- Thread starter
- #61
True. If people were more responsible we would have a lot less social problems. But until we discover how to make that happen we have to deal with the problems. Unfortunately ignoring the problems do not make them go away.The problem is where do you establish the safety net that you refer to.
Over 20,000 single parents who can't work because they can't afford child care
A million illiterate adults who can't quality for a job that pays enough to support themselves or their family
150,000 servilely retarded who will never be able to earn a living
Tens of thousands of kids of an alcoholically and drug addict parents who can't or choose not to work
100,00 kids living in foster care
Then there are 53 million on Medicaid about 1/3 children.
The vast majority of these people will not find jobs if they loose government assistance because those jobs do not exist even for the qualified which these people are not.
Maybe, just maybe, you should consider your child before you bring them into the world without you having a job or stable marriage. Maybe you should have learned to read when it was offered to you free of charge. Maybe, if their were more consequences for these things, people would be more motivated to make sure they were employed and contributing to society.
But why? Why do we have to deal with them? Why should we support people who refuse to take responsibility for themselves? Going back to your former question, I'll respond here. People should not be having kids if they cannot afford to house, clothe, feed, vaccinate, and educate them. If they can't afford childcare, then they better have a steady source of income before they bring kids into the world.
Those who insist that it is their right to have children are correct. They should not have the right for other people to support them, however. So the state should take children from irresponsible or incapable parents until the parents are willing and able to take that responsibility themselves. Make that the policy and you will see a LOT fewer kids needing help from anybody other than their parents.
As for that temporary safety net, I can see a local government working with local charities to set up a central help station that can provide temporary help with rent, utilities, food, etc. I helped set up just such a center in our former hometown in Kansas and it was highly effective. The only government monies involved is that the city furnished the building and paid the utilities. All the other funding for the program came from various local charities and churches. And because recipients had to verify their need on a weekly basis, there was virtually zero fraud or corruption built into the system.
It is a different way of looking at government.