So every underprivileged family should have their children taken away and institutionalized... Who would run the institutions? The state? With TAX dollars?
BTW thats a great idea, lets have more institutionalized dysfunctional adults ravaging society. More serial killers = More fun!
You basically have no real concept of reality. You have a dim view of real life funneled through your parents own tunnel vision.
Hey I have a better idea. Why don't we just kill all the poor people? Just get them together and mass execute them with a guillotine.
While we're at it why don't we kill all the ugly people, poor people and basically people who aren't like us. Purge the species, etc.
*sighs* I'm dropping this because it's true, I don't know enough to argue a case. I still think I'm right, though.
"I won't concede however I still think I'm right, I just can't prove you're wrong as you have already proven that my argument is ridiculous."
Did you know that Hitler had more than 20,000 people killed with a guillotine between 1942 and 1943. He thought the death was belittling.
If you killed all the poor people with one I bet you could beat his record.
I haven't seen any proof that I'm wrong, just lots of opinions and statistics. And nowhere have I said "Let's kill all the poor people!"
No, lets just take their children away and treat them like animals. Then let them starve to death because there aren't enough high paying jobs even if those poor people are skilled workers.
I think you have a slightly twisted view of the care system. Anyway, I'm running from the point of view of Britain, country of people who don't want to get the RSPCC on their backs. In related news, the money saved by not providing welfare for said families (specifically child support) could then be pushed into state child care, where all of it will be used to help the children rather than just a percentage (because, let's face it, child support goes on more than just the children).
Look at me I'm bolding letters I'm automatically right.
Either way, The Editor, you have to realize how other people are seeing this. You're basically saying that it's a girls fault if she gets raped and if she doesn't get an abortion, murdering her child (even though it's conceived from rape). Then saying it's poor peoples fault that finding a good long lasting full-time job is hard.
Also, last time I checked, the UK had a lower purchasing power parity than the US, meaning it has somewhat more of a lower class base of living. So really, your point of view is stronger for their argument than yours.
from what i understand britian is considerably more racist than the united states and they really really hate the underclass
"It's a new method of teaching called shouting at people until they agree!" - Eddie Izzard.
For fuck's sake old man, can you not understand the concepts of adoption and state childcare? Those are options too. It's not a "welfare or die" society.
It's not their fault, but they should try harder if they want it.
I don't understand economist speak, so I'll need you to expain what you mean.
We're not out to get the poor you know. For one thing you need a Conservative government to help. Maybe after the next general election...
Purchasing power parity is the amount of money everyone in the country could receive if the money was evenly distributed. The US has a PPP of over 34,000 while the UK's is around 20,000. Meaning as a whole, your country's situation helps their argument over yours.
I see... And that helps their argument how?
There is less money available per capita in Britain, and thus more poverty.
So you say, "Let them take care of themselves." and I say, "Let them eat cake." Which makes me an even better person. On the back of my high horse rests an Ivory Tower in which I condescend on you.
"Give a man a fish and he will live for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will live for years." Welfare does not encourage you to improve. We should be providing an incentive to do better rather than an easier ride. Your 'moral highground' is holding them back, not pushing them forwards.
And then people said I wanted the poor dead, and I can't leave such slander unchallenged.
Certainly not the way it is done now. It just allows you to starve half to death rather than all the way. That is why there need to be sweeping welfare reforms with many more services being available in the fields of education, job training, improvement of the inner cities, etc. Also the public school system needs to be MASSIVELY overhauled.Welfare does not encourage you to improve.
Exactly. The government should stop spending money on heritage and the like and focus on important things such as education and healthcare.
Actually, one can only remain on welfare until the youngest child is 4 years old and then they MUST get a job or support is cut off. Welfare will pay for education and childcare but they wont support a lay about.
The problem I see with the welfare system is that it is endless if you continue to have children every 4 years. You can potentially stay on welfare until social security age.
I think there should be a maximum lifetime benefit in place. For example one can only be on public assistance for 8 years or etc.
that still is punishing the child for having a useless parent
Also the government will pay for a college education only for the first year, after that the individual must seek student loans even if they have a 4.0 GPA.
I know this because I have a cousin who became pregnant at age 17, and was basically alone from then on. She works full time in her son's daycare, goes to school full time and still manages to be a great mom. However she can't support herself and her child on her income from the daycare (about $8 per hour) more than half her wages goes to daycare while she is in school. Her ex-boyfriend works under the table at a construction site to a void state mandated child support.
If it weren't for medicaid the child wouldn't have insurance. She doesn't qualify for medicaid because she is an adult and makes too much money (haha) so she has no insurance.
Well, if after 4 years the parent can't manage to get on their feet enough to get any sort of work (even a job that still requires some for of government aid) then the kids SHOULD be taken away. If the parent is that useless they probably aren't a very good parent anyway.