Saturday, November 19, 2011
As Part of an Overall Anti-Poverty Program
I would go into every high school in America and have a counselor tell each student this, "Look, kid, if you want to have a child, fine, have a frigging child. BUT, if you ultimately do have one, it will be YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to provide for that child - not mine, not the other fellow's, and not the government's - YOURS.......Now, will we help you in the case of an emergency? Yes, absolutely. But the help will be of a finite nature and it will also be contingent upon you doing X, Y, and Z....I mean, I'm sorry to be so blunt about it, but it is what it is/a brave new world. The Chinese, the Indians, the South Koreans, the Finns - they're ALL flat-out bearin' down on us. And I'm going to be honest with you here, kid. You CANNOT be an uneducated procreating schmuck anymore. You can't.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
The problem as I see it is that children are having children, and a child is not responsible enough to decide whether to have a child.
Holding the adult the child becomes fully accountable for the mindless of the child that preceded him seems a little unfair.
The same argument could be used to justify capital punish for children where capital punishment for adults is sanctioned.
I have a very radical plan, John (one in fact that neither the right NOR the left will like). Pay children to stay in school and pay them not to get pregnant prior to the age of 20. It will help them to avoid a life of poverty and it will the country to be far more competitive.
I am left, and I like it! We give children our tax dollars and they will then have drug money so they will not have to resort to prostitution or other crimes to get their fix.
Since they are in school, they will have connections and they will not have to find them on the street.
Gee, Will. I thought you thought we were already spending too much on education. Now you want to give money to kids?
.
"... YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to provide for that child - not mine, not the other fellow's, and not the government's ..."
Oh horse pucky. There is no reason in the world we (USA) as a society cannot take care of our people.
You say you don't want school kids having babies, then educate the students on all preventative measures to having a baby. Education works wonders.
"The Chinese, the Indians, the South Koreans, the Finns - they're ALL flat-out bearin' down on us."
And they all are socialists countries. They recognize that society achieves so much more when working together. They do not turn their back on their schools and students.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
No, Emma. Socailism is nothing more than the ruling elites controlling everyone's private lives. The maximization of the wealth and privilege of the ruling class.
China is only bearing down on us because it is a lot less socialist than it used to be, and as a result the people are a lot more in control of their own economic affairs. And if you want to see socialism on the Korean peninsula, go north of the 38th parallel. I think you had North Korea and South Korea mixed up. The north is socialist, and the south is not.
dmarks: No, Emma. Socialism is nothing more than the ruling elites controlling everyone's private lives.
I agree with what Emma says about Socialism. We need more of it here in the US. Socialism is when we decide to lift everyone up and make the country stronger in the process.
Here in the US we've entered the cancer stage of capitalism. A symptom of this was the bank bailouts, an out-of-control Wall Street, and a wealthy class that is hoarding an increasingly larger share of the nation's wealth.
We need regulations that keep capitalism, but allow it to work for everyone and not just the wealthy elites. A move in the direction of increased Democratic Socialism is the way to go.
That, or we can continue to watch the middle class shrink and the number of working poor increase. That's the trend, and if we do what dmarks advocates it will continue.
btw, I totally oppose the "ruling elites" controlling my private life... which is why I would oppose a government takeover by Christian Conservatives (they're the ones who want to control people's private lives).
"...have a frigging child. BUT, if you ultimately do have one, it will be YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to provide for that child -"
So if that child is deprived of normal nutrition or suffers in other ways as a result of having an immature parent through no fault of its own, then the heck with it?
That's the conservative position: Abortion is always wrong; but if a teen has that child, that baby's on its own?
I agree with those who believe free birth control should be available to teens along with counselling on the responsibilites one has when one becomes sexually active.
Do any of the liberals here ever think that many of the people out there don't want your help?
"It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent
moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences"
-C.S. Lewis
The government has no money of it's own. What it has it takes from us. When it's in our pocket we can use it as we see fit. When they give it back to us it always has strings attached.
Will,
You posted some link Lisa of "Who's Your Daddy" left over at Sue's "Hello Mr. President...Are You Listening" blog. And you wondered why no one was outraged or said anything about the alleged child harassment at OWS NYC this week.
The reason was because most of us were skeptical of the accusation, which, it turns out, deserved to be questioned.
Here are actual videos of what the rightwing went hysterical over and misreported.
It's best to try to look for the truth behind accusations before blasting misinformation all over the internet.
Lisa and her malcontented pals accuse first and look for facts--if they ever do--later.
John, nobody gets to the heart of an issue quite like you do, my man. I love it!............Jerry, it's not so much the amount of money but how it's spent. We have to give these kids some incentive to succeed. As it stands now, a lot of black kids are actually made fun of for taking schoolwork seriously. Anything that we can do to counteract that is something worth looking at, I think...........Ema, I'm not opposed to a social safety net or helping people who need it. But we have to reinvigorate initiative and personal responsibility. Prior to the Great Society of LBJ (some of which was good, I agree), the black family was largely intact and crime in the black community was significantly lower than it is today. We have to figure out a way to help people and not make them dependent (and, yes, I'm also including here people on corporate and farm welfare). And, yes, I'd hand out condoms every frigging day.
Great call, dmarks. China is succeeding these days precisely because of perestroika and South Korea also has a strong market economy.............Shaw, I actually agree with you. In fact, I would make birth control as readily accessible as candy. I might even frigging pay the kids to use it.............And let me make something perfectly clear here. I think that a large percentage of the OWS people (especially the ones who are there for the cause and not the hangers-on) are good and decent people. The only point that I was trying to make here is that the left made a humongous deal over a few stupid-assed idiots who brought guns and racist signs to the Tea Party rallies and proceeded to condemned the entire movement (Sue practically compared them to the KKK) for it, the fact that they didn't sufficiently speak out against it, etc.. The shoe is on the other foot now.
In the past 20 years federal spending for education has risen 47%....while students math and science scores have steadily fallen.
In a nutshell:
Help the helpless
Fuck the clueless
WD said: "btw, I totally oppose the ruling elites controlling my private life."
yet, you consistently advocate them getting more and more power.
A Musing From The Las Vegas Strip:
Rusty is a businessman and I can immodestly say a pretty good one at that.
One of the most important things I learned both at B-school and through experience was this.
If you have a serious problem,be it low revenue,low sales,poor quality,high cost or crushing debt,never...ever....never ever form a committee to solve the problem....it just never works kids.
This fact of life was proven once again today.Put these idiots in a paper bag,shake it up and dump it out....you've still got idiots.
"You CANNOT be an uneducated procreating schmuck anymore. You can't."
Great. So now you want to punish another innocent child - who didn't ask to be born - for the indiscretions of their parents. Where does this cycle of callous disregard end? And how about some honest sex education for a change instead of that bullshit your people call "abstinence education."
And finally, how about holding your own damn party to account for decades of policy failures based on ideological and religious hocum that did more damage than good. Get real.
Octo,
Great. So now you want to punish another innocent child - who didn't ask to be born - for the indiscretions of their parents.
That is not fair, now, and you know it. They do not want to punish those children. In fact, that give very little thought whatsoever to those children. They are focused on other things.
So let's not call their almost total indifference malice.
Let's call it what it is.
Help me out, conservatives, what is again? Justice? Fairness? Concern for our fellow rich man?
I need more data for my continued defense of the conservative philosophy.
JM: "So let's not call their almost total indifference malice ... Let's call it what it is."
The Bush/Cheney administration spent over $2 billion dollars of taxpayer money on "abstinence only" sex education. And what result did taxpayers get for their $2 billion dollars? A rise in teen pregnancies! That's what! Meanwhile, Will "take no prisoners" Hart wants to cut those little buggers loose, make them pay for their own mistake, and cast more victim blame on the most hapless victims of them all ... the innocent newborns. What a great guy!
Hey, Will. When are you going to start holding your own party to account for one of the most monumental policy failures of all time. When are you going to hold Bush's feet to the fire and the rest of your party?
Meanwhile dmarks thinks: "Socailism is nothing more than the ruling elites controlling everyone's private lives."
Well, that was damn enlightening. Got anything else constructive to offer?
Years ago, the State of North Carolina sterilized poor black girls on the presumption that they were "retarded." Pure eugenics! Hey, dmarks, here's your socialism; except that it isn't socialism: It's racism and fascism.
(Of course, when those poor, supposedly "retarded" black girls grew up, they wrote books about their shame and humiliation in having heir fallopian tubes cut. No, they were not retarded; merely poor and black and powerless).
Yes, John. I'd sure like to read what conservatives have to say about defending the indefensible.
But Octo, you cited examples of indifference to the needs of the little children, and really incited no evidence of malice.
It would seem we agree.
Octopus, I'm an independent who votes probably 3-1 Democrat. And, as the title itself says, "As Part of an Overall Anti-Poverty Program". Yes, I in fact WOULD help the "clueless". BUT, it would have serious conditions and there would be no manipulation of the system allowed. Tough love, in other words.
You are what you vote.
You hear all the time -- "I am an independent. I vote for the person, not the party."
I say, BS!
Unless you only vote for Independents, you are a Democrat when you vote for a democrat and you are a republican when you vote for a republican.
Take your pick, but you are one or the other.
John, I didn’t call it “malice.”
I called it “callous.”
He thinks an overactive phallus
May deprive him of a palace;
This heartless Hart runs on digitalis.
Holy Hewey! I cannot compete with rhymes!
Let's put it this way, Jerry. I'm unaffiliated and unbeholdin'. Yeah, I voted for Mr. Obama but I sure as hell don't feel the need to spin for the guy. And I also listen to both sides prior to making a decision. That, I feel, is important. Huntsman, for example, I would consider voting for. I probably wouldn't because of the abortion issue but I would in fact take a look at him.
Post a Comment