Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:10:24 GMT -5
Seems like I'm still on 5 pages back. But I realy have a problem with Oped's assessment that we have to take care of every kid at all costs and everything is indepdent of the parents. Basically Oped is saying that supporting your kids should be entirely optional. Because if you can't or choose not to, don't worry about it, uncle sugar will give them everything they need. whoosh!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:10:50 GMT -5
So then do parents have no responsibility for their children? Is every parent off the hook then for the kids they create? Where does personal responsibility enter the equation? Are you asking kids to be personally responsible for themselves? Or just saying that is parents don't accept personal responsibility, too bad for the kids? Do I wish there were better alternatives? Yes. 1) But we don't have a good alternate care/ raising system. 2) I'm off the beaten path of a parent enough to be concerned about the implications of more rigorously defining the lines of government intervention in what is a 'right way' to raise kids/ manage fertility.... i think we can always better manage programs, ie I prefer WIC method to food stamp method, reduce fraud, etc.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,873
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 23, 2013 15:17:08 GMT -5
Wow. I taught which in the south is not high paying. I answered the phone at an auto dealership Friday night and all day, open to close so 12 hours on Saturday and I got my real estate license so sold houses or did open houses on Sundays. That's how I supported my kids without another paycheck. Was it fun? No it was not but I did what needed to be done since I chose a low paying career and didn't have the second income. It wouldn't have occurred to me that someone else should buy my food and house and clothe and doctor my children and myself.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,873
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 23, 2013 15:19:54 GMT -5
Nope, of the parents don't wish to support their children, there are other people who will but not taxpayers dollars. So many people would like to adopt but no kids available thanks to social programs. So we need to spend thousands of dollars going out of the country to get kids. Kids are right here and available. If you realized you weren't going to get a check for popping out a kid, you might think twice before doing so. If not, there's plenty of parents out there wanting children desperately.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:22:55 GMT -5
Yep, there were no poor kids before social programs ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/rolleyes2.gif)
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 23, 2013 15:26:07 GMT -5
So Oped, you're still basically saying taking care of your kids should be entirely optional. And parents have no responsibility to do so. People being personally responsible for their children never enters the equation and no amount of money taken from others is enough.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 23, 2013 15:26:31 GMT -5
One option for a recently divorced mom could be to share housing with another single mom. They can split expenses and help one another with child care. One of my best friends did this with a good friend / fellow single mom for years and it worked really well - neither of them had to go on assistance ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/thumbsup.png)
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 23, 2013 15:29:31 GMT -5
Wow. I taught which in the south is not high paying. I answered the phone at an auto dealership Friday night and all day, open to close so 12 hours on Saturday and I got my real estate license so sold houses or did open houses on Sundays. That's how I supported my kids without another paycheck. Was it fun? No it was not but I did what needed to be done since I chose a low paying career and didn't have the second income. It wouldn't have occurred to me that someone else should buy my food and house and clothe and doctor my children and myself. According to Oped and a few others, apparently you shouldn't have to do that and taking care of your kids is entirely a matter of choice. Either way, we can't hold people accountable for their kids because the kids would be harmed. So have kids, them on the street and go live your life because you have no responsibility for them. It's someone else's job to raise them. It's scary that Oped is concerned over government intervention yet turns around and expects government to basically raise all the children of parents who can't be bothered to do it themselves. Government intervention is okay in that case. So Oped, why didn't you your kids off somewhere after they were born? It obvously never occured to you that you had to take care of your own kids because that was someone else's job. Namely, the governments.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:30:47 GMT -5
Hello Gov'ner. more gruel?
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,373
|
Post by movingforward on Apr 23, 2013 15:31:34 GMT -5
One option for a recently divorced mom could be to share housing with another single mom. They can split expenses and help one another with child care. One of my best friends did this with a good friend / fellow single mom for years and it worked really well - neither of them had to go on assistance ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/thumbsup.png) Wasn't that a show? Kate and Allie or something? Oh, my goodness. I forgot all about that show. I used to love it!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:32:18 GMT -5
I'm saying that allowing children to go uncared for is not an option.
You honestly think that most people who get assistance of some kind have no personal responsibility?
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 23, 2013 15:35:49 GMT -5
I'm saying that allowing children to go uncared for is not optional. You honestly think that most people who get assistance of some kind have no personal responsibility? And by saying that allowing children to go uncared for is not optional then that means that parents have every right to not do it themselves. And yes, I DO think someone having kids has a great deal of responsibility, wheather they are on assistance or not. You are the one who is arguing that it's not the parent's jobs to take care of their kids.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:38:25 GMT -5
So, why can't you answer any of my questions?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:40:08 GMT -5
I never said that. <br><br>You have suggested that it is an option to just let kids o uncared or, make them take responsibility for themselves, or just suffer the consequences if their parents don't..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:43:44 GMT -5
But did they take him at 6:30 in the morning or whatever time y ou needed to be at work? Yes. There are lots of shift workers in this town and daycare accommodate.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:45:19 GMT -5
But did they take him at 6:30 in the morning or whatever time y ou needed to be at work? Yes. There are lots of shift workers in this town and daycare accommodate. Wow. that is awesome.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 15:50:46 GMT -5
Yes. There are lots of shift workers in this town and daycare accommodate. Wow. that is awesome. These are in home daycares. 6-2 and 6-4 shifts cover a large population of potential kids. More than the traditional 9-5.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 23, 2013 16:31:28 GMT -5
I'm saying that allowing children to go uncared for is not optional. You honestly think that most people who get assistance of some kind have no personal responsibility? And by saying that allowing children to go uncared for is not optional then that means that parents have every right to not do it themselves. Um, it doesn't mean anything of the sort. OF COURSE parents have primary responsibility for their offspring. oped is simply acknowledging the reality that sometimes parents can't or don't take care of their kids without help and the kids shouldn't be punished for that. Are you actually suggesting we let kids starve if their parents don't provide for them? Granted, yes, that would "wake up" a lot of parents and many of them would do what had to be done - it would light a fire under them in the way that the current system obviously does not. But what if that wasn't enough? If the kid goes hungry because of a parent's bad choices, the bottom line is that we will have kids going hungry. Not too many (one hopes MOST parents would find a way to get the job done if assistance simply vanished) but some for sure. Sadly, there are some people out there who can't or won't feed their kids without assistance (and it doesn't matter whether they can't or won't for the purposes of this discussion, the point is that it wouldn't happen). Should those people have had kids? Obviously not but the little buggers are here anyway and they shouldn't have to go hungry just because their parents are not equipped.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 23, 2013 16:33:56 GMT -5
So, why can't you answer any of my questions? I thought I did? You asked if I thought everyone on assistance had no personal responsibility, and I said that I thought having a child involved a great deal of responsibility wheather you're on assistance or not. So my answer is yes, I think someone who has kids and is on assistance has a mandate to care for their children, just like everyone else does. Here's the thing, responsibility is something that circumstance foist upon you, or you choose to take on yourself. Responsibility means others depend on you to do what you need to do or they will suffer. If I fail to do my job my agency and the employees will suffer. If you have a child, if you fail in parenting the child will suffer. The fact that if you screw up and don't do what you're supposed to do then others suffer is the very definition of responsibility. So, in my view, you have responsibility wheather you choose to meet it or not. You, at least from what I'm gathering, want to aleviate any responsibility from parenting, remove all responsibility from it. So what do you think a parent is responsible for? And if I missed any other questions, let me know, and I'll try to answer them.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 23, 2013 16:40:26 GMT -5
So, in my view, you have responsibility wheather you choose to meet it or not. You, at least from what I'm gathering, want to aleviate any responsibility from parenting, remove all responsibility from it.
That's not my take at all, and I don't think it's oped's (she can correct me if I'm wrong about that). I fully agree with you that being a parent gives you responsibility whether you want it or not, and you shouldn't just shrug it off. But going along with that is the reality (not an idealized lalaland where everyone does what they're supposed to do, I'm talking about gritty hard cold smack-you-in-the-face REALITY) that people do NOT always take responsibility for either their choices or their children. There are people out there who rely on assistance to feed their children. Most of them, I'd really like to believe, would step up and make it happen *somehow* if they no longer got that assistance. But SOME of them would NOT, either because they literally couldn't no matter how hard they tried, or because they were too fucked up to care that they were screwing their kids. So taking that REALITY into account, yes, I do think society becomes responsible for the well-being of small children when their parents are incompetent or otherwise ill-equipped to provide for them regardless of the reason. I don't think kids should suffer more than they already do because they have fucked up parents. They didn't ask to be here. And they have problems enough without worrying about going hungry on top of them.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Apr 23, 2013 16:44:21 GMT -5
By the way, that last post made me sound like I'm really down on people who receive assistance. I'm not - I think a lot of the time, people who receive assistance could get by without it if they really had to, but do rely on it in the short-term to make ends meet.
I know at least two people who received some form of aid while their kids were small so they could scrape by while they were in school with the goal of eventually supporting themselves and their families without assistance. I have no problem with that scenario whatsoever, and I'm not in any way suggesting that most people who receive assistance don't care enough about their kids to provide for them on their own. That's not even remotely true. I want to make that very clear.
Again, I would HOPE that the number of people who would let their kids go hungry and/or not have the resources to feed their kids without help is a small number. I think most people would find a way because most people love their kids. Being rich doesn't make you a good person, and being poor doesn't make you a bad one.
But I don't think that number would be zero.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 23, 2013 17:02:02 GMT -5
Okay, fair enough. Firebird at least seems to agree that parents bare the primary responsibility for their children.
I don't know what the answer is anymore than anyone else. But the point I'm trying to make is I don't think in our rush to "save the children" we should ignore deadbeat mom's and dad's. We should be holding them accountable for their children's well being, and we need to keep in mind they have a responsibility first and foremost.
I am not opposed to temporary assistance for those who need it, but it's important to keep in mind that people have a responsibility to care for themselves and their kids if they have them.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 23, 2013 17:04:39 GMT -5
I guess the issue comes down to what is enough and what is too much. As (I think it was Cawaiu) pointed out there's already trillions of dollars spent every year on assistance for the needy. And we get another article saying that it's still not enough and we need more, we need subsidized daycare that's both affordable and staffed with people with advanced education and have the wealthy and middle class pay for it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 17:36:03 GMT -5
The middle class gets a lot of assistance actually.
Are you saying that if a person gets some kind of assistance that means they are taking no personal responsibility for their children?
Are you saying that if parents do not take responsibility, the kids should just be left to bear the consequences?
What would you like to happen?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 17:36:30 GMT -5
The middle class gets a lot of assistance actually.
Are you saying that if a person gets some kind of assistance that means they are taking no personal responsibility for their children?
Are you saying that if parents do not take responsibility, the kids should just be left to bear the consequences?
What would you like to happen?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 23, 2013 17:38:32 GMT -5
Going to school is not an option. Now what? Seriously? Why not? You really think you just deserve more for nothing. Shit, she's turning me into a conservative... Wipes tear from eye...
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,873
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 23, 2013 17:42:28 GMT -5
Those kids should be given to those who are willing to care for them. If their parents choose not to work and provide for them. There are parents out there who want children very much but thanks to never ending and not enough social programs, those kids will never escape those deadbeat parents. So the cycle continues. A few escape it but not as many that are trapped in it again.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 23, 2013 17:43:08 GMT -5
I'm saying that allowing children to go uncared for is not an option. You honestly think that most people who get assistance of some kind have no personal responsibility? If someone gets knocked down temporarily I don't judge . People that have kids that they can't afford and look to the government to support "cough" doxie "cough" have absolutely no personal responsibility. Just the attitude of "I'm too f'n lazy to better myself so I expect all of you who work hard" makes me want to poke someone's eyes out
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 5, 2024 5:50:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2013 17:46:04 GMT -5
And doxies kid should pay for that?
You think even most people who get WIC or an EITC are like that?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 23, 2013 17:46:07 GMT -5
hold the fuck up - how did this turn into ANOTHER Doxie thread?!??!?!?! Because she is the living example of how not to become self sufficient and rely on others for support. Throw in some complaining about how all that is currently being done is not enough to meet her wants and you've pretty much summed it up. [b I'm beginning to wonder if she is t a staunch conservative trolling to show everyone how bad the entitlement attitude is out there...she can't be real
|
|