Existing programs do not go far enough and do not solve anything. You may enjoy throwing other people's money at problems and not solving them, but most of us don't.

It's mostly, if not always poor people who are financially unprepared for parenthood. Apparently, you are not actually involved in your community or you'd know that. As someone who represents children in our juvenile deprived courts on a regular basis, I have not seen very many middle class or higher families have their children taken away because of abuse or neglect. It does happen, but it is rare. I'm pretty used to seeing children taken from homes with no running water or electricity, and it's never just one child. These dumb bastards tend to have 3-4, at least one is special needs, probably due to neglect. Their rights get terminated and they go on to breed again.

Your apparent solution, not having any more children is about the dumbest thing I've ever seen. It works great until it leads to the extinction of the species. What of your programs and services are actually making a substantial impact on generational poverty? (in a positive way as most of these programs tend to encourage and enable it)

Pretty sure Trump doesn't qualify for the EITC. Pretty much only poor people qualify for it.

You don't know anything.

You also need to get over your uninformed bigotry and research how people across socioeconomic status (with some exception for the independently wealthy) express being economically and mentally unprepared for children. Poor people are unfairly the representatives for something that is a societal and world problem.

I don't care if people go extinct (which will take a while with over 7 billion people and daily births and deaths) but I never said people should stop reproducing. I said no one is doing anyone a favor by reproducing. Fertile people have relatively mindlessly and effortlessly reproduced for thousands of years. Wooptydoo. The ease at which eggs dance with sperm for fertile people across socioeconomic status places the tax incentive and paid sterilization nonsense in their proper perspective.

I was listening to "Lust For Life" by Iggy Pop when I read this. It put quite a picture in my head.

But anyway, I did the bare bones search on this dude, and it was as expected. Note: People comparing you to David Duke is not good ever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_LaBruzzo

Bullshit. Middle class people all over the world do just fine with their kids. It's an economic adjustment for almost everyone but they deal with it. The poor, on the other hand are excessively dependent on government wealth redistribution in order to make ends meet, and as mentioned earlier, still fail to take adequate care of the children, costing further billions of dollars. Paying a thousand dollars here and there to make sure some of those individuals stopped making babies that the public had to provide for would save huge sums of money. Considering that the first rule of getting out of a hole is to stop digging, something like this would certainly yield positive results.

Sure we do. Those of us who produce children who will go on to college and make something of themselves because they had good parents to teach them right from wrong, that hard work pays off, and to refrain from drugs/crime are producing the future workforce, the folks who might someday be funding our social security, etc. On the other hand, the poor are by and large producing our future prisoners and felons, future gang members, future meth manufacturers, etc. That's a lot of generalization, but gang membership and distribution of meth is not found in all socioeconomic cross sections of society at the same levels.

Bullshit. And this is why people have silent struggles.




:rolleyes: Thank goodness for people of higher socioeconomic status, the majority of which are white. The heavens open. Let's ignore the fact that indecency and crime (across categories) span across socioeconomic status. Let's also ignore the fact the average poor person is hard working, honest, and not involved in crime.

/letting Kevin dig himself a bigoted hole.

I have to say that there are some things I agree with you on but, the way in which you share your viewpoint comes off as really pretentious. I would hope you don't speak to your clients in such a manner to let them know you think of them as trash. I also found it offensive that you believe some people have a special needs child, as you stated, "probably due to neglect." Please, if nothing else, find a way to present your argument without offending every other person out there.

#firstworldproblems. Our middle class "struggles" are certainly struggles, but no middle class income person is really worried about whether they will have shelter or the basic necessities.

[quote]True enough... if there wasn't enough of their wealth to redistribute, the poor folks would have it pretty bad.

Do they? Are a lot of those folks in the country club cooking meth and having their children placed into foster care? I work in the system and I just don't see that happening. Out of the hundreds of cases I've worked on, I think one time ever did I have kids in private school.

That said, back to the original subject, the proposed system didn't intentionally target lower-income people, but I could definitely see why $1,000 to someone on public assistance would mean more than $1,000 to me.

Kevin, don't you think that people with money are less likely to make enemies of the court system? I'm being serious. I want to make it clear that I am not badgering you or calling you names. In fact, I sometimes believe that you may say things that others might think but, do not want to express. I'm not saying that you don't have valid points that people who are middle or upper class are more likely to value waiting until they are financially stable to have children but, let's be honest here. Don't you think people may be a little more biased and feel obligated to remove a child from a home that is "poor" and less clean than a home where the parents are well-educated and have some money?

I'll admit that in my past job working for CPS, initially I was more apt to judge the poor families who had been accused of neglect or abuse than the families with money and nice homes. I'm not saying I was right. I remember once getting a call about an upper-middle class home where a mother had slapped her teenage daughter and my first thought walking into the beautiful well-kept home was, "Well, maybe the teenager talked back to her mom and deserved a slap." Thinking back, there is really no excuse for hitting your child but, I almost found myself siding more with the married parents with the high income. For cases of low-income families, I might have gone in thinking, "This must be a cycle of abuse for this family." I was quite judgmental when I first started my career. It's good that things have since changed or I would not be nearly as successful in my current career as I am now. I just had to realize my bias and open my mind.

I do have to say that, if nothing else, I appreciate the dialogue of everyone in this thread because if everyone agreed 100%, then this would be a very one-sided discussion.

Kevin, and anyone who believes as he does, is a bigot with limited exposure. He very much deserves to be badgered and called names. There is no need to apologetically question or coddle Kevin. He is an adamant asshole and knows exactly what he's saying. People like Kevin do a lot of damage to societies. Social policies should not be based on such inaccurate and inconsistent views of the poor and middle class.

/we all have our views that rub other people the wrong way but people like Kevin can fuck off a million times

Well, I'm trying not to jump to that conclusion. I'm willing to bet that there are a lot of people who think just like him. I at least give him credit for saying it out loud and not keeping it to himself. If nothing else, we can agree that Kevin says what he is thinking.

Thank goodness Kevin isn't a politician. He'd be expressing his bigotry and stupidity and you'd be waiting patiently for the Golden Compass. ;) Meanwhile, the uneducated bigotry has been inserted in the policies and laws.

Kevin isn't the first person to express these bigoted viewpoints. Everything he types has been said by plenty of people over the generations. I talk to people everyday who hold these viewpoints and I read about these viewpoints everyday. To hell with all of them. People don't get props for expressing uninformed and uneducated opinions. No thanks and no props.

Hey now. I'm trying to put an optimistic spin on it. I remember saying to one of my LGBTQI friends, "I'd rather know who is bigoted towards me than to wonder." I am not LGBTQI. I was using the example that if someone discriminated against me, I'd rather know their feelings so that I don't patronize their establishment than to give money to people who hate me simply for being me. While his statements are uneducated in nature, there are many people who actually feel like him (as you noted).

I wish there was an easier way to rid the world of poverty and unfair conditions. I don't know how we can do that. Let's talk about some suggestions how we can make things better and advocate for marginalized populations.

People interested in working on poverty have programs in their cities and states; or can work on program initiatives. I encourage people to not go into the programs believing as Kevin believes. Educate yourself, inform yourself, and be open to being educated and informed by the people in these programs.

So if we're going to pay women to not get pregnant would we also pay someone a gratuity for being thoughtful enough to abort a pregnancy due to being G ill prepared?