rescued by everyone else to be sure she has a wonderful childhood. She can still be a happy child as long as she isn't hungry and is loved but having her mom not be able to give her much might make her think twice before she decides to have kids she can't afford.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Apr 7, 2011 7:24:07 GMT -5
I remember a story from a few years ago of a child who died from a tooth infection. His tooth hurt. He didn't make a big deal about it, so his mom didn't freak, she just made the next available dentist appt. Sadly, the child was on medicaid and the only dentist who took medicaid didn't have any open appts for something like 3 months. The infection spread to the child's brain and he died. Not only did the family pay a huge price (a child's life) for lack of timely care, so did the rest of society. Think of how much less it would have cost if he could have gotten in to a dentist and had the toothache treated, than it ended up costing with ER services and brain surgery.
There's a lot more to this story that the public does not know. The press's spin on this made it sound like it was a travesty, BUT there were other options available to the parent and they were not used.
Here's a little information available. I work at a facility that will provide dental care to Medicaid kids. The dental van shows up at the child's school and the ONLY thing that the parent needs to do is sign the consent form. Our dentists cannot touch a child without this. This is scheduled in advance, at the beginning of the school year, a targeted school is on the schedule and a fully functional dental van is delivered to the school, stays there for several weeks and treats all children who have returned a signed consent form. We are not the only facility in the US that does this, most dental schools in the US have an outreach program available and (sadly), their results of response rate are comparable to ours.
Less than 10% of the consent forms are returned. These are school districts where >80% of the children receive free lunches and this is used a rough measure of who is eligible to receive dental care (even though all students who return the consent form are treated, regardless of Medicaid status). So the parent does not have to take time off from work to take the child to the dentist. The parent does not have to find a dentist. There is no money exchanged, most of the dental treatment is provided by a combination of dental school funds and some support from Medicaid. There are also corporate sponsors (most of whom are vilified on this board as 'big Pharma').
The children are pulled from class, given an oral exam and their problems are delineated. Their teeth are cleaned, they're given dental supplies (toothbrush, paste, floss, a timer) and a notice is sent home with the child to explain to the parent what the child's problems are. The child is then scheduled to be treated (teeth filled, extracted, crowned, etc.) and on these days, sometimes only 2-3 children can be treated on any one 8 hour day due to the extensiveness of their problems. A screening day, the van can deal with up to 15 kids. This really works as a nicely oiled machine that is horribly underutilized by those who need it the most.
In cases where a community has access to dentists who accept Medicaid, less than 20% of the eligible population utilize the services - even for preventative dental care.
This is an extremely perplexing problems to a lot of health professionals and while this child's death was a travesty, it's incidence is not wholly on the back of the healthcare system. Other entities share responsibility, the least of which is the parent.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Apr 7, 2011 7:52:44 GMT -5
Mich I think the case everyone is talking about was in NJ and the news covered it locally with more details that may shed some light. This child didn't have a regular cavity. He had an abscess and needed a root canal and a crown.
The mom said that the child had been to a regular dentist but all he could do was pull the tooth. He didn't do root canals on anyone, most especially on kids. Truthfully how many dentists want to get paid what medicaid pays for that kind of dental work?
Honestly I have two kids and most dentists here don't want have kids as patients. The ones that do book up 6 months in advance. And that is when you are a cash customer.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Apr 7, 2011 8:03:50 GMT -5
Mich I think the case everyone is talking about was in NJ and the news covered it locally with more details that may shed some light. This child didn't have a regular cavity. He had an abscess and needed a root canal and a crown.
It was in MD, Prince George's County, to be specific. I know the details of the case well - and a lot more of the details that were published by the popular press. When something like this happens, the dental community DOES discuss this because ultimately, there is a goal to not see problems like this. This was a forum topic at the university - a forum that I attended.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Apr 7, 2011 8:10:14 GMT -5
Mich the mom doesn't live that far from me and she went on TV and in the papers and talked about it so I don't think it was really that secret. I just think people don't remember those parts. Maybe you can explain one thing. As a person who has had plenty of dental problems I have had a root canal or two. How come when the boy went to the original dentist and he said the tooth was absessed they didn't put the child on antibiotics? Then get him to the dentist to proform whatever procedure he needed. I am an idiot lay person and in my mind that would have been the first thing I would think they would have done.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Apr 7, 2011 8:34:06 GMT -5
I believe that the child never went to a dentist, he went to an ER where he was treated for sinusitis as his complaint was headaches, not a tooth ache. Unfortunately, many physicians still do not see the importance of oral health and are not wholly on the bandwagon with regards to how oral health can affect systemic health. At the point he was finally seen by someone, the infection had probably already entered his brain and due to the blood/brain barrier, most oral antibiotics would not be effective.
Everything that I have heard, the mother had looked for a dentist who would accept Medicaid and she said that she could not find one. However, of my list of dentists that do accept Medicaid, there are 4 in the county he lived in.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2011 8:52:31 GMT -5
My former sister-in-law never saw a dentist until she was an adult and the company she worked for got dental insurance as part of the compensation package. Her parents simply couldn't afford for her and her siblings to go to the dentist. They worked, both of them, all their lives and had a house in a not-so-great area but did the best they could do. The kids went to the doctor when it was absolutely necessary and not until. She was lucky that all she had was a few cavities but needed some major cleaning. But her mom had them all brush with baking soda which seems to have really helped. I can't tell you how many kids come to school and it's obvious they have never even brushed their teeth. No excuse for that. Just lousy parenting. I'm sorry but now with all the handouts, there is no excuse for this neglect. Back in the olden days, parents provided or the kids did without. Not a bad idea. Yes, there were local programs to help out and some doctors/dentists worked with the working poor but the idea that ANYONE should go to the dentist or doctor for free is ludicrous. If you have money for your hair and nails, you have money for your kids basic needs.
|
|
qofcc
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:30:58 GMT -5
Posts: 1,869
|
Post by qofcc on Apr 7, 2011 8:56:05 GMT -5
So if for example a girl gets pregnant with no job skills, doesn't know who the daddy is and her parents won't support her because she was a tramp. She would be given a bed in a home for unwed mothers and food and medical care. She might be in a house with 4 other mothers and babies. The mothers can live there as long as they need to. Go get jobs, watch each other's babies, share cooking and cleaning duties. When they are working low paid part time jobs they can keep the money to buy clothes, things they want, diapers, go to school or whatever they want. They will be charged a nominal amount of earnings as rent like keep $100 a month then pay 20% for room and board. This allows them to earn a thousand pay 180 rent but then start buying things like better food or paying tuition and buying books so they don't have to stay poor.
They won't like a group home that is small and overcrowded so will want to better their life if they can. They won't be given clothing or toys so if they want better for the kids than just room and board they can get it for them.
Crone, these group homes do exist. A girl my daughter knew in HS went to live in one. I think it was court ordered because she was running wild and getting in trouble and her parents weren't willing to take care of her. Each girl was given a room for herself with a crib for the baby and the babies had all sorts of nice baby gear and toys available to them (to use while they were there). The girls themselves were just given the bare minimum basics. The girls were required to attend school until HS graduation, but they went to classes with modified curriculum that had less homework because they had chores in the evenings and had to take care of their babies. After graduation, they were allowed to stay for a period of time to find employment and save up money to move out or go to college. They received college and career counseling. There was some type of house mother and daycare provider. They had very strict rules about visitors. We went to visit her, but we weren't allowed to see her room or any of the private areas. She wasn't allowed to have male visitors unless they were immediate family members. We weren't supposed to tell people where the place was and it looked just like a normal house from the street. There wasn't a sign in the front yard advertising home for wayward pregnant teens. It was a nice set up and after she got over being upset about the strict rules, she was very grateful to be there.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Apr 7, 2011 8:56:28 GMT -5
Mich I was listening to people talk about getting an appointment with a dentist that will accept medicaid last week. They were actually senior citizens. They said except for the actual "free clinic" type places it can take months to get an appointment. The others it is almost impossible. I do agree that there are tons of places that will give the kid a cleaning. Maybe if she had done that before it wouldn't have gotten to this point. Then again who thinks of a kid at 8 would be needing a root canal? The regular denstist around here charge $250 for a cleaning and dental check and anywhere from $350 to $500 just for one filling. I freely admit I have never had dental insurance and I have taken my kids to the clinic. ;D They are nice, professional, if hard to get an appointment with and usually run late, but completely affordable.
|
|