Posted on 02/04/2011 5:02:18 AM PST by IbJensen
>Abolish welfare altogether would be a more humane solution.<
You might want to do a little research on the slums of Bangladesh, India, many countries in Africa and in South America, before you make that statement.
Do I think welfare is a good idea? No, but I would rather see young women in inner cities who do not get pregnant rewarded. Pay them if necessary for not getting pregnant and for staying in school, at least for a trial period. It might be the best money we ever spent.
I wonder what would happen if we drafted any young man who impregnated his girlfriend of the hour, unless he married her?
>Abolish welfare altogether would be a more humane solution.<
You might want to do a little research on the slums of Bangladesh, India, many countries in Africa and in South America, before you make that statement.
Do I think welfare is a good idea? No, but I would rather see young women in inner cities who do not get pregnant rewarded. Pay them if necessary for not getting pregnant and for staying in school, at least for a trial period. It might be the best money we ever spent.
I wonder what would happen if we drafted any young man who impregnated his girlfriend of the hour, unless he married her?
Really, we are only a few welfare checks away from Bangladesh?
If someone is impoverished in America it is because they don’t want to work, or have deep fundamental problems.
The number one nutrition related problem among America’s “poor” is obesity. You are, in fact, more likely to be obese if you are “poor” than if not.
There would not be mass starvation and malnutrition if we cut off welfare.
People predicted the same thing when most States were curtailing welfare as far as the eye can see, and limiting it to a few years while looking for work. The doomsday scenarios never materialized.
So you think the current system of letting tom cat boys get off scott free is a good one? IF they had some sort of consequence for impregnating a girl, might they figure out such activity is not really in their best interest?
To answer your other post, abolishing all welfare would leave those who are actually helpless and not just shiftless in peril. Let’s face it, we cannot afford to support an ever-expanding welfare class any more. Cuts are coming as the economy weakens.
It is not a matter of either...
a) conscript unwed fathers into the military or force them to get married.
Or
b) let them off “scott free”.
Your “solution” would weaken both marriage and our military.
Please think through the consequences of your policy prescriptions.
“Ah the dilemma of the false choice!
It is not a matter of either...”
Fair enough. What do you suggest is a solution to young men impregnating teen girls, then taking no responsibility for their actions?
We got into this pattern when the government provided welfare only to families where there was no father living in the home. Government, in essence, rewarded the broken family. When you pay people for a given behavior, it stands to reason you will get more of that very behavior.
Hey, wow, I have been saying the same thing; even attributing a quote from Reagan on the subject.
What I suggest as a solution is the cut off of welfare funds.
Sort of like going after employers of illegal immigrants.
When you cut off the financial incentive for the behavior, the behavior tends to curtail.
Yes, because paying people not to do things has worked so well previously.
Pay people to get married, and most of this will go away. Subsidize behaviour that you want to see, not for refraining from participating in bad behaviour.
They ARE subsidizing behavior they want to see.
>When you cut off the financial incentive for the behavior, the behavior tends to curtail.<
Except when there are, er, other powerful rewards inherent in the behavior, if you get my drift. We’re in such a pattern now, with so many boys and men who have no moral anchor, they will still, I think, engage in physically rewarding behavior and consequences to the girl and especially to the baby will be the last thing on their minds.
I am afraid, at least for a time, there needs to be some sort of unpleasant consequence directly to the male in the picture, before we would see a real change in society.
Correct, but I guess the larger question is: Does the "hip-hop" culture create the societal breakdown or does it exist as a result of such? Either way, I guess the answer is moot since the existence of this sub-culture does nothing to correct this atrocious behavior and restore personal responsibility. 40 acres and a mule, and everything would be resolved right?!? Well, that would probably be cheaper than supporting their generations in perpetuity.
I graduated in 1990 from an inner-city school (Sexton) in Lansing MI. I could count on one hand the number of girls that were pregnant. This problem has literally exploded over the past 20 years. Every time the handouts are increased, the problem grows - the link is distinct and only an idiot could not draw the correlation.
I think that when women no longer get the pampered princess treatment when pregnant, and have to face the hard cold economic reality of being a single mother without a indulgent ‘Uncle Sam’ - they will figure out that letting young men impregnate them isn't such a good idea.
This folks, is why America is finished.
The quick fix for the basdardization of black america is to mandate birth control for every girl till she is 18 years old. That won't happen so Islam is sweeping up inner cities and is creating order from chaos.
I have two teen aged daughters one a freshman in college the other in high school. The last thing I want is some socialist engineer giving them drugs and saying sex outside of marriage is OK
Christians are too secure and fat and happy to do the dirty work needed to save black america.
This I totally agree with, however only Black people can save "Black America" However thanks for your interest and concern. Either we rise or fall on our own merit...
The girl is trapped in the hell of liberal public policy and social engineering that defines the government school system and low income urban areas. The only hope she has (outside of Christ) is teachers like the author of this article and/or the liberation of such students from the current school system.
The current system is set up to encourage life long dependency on government programs and a detachment of sexual activity from personal responsibility. It is a sure way to make sure each generation remains trapped in a cycle of poverty, personal defeatism and wrong choices.
I don’t have some starry eyed ideal that she will wake up,
wise up and apply herself to bettering her life. But I would like to think that we get realistic and demand gov’t schools give them the necessary survival tools. Tools that are scoffed at as being archaic and anti feminist these days. You know, like home ec. instead of sex ed.
The big problem is that current policy makes the wrong thing easy. You want child care provided by the school. You can take care of your own baby and go to night school and pay for child care.
Nothing should be free. Based on a sliding scale, sure but not free. If you can’t pay you can put in sweat equity. But we are no longer going to reward bad choices.
A lot of answers in this thread disgust me. But being Catholic and believing in the dignity of all persons no doubt influences me. I guess only some of us according to these posters are made in the image and likeness of God.
I can believe the behavior is wrong and still want what is best for the person and still believe in their humanity.
Thank you.
It’s kind of like Margaret Sanger is being channeled in this thread, isn’t it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.