mrsdutt
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 12, 2012 7:39:38 GMT -5
Posts: 2,097
|
Post by mrsdutt on Oct 26, 2012 10:14:16 GMT -5
HOOPS said: I think this illustrates a point pretty clearly, people don't care what's best for their kids, they only care about what they want. At which point having the government take care of them might be a really good thing.
I don't think I have ever read a more callous statement. I'll stop there because you just set me back, emotionally, 40 years.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 10:28:19 GMT -5
Wow, because its true? Parents who really love their kids more than themselves, do what's best for them, regardless of their own personal feelings.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 10:38:15 GMT -5
Where is this manual on what is "best" for the child? I want to make sure to pick one up before I have a kid.
Even the greatest parents I know still make mistakes, or choose one course of action when another - in retrospect - would've been better. I know you're not an exception to this, Zib. Does that mean you don't love your kids?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 10:41:05 GMT -5
I do and I've made plenty of mistakes. But I didn't ask anyone to fund my choices. I have two kids because I could support two kids. I also worked two jobs and flipped houses when the market was decent for doing so.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 10:44:20 GMT -5
So it's not that parents who make mistakes don't love their kids, it's that parents who "ask others to fund their choices" don't love their kids?
If your kids went to public school, you're asking others (including me, including many who don't have kids) to "fund your choices." In that example, your choice to not send your kid to private school.
It's not just limited to welfare. Middle class parents receive plenty of subsidies for their children. But that's different, I'm sure.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 10:47:21 GMT -5
I paid school taxes. In fact the taxes that went with my neighborhood school system. You don't love your kids if you have them knowing full well you can't take care of them and expect others to do so. It's about YOU not them.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 10:50:47 GMT -5
I'd be interested to know the number of people who fit the above description, compared with the number of people who hit hard times and maybe made inadequate plans (by YM standards).
I know a lot of people who probably should've waited a year or two before having kids (although none are on assistance). But I don't know a single person who tried to have a child KNOWING they couldn't afford it.
So I think denouncing anyone who receives aid, at any time/for any reason, as not loving their children, is pretty ugly and assumes a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 17:34:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 10:51:39 GMT -5
So it's not that parents who make mistakes don't love their kids, it's that parents who "ask others to fund their choices" don't love their kids? If your kids went to public school, you're asking others (including me, including many who don't have kids) to "fund your choices." In that example, your choice to not send your kid to private school. It's not just limited to welfare. Middle class parents receive plenty of subsidies for their children. But that's different, I'm sure. you are equating school and education for the masses to welfare for those that take it? there is a major difference in the two.....educating the masses produces citizens who one day will work in our economy, and who will be the taxpayers of the future welfare allows those without enough subsistence to get over their issues....i dont see how they are equal in any matter
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,083
|
Post by giramomma on Oct 26, 2012 10:53:56 GMT -5
I am not sure I understand why busing poor kids into your neighborhood is not allowing your kids to get a decent education. I am only asking because where I grew up they bused low-income kids into our neighborhood school and I don't believe it had any affect on my education. Granted that was over 20 yrs ago but I still got a good education. If you were smart and studied hard you ended up in AP or college prep courses. The fact that poor kids also went to the school had no bearing on what education you received. We had a very high % of our class go on to college, including a number of those poor kids that were bused in... 80% of the kids are poor at our elementary school. The school as a whole reads well below US averages. I don't understand how being put in a class where MOST of the kids read below their grade level is a "good" education. My school district has come out and said "It's too expensive to teach the poor kids how to read at grade level. So, we won't do it." Instead of teaching the kids to read or putting extra resources to that, our district teaches the kids about cultural diversity. So what if they know about every single cultural holiday. They still can't read worth anything. Things aren't like they were 20 years ago. 20 years ago, I'd agree with you too. I had poor kids in my elementary schools, but the ratio was not 80% poor to 20% nonpoor.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 10:59:25 GMT -5
I just find it a little hypocritical that those who are judging other parents' love for their children have no problem accepting 'free' public education for their own children.
I am in favor of public schools, and have ABSOLUTELY no problem paying taxes to fund them. That's not the issue. The issue is the "Well, when I take subsidies for my kids, that's OK, but when a single mom takes food stamps, it means she doesn't love her child" attitude I'm seeing from some in this thread.
And again, I think the welfare system could use a good overhaul. I don't think it should be a way of life for people unless they truly have no other options. But I'm not about to judge someone's love for their children based on the circumstances in which they've found themselves. There but for the grace of God...
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 11:06:28 GMT -5
I don't see paying school taxes and sending your kids to the school as being welfare but whatever. If I take food stamps because I won't work to feed my own children, that's welfare.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 11:10:33 GMT -5
I never said it was welfare. And there is a strong social purpose behind educating the populace.
But unless you pay enough in property taxes to cover your childrens' cost of education (most parents don't) you ARE being subsidized by other taxpayers. You can spin it as different from "welfare," but the bottom line is you are not funding ALL your own choices. (Which, by your and Hoops' logic, means you don't love your children.)
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 11:12:26 GMT -5
Guess I don't love them then. But they still aren't on welfare. In fact, they pay taxes.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 11:15:50 GMT -5
I wonder if there was no uncle sugar if they'd stop having babies they can't afford?
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 11:16:39 GMT -5
Au contraire. I waitressed for 4 years and most of my coworkers were about my age, with kids. Some received assistance, some didn't. But they were all doing the best they could, and - at the time they had kids - they reasonably believed they could afford them.
I was acquainted with one person who did seem to view her child as a meal ticket. She had some drug problems and I'd guess an undiagnosed personality disorder. But I don't pretend that she is the rule rather than the exception, because that has definitely not been my experience.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 17:34:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 11:23:42 GMT -5
I think, we are talking about Apple or Orange or can be Chicken or Egg.
The public school system is must, we all gladly pay tax to support them. But when it comes to welfare there should be certain time frame on them. If we don't, it will create more dependency of the government. It's not matter of how one loves their children or not. Those kind of environment that can creates multi generations of welfare recipient. That is my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 17:34:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 11:27:08 GMT -5
Our opinions are based on what we know. I know this and try to see outside my box, but when I do, I see the same type of behavior.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Oct 26, 2012 11:27:30 GMT -5
Mid, There are obvious cases in the news (two comes to mind recently) of times where it was obvious the parent was more concerned about themselves than what was best for their child. I'm sure you heard about them, the one who glued her toddler's hands to the wall, or how about the one who bashed in the head of her baby because he was crying and we later discover she had another kid she killed a few years back. Now pregnant with number four and in jail kid number one is (FINALLY) in CPS. Yea, all parents care about what is best for their child and know how to put their kids before themselves. Of course we've become so touchy feely about it a kid has to practically die before a parent is deemed unfit.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 11:31:44 GMT -5
Not to mention social workers jobs depend on them staying in the home and on the dole.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 17:34:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 11:32:16 GMT -5
Mid, There are obvious cases in the news (two comes to mind recently) of times where it was obvious the parent was more concerned about themselves than what was best for their child. I'm sure you heard about them, the one who glued her toddler's hands to the wall, or how about the one who bashed in the head of her baby because he was crying and we later discover she had another kid she killed a few years back. Now pregnant with number four and in jail kid number one is (FINALLY) in CPS. Yea, all parents care about what is best for their child and know how to put their kids before themselves. Of course we've become so touchy feely about it a kid has to practically die before a parent is deemed unfit. So, these whackadoos killed their kids because they were poor?
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Oct 26, 2012 11:35:38 GMT -5
Mid, There are obvious cases in the news (two comes to mind recently) of times where it was obvious the parent was more concerned about themselves than what was best for their child. I'm sure you heard about them, the one who glued her toddler's hands to the wall, or how about the one who bashed in the head of her baby because he was crying and we later discover she had another kid she killed a few years back. Now pregnant with number four and in jail kid number one is (FINALLY) in CPS. Yea, all parents care about what is best for their child and know how to put their kids before themselves. Of course we've become so touchy feely about it a kid has to practically die before a parent is deemed unfit. This is obvious abuse. Very different than the concept of taking kids away from a parent who loves them simply because they receive some government assistance.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,614
|
Post by swamp on Oct 26, 2012 11:35:58 GMT -5
Mid, There are obvious cases in the news (two comes to mind recently) of times where it was obvious the parent was more concerned about themselves than what was best for their child. I'm sure you heard about them, the one who glued her toddler's hands to the wall, or how about the one who bashed in the head of her baby because he was crying and we later discover she had another kid she killed a few years back. Now pregnant with number four and in jail kid number one is (FINALLY) in CPS. Yea, all parents care about what is best for their child and know how to put their kids before themselves. Of course we've become so touchy feely about it a kid has to practically die before a parent is deemed unfit. So, these whackadoos killed their kids because they were poor? Yup, only poor people do things to hurt their kids
|
|
muttleynfelix
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:32:52 GMT -5
Posts: 9,406
|
Post by muttleynfelix on Oct 26, 2012 11:42:43 GMT -5
I call BS on this on so many levels. There is so much out there on what is "best" for the child. Sure it isn't fucking life threatening stuff, but good lord no one does EVERYTHING that is BEST for their child. Did you breastfeed for at least a year and do childled weaning? Because if you didn't, then you didn't do what was "best" according to AAP. Do you see where this goes? It gets long and nasty and I guarentee that at some point you did something that some expert deemed not the best.
The second part - well Shasta said it best:
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 11:46:48 GMT -5
How exactly is this relevant to the claim that anyone who receives welfare doesn't love their kids?
I have never argued that EVERYONE loves their kids. Many people have kids for selfish reasons, or discover (once the child comes along) that they don't have the warm fuzzy feelings they are supposed to. This certainly isn't limited to the poor/working class.
And parents who kill or harm their kids ALSO aren't limited to the poor/working class. I don't recall Andrea Yates or Susan Smith receiving welfare.
All I have been saying is the mere receipt of government benefits - with NO other evidence of abuse, neglect, poor choices - does not automatically mean the parent does not love his or her child.
|
|
susanb
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 21, 2012 14:16:56 GMT -5
Posts: 1,430
|
Post by susanb on Oct 26, 2012 11:50:12 GMT -5
I think (not sure, so sorry if I am wrong) Mid's point is that most of us are a net drain on the system.
If everyone were really to pay their equal portion, or fair share, each of us would have to pay tens of thousands a year in taxes (I don't remember the exact number, but it is more than 30k per person. Let's say 30k for the sake of argument). Very few married couples pay 60k+ a year in income taxes.
So, let's say you are a middle class couple with two kids - you get a mortgage deduction and a break on your tax bill for dependents, but you still pay 10k in income tax and 2k in property tax. You are still using more $ in services (far, far more) than you have contributed in tax dollars. Your children's education alone is about 20k a year. We haven't even addressed road or hospitals.
Of course, this does not change the fact that there is a lot of waste in the welfare system as well as the tax system or that people paying $0 in taxes is a bigger problem than people paying 12K in taxes. I am a strong proponent for everyone having skin in the game to preserve our democracy. To me, it has gotten to the point where politicians from both parties buy votes by handing out money.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 11:50:43 GMT -5
Exactly.
Just look at the comments on any tiger mom thread. Half say she's doing things right, half say she's abusive. Look at the mommy wars over SAHPing vs. working, or breastfeeding, or cosleeping, or spanking, or private vs. public school.
But somehow we're expected to adhere to a static definition of what is "best" for a child? Not just a child, ALL children? We can't even all agree on one single aspect of parenting. And neither can the purported experts.
Barring obvious cases of abuse/neglect, what is "best" for one child is often not best for another.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 26, 2012 11:51:54 GMT -5
Yes! Thank you, Susan. I wasn't sure if I was expressing myself very clearly.
(And I agree with your entire post, including the last paragraph.)
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Oct 26, 2012 11:55:34 GMT -5
Mid (and others) I NEVER said poor people don't love their kids.
Someone had stated that a parent should always do what is best for their children.
My point (apparently not well made) was to demonstrate that some parents will not always choose what is best for their childrent because the parent puts THEIR OWN INTERESTS first.
How many times do we see people who insist, contrary to all available evidence, that they are a "good" parent. I'm talking the extreme cases here, and yes it is a slippery slope and difficult to determine what that bright line is. However I firmly believe we leave far too many kids in bad homes which set them up for failure in life because they don't have an example of anything different.
I don't have a solution but what we are currently doing is not working.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Oct 26, 2012 12:01:30 GMT -5
My point (apparently not well made) was to demonstrate that some parents will not always choose what is best for their childrent because the parent puts THEIR OWN INTERESTS first. I would be willing to bet that ALL parents will not always choose what is best for their children because they put their own needs first. Any parent thats says otherwise is a liar.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Oct 26, 2012 12:02:40 GMT -5
I have two friends from high school that I'm fb friends with. BOTH are currently pregnant with kids that they know damn well they can't afford and both have multiple kids with multiple different baby daddies. We all graduated together so they are as old as I am and should know how kids are conceived.
"T"- had baby number one towards the end of our junior year. She had to go to visit the baby daddy in jail to tell him she was pregnant. This child is now over 18 and was recently released from jail. They had a graduation party from him when he was released because he finished his GED behind bars. She got pregnant with baby number 2 while that baby daddy was on HUBER (work release from jail). They would meet up on his lunch hour and spend some quality time together if you kwim. Number 3- I don't know his dad except that she frequently complains on FB that he doesn't pay child support. #4 and #5 and #6 (one she is currently pregnant with) all have the same dad. He has 2 kids from a previous relationship. She routinely bitches about how much his Ex is demanding in child support and other money (band, soccer, etc). She was actively trying to get pregnant with #6 because she is hoping for a girl this time. She is unemployed and hasn't had a full time job in her entire life. Every other week on FB she is bitching about being broke, baby daddies not paying CS or how much her current man has to pay in child support. FWIW- she and the current man and not married.
"N"- got pregnant with her oldest within weeks of graduating high school and went on to have 5 more with 4 different men (two youngest have the same father) She complains every week on facebook about the lack of child support and what a hassle it is to deal with the county. She has not worked a full time job in her entire life. Her current husband (who I also graduated with) begged her to have a baby with him. So she is currently pregnant with her 7th baby. He works but doesn't make a lot of money. He can't work anywhere that drug tests because he is a heavy drug user. I know this because he complains constantly about his drug use on FB and they have some pretty explosive fights on FB over his drug use. In the 6 months that they have been married she has kicked him out and changed her status from Married to Single 3 times (and was "in a relationship" with another guy on of those times).
Both of those women knew full well they couldn't afford another kid, both are on and have been on one from of assistance or another for the past 18 years and both set out trying to get pregnant.
|
|