Atheist 2020
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2018
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 290
- Location
- Tennessee
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
If America really wants to end poverty to a lower overall percentage -- you need to pay people to have abortions. Right now we have women that do not get married and have a number of children with a number of fathers. The mother gets more aid to dependent children and the cycle of having children keeps going with their grandchildren. It is cheaper to pay mothers upfront with a $5000 payout to have abortions. True, some will have 10 abortions with 10 different fathers. Still, it would break the back of poverty if we pay mothers to have abortions.
I'm very pro-choice but your proposal would create a cobra effect.
Right now we have women that do not get married and have a number of children with a number of fathers. The mother gets more aid to dependent children and the cycle of having children keeps going with their grandchildren.
Effects of Welfare on Marriage, Fertility, and Abortion - Welfare, the Family, and Reproductive Behavior - NCBI BookshelfRobert Moffitt noted that the magnitudes of these effects are still quite uncertain. Not only are there still quite a few studies showing no significant effect of the welfare system (see Table 2), but also many of these studies use stronger methodologies and are sounder than the others (as in the results for whites). In addition, of the studies that find significant effects, some find the size of the effect to be very modest in magnitude compared with other influences on fertility and marriage, although some find sizable effects as well.
The final point emphasized by Moffitt is that, even though there is a rough consensus that welfare has some effect on marriage and childbearing, the welfare system cannot explain the rise in nonmarital childbearing over the 1980s and 1990s because welfare benefits have been falling over that period (see the section above on trends in the welfare system). To explain that rise, some other factor must have been at work. Leading candidates are a rise in the earning power of women, even low-income women, leading them to be able to support themselves and their children without the earnings of a husband; a decline in the incomes of less educated men, which could have decreased their attractiveness as marital partners; and a decline in the numbers of men available, a hypothesis suggested for disadvantaged blacks (Wilson, 1987). There is considerable research on these other factors, but less research that compares welfare benefits to those facts and attempts to parcel out their relative influences (studies that have attempted to control for some of these other factors include Acs, 1995, 1996; Danziger et al., 1982; Darity and Myers, 1993, 1995; Duncan and Hoffman, 1990; Hoffman and Duncan, 1988, 1995; Lichter et al., 1996; Lundberg and Plotnick, 1990; Schultz, 1994). At the workshop, June O'Neill emphasized that the decline in male wages may have been so great than welfare benefits could have increased in relative attractiveness, whereas William Darity believed that it has been the decline in the pool of marriageable men that is the most important.
A Swiftian Proposal that the illiterati cannot appreciate. Bravo!If America really wants to end poverty to a lower overall percentage -- you need to pay people to have abortions. Right now we have women that do not get married and have a number of children with a number of fathers. The mother gets more aid to dependent children and the cycle of having children keeps going with their grandchildren. It is cheaper to pay mothers upfront with a $5000 payout to have abortions. True, some will have 10 abortions with 10 different fathers. Still, it would break the back of poverty if we pay mothers to have abortions.
If America really wants to end poverty to a lower overall percentage -- you need to pay people to have abortions. Right now we have women that do not get married and have a number of children with a number of fathers. The mother gets more aid to dependent children and the cycle of having children keeps going with their grandchildren. It is cheaper to pay mothers upfront with a $5000 payout to have abortions. True, some will have 10 abortions with 10 different fathers. Still, it would break the back of poverty if we pay mothers to have abortions.
This is basic stupid level 1.
You are arguing by association.
People are poor therefore poverty is caused by people. How ****ing ridiculous is that.
Try reading a book or two on economics it will really help.
If you live in a capitalist system which we do, where only a small percentage hordes the largest percentage of wealth, then you are going to get poverty.
Your blaming poverty on women? Really!!! This sounds more a case of the usual some man low on the totem pole needs someone below him to make him feel better.
This is basic stupid level 1.
You are arguing by association.
People are poor therefore poverty is caused by people. How ****ing ridiculous is that.
Try reading a book or two on economics it will really help.
If you live in a capitalist system which we do, where only a small percentage hordes the largest percentage of wealth, then you are going to get poverty.
Your blaming poverty on women? Really!!! This sounds more a case of the usual some man low on the totem pole needs someone below him to make him feel better.
Poverty is caused by low IQ's. People with low IQ's should not be spreading their bad genes.
As a social democrat, we are willing to pay people to get out of poverty with government policy. But, we are not willing to be a lifetime government handout. Having a baby, get on welfare and raise your child that way -- is not rational. Because your child more or less do what you did as a mother. Three generations on welfare is a failure of the left.
So we should pay people for committing murder?If America really wants to end poverty to a lower overall percentage -- you need to pay people to have abortions. Right now we have women that do not get married and have a number of children with a number of fathers. The mother gets more aid to dependent children and the cycle of having children keeps going with their grandchildren. It is cheaper to pay mothers upfront with a $5000 payout to have abortions. True, some will have 10 abortions with 10 different fathers. Still, it would break the back of poverty if we pay mothers to have abortions.
So we should pay people for committing murder?
Yes they are.Abortions are not murder.
Yes they are.
If America really wants to end poverty to a lower overall percentage -- you need to pay people to have abortions. Right now we have women that do not get married and have a number of children with a number of fathers. The mother gets more aid to dependent children and the cycle of having children keeps going with their grandchildren. It is cheaper to pay mothers upfront with a $5000 payout to have abortions. True, some will have 10 abortions with 10 different fathers. Still, it would break the back of poverty if we pay mothers to have abortions.
Yes they are.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?