Acolytes of Junket

Level 10

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#34214 Feb 20, 2013
Greetings Kevin and Perf!

Sublime, child credit - taken at the end of the working year via a refund? Nice, good idea, but if childcare costs $300/week and someone is only earning $500/week?

Perf, Spring will come. Patience, my friend. Stay layered and warm in the meantime.

Kev, many women (those with a pulse), find Satan simply irresistable. Harmless fun.

Cov, I'm with you! I would rather go out with a bang and not a whimper filled with regret.
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34215 Feb 20, 2013
covcas wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah--its five o'clock somewhere and a beer boot! LOL. Thanks, Sublime. You only get one shot at this life, might as well have fun with it. Don't want to go out moaning, but rather "wheee! what a ride this has been!"
Yep ... that's my plan too.

-Kevin-
Level 10

Since: Nov 09

Smirk .. ;-)

#34216 Feb 20, 2013
Junket wrote:
Kev, many women (those with a pulse), find Satan simply irresistable. Harmless fun.
It was all in good fun :D
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34217 Feb 20, 2013
Junket wrote:
Greetings Kevin and Perf!
Sublime, child credit - taken at the end of the working year via a refund? Nice, good idea, but if childcare costs $300/week and someone is only earning $500/week?
$500 a week is not middle class.

It also takes two people to make a baby. Where is the other parent and what is he/she making (or if they are not raising the baby together paying in child support) in addition to this $500?

Are there single parents with no support from the other parent and no family member's willing to assist them with child care; sure, but this is not the typical situation. We are talking about a small minority of people. Do you feel that national policy that affects the masses, including the vast majority of people who are not single parents with no support from the other parent or family, should be structured solely to benefit that situation, despite said policy not being necessary in the vast majority of situations and it actually incentivizing inefficient or poor decision making in the vast majority of circumstances?

I also point out that if you are making that small of an income, you probably shouldn't be having babies in the first place, since you can barely provide for yourself (which is why I support free birth control and preferably the type you don't have to swallow every morning). I know stuff happens, but still, there is something to be said of responsibility and accountability, which is as dead as common sense in this country, when it comes to policy decision making. Given the notion of responsibility and accountability, I again ask, should national policy, that is not efficient or promoting good decision making for the masses, be tailored to maximize the benefit of people who have created this situation for themselves? I don't believe so.

In the vast majority of situations, you get what you put in, and people get what they deserve based on their decision making. Sure tragedies strike, but in the vast majority of circumstances people find themselves in bad situations in life, because of poor decisions (I certainly cannot be the only person who has observed this is his own life ... I could give you a ton of examples ... like some 24 year old man, who should know better, deciding his goal in life and major ambition in life should be to join some Puerto Rican Prison Gang, but many more of which are from people I know IRL).
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34218 Feb 20, 2013
What's gonna happen when this guy breeds:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/topix/T8K7A22...

Obama's and others hearts will start hemorrhaging blood when they hear of his plight, is what will happen.

“Dragon my tail.”

Since: Jun 09

Wherever

#34219 Feb 20, 2013
-Kevin- wrote:
<quoted text>
It was all in good fun :D
I agree. Satan's valentines day post to Junket was all in good fun. Someone's post about Junket on Satan's thread today was sort of tasteless, though. And didn't appear to be all in good fun.

-Kevin-
Level 10

Since: Nov 09

Smirk .. ;-)

#34220 Feb 20, 2013
You'd have to know the history.
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34221 Feb 20, 2013
Let's take Junket's example of the person making $500 a week. That's a little more than 2,000 a month on average.

In NC, you may be eligible for food stamps if you gross $1862 a month, but only have 1 person in your home, i.e. this hypothetical person making 500 a month. However, since this hypothetical person is grossing a little more than 2k a month gross, which is more than 1862 a month, they would not be eligible for food stamps in NC.

However, if this hypothetical person now pops out a baby, they now have two people in their household, and they can gross 2522 a month and possibly get up to $367 in food stamps, which is like getting a 16 percent raise for a person making 500 a month. On top of free food stamps (and FSM knows whatever any other handouts you may be eligible for) if you throw in the fact that you have free universal day care and you essentially have very little costs when it comes to having this child child and are arguably actually better off, because to the extent you have to clothe the child and provide extra space in your home, you've gotten free food for yourself and them.

At worse it incentivizes having a child when you can't afford one and should not and at best it doesn't disincentives someone who shouldn't be having a baby from not having one, because it shifts the natural consequences of that decision making (that being you'd have a harder time making ends meet) on to society as a whole.

There is something to be said about natural consequences ... me I'd like to go take my bike and do 150 on the interstate, just for the thrill of it, but I'd probably die at some point if I did it enough or lose my license ... therefore, the natural consequences dissuade me from doing so. It's no different in many situations, including when enacting social policies.
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34222 Feb 20, 2013
a 16 percent raise for a person making 500 a WEEK, not a month
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34223 Feb 20, 2013
Somebody, hurry up and judge my post negatively already! Slacker!!!

-Kevin-
Level 10

Since: Nov 09

Smirk .. ;-)

#34224 Feb 20, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
Somebody, hurry up and judge my post negatively already! Slacker!!!
Lots of touchy people lately.

Level 10

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#34225 Feb 20, 2013
Sublime, take a good look around. June and Ward left the building. Single mothers are not unusual. Don't get me started on contraceptives. Because, trust me, I've had ideas that are finally being implemented. Let's hope they result in less "oops" and more "planned". No one can police "morality", so let's be realistic and deal with the hands delt.

Kev and Cov, I "met" Satan when he was marketing his "vag-o-matic". This was back when a thread was started - "Who is Hotter, Satan or TM15?" Cov, the diner is one thread that reinforces the concept that topix doesn't have to be a cesspool. It's what we, collectively, do daily that can make or break our topix experience.

5554 - another 3 of a kind. Ha!

“Dragon my tail.”

Since: Jun 09

Wherever

#34226 Feb 20, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
Somebody, hurry up and judge my post negatively already! Slacker!!!
Sorry, I would have, but I've been trying to figure out how to feed a family of 3 or more on $327 a month and give them quality food--fresh fruits and veggies aren't cheap. My problem is that I would hate to see a child go hungry because of the parents. however, I have no solution for that. go back to poorhouses like in the times of Dickens? Seriously, I do not know what the solution is. I have been enjoying reading though. Does give one food for thought.
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34227 Feb 20, 2013
covcas wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, I would have, but I've been trying to figure out how to feed a family of 3 or more on $327 a month and give them quality food--fresh fruits and veggies aren't cheap. My problem is that I would hate to see a child go hungry because of the parents. however, I have no solution for that. go back to poorhouses like in the times of Dickens? Seriously, I do not know what the solution is. I have been enjoying reading though. Does give one food for thought.
That's a family of two on $327 a month. Are you going to be eating filet mignon, every night; no, but why should you be when you are living on the dole. If you want that kind of lifestyle, you should have to earn it yourself.

Our conversation is not about food stamps and no one, least of all me, is advocating a return to Oliver Twist. Rather, my conversation with Junket is about her suggestion that we should do still more for folks who are in need and providing them with free childcare, which will be paid for by other people (not to mention SS and Medicare are facing insolvency). I don't have a problem with food stamps for children in need. I don't think any children should go hungry or go without medical care.

I think a basic safety net is important, but I don't think its good to go much beyond that (except I would like to see more funding for programs that enhance social mobility ... not just giving folks a fish to feed them for a day, so to speak, which is what most of our welfare programs are geared towards) and I also think we need better mechanism to encourage folks to get off of these programs ... a stick so to speak ... there currently is no stick. Folks come to rely on these things and it becomes a way of life.
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34228 Feb 20, 2013
Junket wrote:
Sublime, take a good look around. June and Ward left the building. Single mothers are not unusual.
Your example was of someone who made 500 a week and had no other income, such as child support from the other parent, or assistance from family, which isn't the majority of single mothers.

Because of this, I wasn't talking about single mothers in general.

I was talking about single parents (including single mothers, but make no mistake there are single dads ... I have an uncle who is one and a brother) who don't receive any support from the other parent and who have no help from family members. Most of the single parents I know, including my bro (who doesn't get any support from the mother of his children ... not a dime ... we are lucky if she doesn't break promises to see them 90% of the time), have family to help them out or receive child support from the other parent.
Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#34229 Feb 20, 2013
-Kevin- wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of touchy people lately.
Instead of judging, I'd rather they toss their hat into the ring. It is possible to have respectful discussions.

“I'm just a country boy”

Level 5

Since: Feb 13

.Rooster Run, Ky

#34230 Feb 20, 2013
Junket wrote:
Sublime, take a good look around. June and Ward left the building. Single mothers are not unusual. Don't get me started on contraceptives. Because, trust me, I've had ideas that are finally being implemented. Let's hope they result in less "oops" and more "planned". No one can police "morality", so let's be realistic and deal with the hands delt.
Kev and Cov, I "met" Satan when he was marketing his "vag-o-matic". This was back when a thread was started - "Who is Hotter, Satan or TM15?" Cov, the diner is one thread that reinforces the concept that topix doesn't have to be a cesspool. It's what we, collectively, do daily that can make or break our topix experience.
5554 - another 3 of a kind. Ha!
As it has been said before "we cannot legislate morality", when we became a nation promoting promiscuous behavior by tossing out condoms like free candy, we also tossed out the idea that is OK to have lots of sex, if it makes you happy. When you add teens, alcohol, and God know what else you end up with unwed moms with multiple "Baby daddy's". Then these young women who either did not get to plan a future or were knocked out of that plan must be supported by those of us who did do things (with some luck, and hard work) right!
It's heart breaking when it happens in your family. A young girl raised right, did well in school, had big plans and a bright future...then she meets Mr. Loser! His usual response "Dayuum [email protected] I thought you was on the pill!" , "I'm Audi".

-Kevin-
Level 10

Since: Nov 09

Smirk .. ;-)

#34231 Feb 20, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Instead of judging, I'd rather they toss their hat into the ring. It is possible to have respectful discussions.
People are too quick to judge. Like those judging you or pers for harmless Topix flirting when I've seen worse or posts just as bad come from them.

I mean really. People need to keep their own MORAL belief system to themselves and stop trying to play high horse with a pony.

“Dragon my tail.”

Since: Jun 09

Wherever

#34232 Feb 20, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a family of two on $327 a month. Are you going to be eating filet mignon, every night; no, but why should you be when you are living on the dole. If you want that kind of lifestyle, you should have to earn it yourself.
Our conversation is not about food stamps and no one, least of all me, is advocating a return to Oliver Twist. Rather, my conversation with Junket is about her suggestion that we should do still more for folks who are in need and providing them with free childcare, which will be paid for by other people (not to mention SS and Medicare are facing insolvency). I don't have a problem with food stamps for children in need. I don't think any children should go hungry or go without medical care.
I think a basic safety net is important, but I don't think its good to go much beyond that (except I would like to see more funding for programs that enhance social mobility ... not just giving folks a fish to feed them for a day, so to speak, which is what most of our welfare programs are geared towards) and I also think we need better mechanism to encourage folks to get off of these programs ... a stick so to speak ... there currently is no stick. Folks come to rely on these things and it becomes a way of life.
Oh I totally agree. I was just tossing random thoughts out. I've always thought welfare begets welfare because a child learns what he's taught. If that's the norm growing up, it will be the norm as he/she becomes of age. And there have been social programs designed to help break that mold (job corps comes to mind), but somehow that didn't help. Do you think a mandatory stint in the military might help (say 2 years). Teach some skills and discipline? I don't know if that's viable or reasonable,either. Again--just tossing ideas out there. Time limits on govt assistance?(are there any now?) I'm woefully unaware of some of these things, I guess. Just didn't see it when I was growing up. We were taught an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. Hand me downs were the norm, neighbors looked out for neighbors, kids stayed in school, divorce was rare and unwed mothers even more rare. LOL--I grew up in the days of June and Ward!

“Dragon my tail.”

Since: Jun 09

Wherever

#34233 Feb 20, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Instead of judging, I'd rather they toss their hat into the ring. It is possible to have respectful discussions.
And rather enjoyable!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Topix Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Wayne Goodwin Needs To Go 2 hr Reba Lewis 2
NSA HOOKUPS FOR FLINT/FENTON Michigan 4 hr Mckenzie 1
Word association game (Sep '12) 16 hr Honest Babe 1,487
~Last Post~ (Apr '12) 20 hr Recon Beeker 3,912
all-stars unfair Thu Sublime1 2
Create Your Own Forum (Jun '15) Thu Zzzz 391
Sean Stone from "Watching the Hawks" Is Impossi... (Jul '15) Wed Change is good 2
More from around the web