Have a kid, get money from the government!

Not only should we repeal tax credits for children, we should repeal child labor laws so that they can stop being leeches on their parents -- and, by extension, society, as the energy they demand comes at the expense of energy that might be devoted by the parent to productive work. Freakin' parasites. If being a kid requires so much work, why do they choose to be born?

0 Replies

Yes, I would be in favor of a flat tax. The government has already intruded so far into our personal lives that the tangled web of tax incentives and loopholes is vast and complicated, and there's not a damn thing anybody can do about it at this point. It's a mess, in my opinion.

But just for the sake of argument, kids may grow up to be the next Bill Gates, but they might also grow up to be the next gang leader too. Having a kid doesn't necessarily translate into a benefit for society.

0 Replies

Yes, but having no kids translates into no benefit at all.

0 Replies

The thing that really irks me in this country is the single mother's pension. Mainly where the woman has had not one, and not two, but three, four and five children without ever intending to have a father support them. And the government just keeps increasing the handouts with no question. I believe that if they recieved a letter after the second one saying that if they have more children their benefits wouldn't increase, they'd stop having children. They do get these letters. After having five kids.

0 Replies

I hear that Wilso. My ex's wife is one of those women who had 6 kids with 4 different fathers and she's been living off welfare all these years. Now that burns my ass.

0 Replies

Montana wrote:

I hear that Wilso. My ex's wife is one of those women who had 6 kids with 4 different fathers and she's been living off welfare all these years. Now that burns my ass.

And we pay the taxes that supports them. Evil or Very Mad

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

The thing that really irks me in this country is the single mother's pension. Mainly where the woman has had not one, and not two, but three, four and five children without ever intending to have a father support them. And the government just keeps increasing the handouts with no question. I believe that if they recieved a letter after the second one saying that if they have more children their benefits wouldn't increase, they'd stop having children. They do get these letters. After having five kids.

Does that mean, the fathers have to pay nothing?

This would really be funny!

If, however, "government" (I suppose, 'mother's pensions' are given by law?) pays all without trying to get it back from the father, that's really for the female co-citizens a great benefit.

And for the male even more. Which is not only totally unfair but ... well, it's hard to understand.

0 Replies

If the father has got a job, and can be identified, and found, then yes, they have to pay.

0 Replies

So, why is the 'helping system' to blame and not the males?

(These fathers get convicted here in Germany.)

0 Replies

In my ex's wifes case, the fathers of her children keep moving, so they have a problem tracking them down. My issue is with the mothers who keeps having children when she obviously can't and/or won't provide for the ones she already has.

0 Replies

Now, if a woman has several children with the same man who has been providing for them and he suddenly vanishes leaving the woman alone with no financial means, then, of course it's the father that is to blame. The same goes for woman who abandon their children, leaving them with the father to care for.

If a woman such as my ex's wife continues to have children with several different men with each one of these men eventually abandoning her, then it is the mother and fathers fault, but the mother is more to blame in my opinion because she continued to have children knowing that she couldn't possibly provide for them if she should be abandoned again, which she was.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

So, why is the 'helping system' to blame and not the males?

(These fathers get convicted here in Germany.)

I tend to think the women should share some of the blame as well. (I know I'll cop hell for this from some)
It's the part of the "helping system" that just keeps paying, and paying, and paying, before saying "enough". That word should come much sooner.

0 Replies

Actually, Wilso, I'm more than glad that men finally "invented" such a system!

(And I know, what I'm speaking of: both as a historian and social worker ... and thus, ashamed, as a male, too.)

0 Replies

Montana wrote:

Now that burns my ass.

You know what burns my ass?

A flame about 3 feet high.

0 Replies

LOL! Yeah, me too!

0 Replies

I'd say that burns my chin, but then slappy might come at me with the Bush mask...

0 Replies

Hahaha!

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

kickycan wrote:
Now I just found out that the U.N. also gives extra money for a spouse that doesn't work. I'm sorry, but that is complete bullshit.

What about social security benefits to the spouse of a deceased person, who paid the requirement amounts of $$ into social security? Should a spouse, who never worked and NEVER paid a cent to social security receive benefits, just because they were MARRIED to someone who did?

That ignores the larger question: how long until that Ponzi scheme collapses like the house of cards it is?

0 Replies

Have a kid, get money from the government!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know