CFB Apologist wrote:The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage"
Any insight as to why this is the case? Besides redneck whites keeping them down? any opinion on WHY some out there can't earn a wage to support their families?
Because income inequality is worse in this country than it is in Pakistan
LOL- boom- game, set, match... Pakistan is a war torn excrement hole where children are executed for looking the wrong way. Their people are starving, and their government kills teenage girls who are raped...Let's hurry up and be like them- great plan.
CFB Apologist wrote:The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage"
Any insight as to why this is the case? Besides redneck whites keeping them down? any opinion on WHY some out there can't earn a wage to support their families?
Because income inequality is worse in this country than it is in Pakistan
Hokie5150 wrote:That's why welfare for these parents should be attached to a requirement for sterilizations (either chemical or surgical) so that these parents cannot subject any more kids to such suffering.
Interesting idea. Can't imagine either party ever supporting that, but I personally don't think it's too bad
Hokie5150 wrote:That's why welfare for these parents should be attached to a requirement for sterilizations (either chemical or surgical) so that these parents cannot subject any more kids to such suffering.
Interesting idea. Can't imagine either party ever supporting that, but I personally don't think it's too bad
So you have changed your opinion- good job... Prior to the election you -of course- were the hard corps "keep the government off of my body, but pay for my birth control" lobby... now you want the government sterilizing women...good job Beached, you are coming around...
CFB Apologist wrote:
LOL- boom- game, set, match... Pakistan is a war torn excrement hole where children are executed for looking the wrong way. Their people are starving, and their government kills teenage girls who are raped...Let's hurry up and be like them- great plan.
I support the US becoming less like Pakistan and most countries in Africa, in terms of income inequality. You and your party, on the other hand, support the US becoming more and more like those countries in terms of income inequality .... you know, those countries with muzzies and blacks, countries you despise. Ooohhhhh the hypocrisy
CFB Apologist wrote:The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage"
Any insight as to why this is the case? Besides redneck whites keeping them down? any opinion on WHY some out there can't earn a wage to support their families?
Because income inequality is worse in this country than it is in Pakistan
And our poorest people all have things like microwave ovens, color televisions, X-Boxes, air conditioning, and internet access. They seem to really be suffering.
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican... if you refuse to consider alternatives to the two parties, you support the Status Quo and you are a major part of the problem.
Hey numbskull. Poverty does not mean indifference. I was born into a family that was far from rich. My father had an 8th grade education. My mother graduated from high school. However, my parents cared about my education. They made sure I was hitting the books and staying out of trouble. Most parents you partition into the poverty group don't fail their kids because they are poor. They fail them because they don't care.
By the way, I went to VT, got my engineering degree, and I'm now one of "those" people you think doesn't have a heart. Too bad it doesn't fit since I give more to charity than the VP of the US does. Maybe he doesn't care about kids.
nc87 wrote:
oaktonhokie wrote:Wow.
Really.
Yes. Really.
Look at every right wingers post in this thread bashing the parents and their poor decisions. Not one mention of the children who are most affected by and had no choice being born into poverty. Sad
CFB Apologist wrote:The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage"
Any insight as to why this is the case? Besides redneck whites keeping them down? any opinion on WHY some out there can't earn a wage to support their families?
Because income inequality is worse in this country than it is in Pakistan
And our poorest people all have things like microwave ovens, color televisions, X-Boxes, air conditioning, and internet access. They seem to really be suffering.
Don't forget diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease. They could stand to eat a little less.
nc87 wrote:I support the US becoming less like Pakistan and most countries in Africa, in terms of income inequality. You and your party, on the other hand, support the US becoming more and more like those countries in terms of income inequality .... you know, those countries with muzzies and blacks, countries you despise. Ooohhhhh the hypocrisy
What is the correct income distribution and how should it be achieved?
Mcl3 Hokie wrote: Most parents you partition into the poverty group don't fail their kids because they are poor. They fail them because they don't care.
What about rich parents who don't care, are they failing their kids? What about poor parents who do care but are still demonized by your party? And regardless what the reason is for parents in poverty failing their children, the bottom line is you want to place the burden of those failures on the children. They're the ones who most depend on food stamps. They're the ones most hurt by living in poverty.
If your party doesn't want to support children in need, you need to support "choice". Only caring about a "child" while its in the womb is a hard concept for me to understand
Mcl3 Hokie wrote: Most parents you partition into the poverty group don't fail their kids because they are poor. They fail them because they don't care.
What about rich parents who don't care, are they failing their kids? What about poor parents who do care but are still demonized by your party? And regardless what the reason is for parents in poverty failing their children, the bottom line is you want to place the burden of those failures on the children. They're the ones who most depend on food stamps. They're the ones most hurt by living in poverty.
If your party doesn't want to support children in need, you need to support "choice". Only caring about a "child" while its in the womb is a hard concept for me to understand
Can I expect an answer re the relative humanity of death by abortion vs starvation?
And the questions about living wages for people at different stages of their lives?
If the questions are too tough, just say so, or ignore this post, and continue embarrassing yourself with other postings.
nc87 wrote:
Mcl3 Hokie wrote: Most parents you partition into the poverty group don't fail their kids because they are poor. They fail them because they don't care.
What about rich parents who don't care, are they failing their kids? What about poor parents who do care but are still demonized by your party? And regardless what the reason is for parents in poverty failing their children, the bottom line is you want to place the burden of those failures on the children. They're the ones who most depend on food stamps. They're the ones most hurt by living in poverty.
If your party doesn't want to support children in need, you need to support "choice". Only caring about a "child" while its in the womb is a hard concept for me to understand
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.
HokieDan95 wrote:like 5150 above let's talk about educating people on why it's dumb to try to raise a family of 4 on the minimum wage rather than making other people pay for bad decisions
You mean the kids? Republicans care about ALL life.... Until the child is actually born
I'm confused. Please elaborate.
The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage". Republicans tend to forget that the kids, the ones most affected by poverty, did not have any choice in being born to irresponsible parents. Should we as a society say eff em, or help them live? If we're saying "eff em", republicans need to get on board with the pro-choice movement, it's a lot more humane to kill an unborn fetus than starve a living child to death
Malnutrition essentially doesn't exist in the US so what are you talking about. Not enough TVs, iPhones, gaming consoles?
CFB Apologist wrote:The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage"
Any insight as to why this is the case? Besides redneck whites keeping them down? any opinion on WHY some out there can't earn a wage to support their families?
Because income inequality is worse in this country than it is in Pakistan
Only because there are no successful people in Pakistan to form the high end of the scale!
Yes they are being irresponsible. They let them become OWS'ers. Spoiled, educated, but they possess no skills to support themselves.
What poor people are being demonized that care about their kids? It's the liberals that are against school vouchers that are preventing these kids from getting a better education. Have to protect the status quo ---teachers unions.
nc87 wrote:
Mcl3 Hokie wrote: Most parents you partition into the poverty group don't fail their kids because they are poor. They fail them because they don't care.
What about rich parents who don't care, are they failing their kids? What about poor parents who do care but are still demonized by your party? And regardless what the reason is for parents in poverty failing their children, the bottom line is you want to place the burden of those failures on the children. They're the ones who most depend on food stamps. They're the ones most hurt by living in poverty.
If your party doesn't want to support children in need, you need to support "choice". Only caring about a "child" while its in the womb is a hard concept for me to understand
HokieDan95 wrote:like 5150 above let's talk about educating people on why it's dumb to try to raise a family of 4 on the minimum wage rather than making other people pay for bad decisions
You mean the kids? Republicans care about ALL life.... Until the child is actually born
I'm confused. Please elaborate.
The kids are the ones who are hurt the most by their parents not being able to earn a "living wage". Republicans tend to forget that the kids, the ones most affected by poverty, did not have any choice in being born to irresponsible parents. Should we as a society say eff em, or help them live? If we're saying "eff em", republicans need to get on board with the pro-choice movement, it's a lot more humane to kill an unborn fetus than starve a living child to death
Malnutrition essentially doesn't exist in the US so what are you talking about. Not enough TVs, iPhones, gaming consoles?
Dude- its beached.. the issue is that people - in his case a lot of people- are more successful and have more money that he and his friends, and to him- that is just wrong. NO CONCEPT of the big picture in life, no concept of econ 101, no concept of how the government or tax code works, etc. In his world if you have a lake house- you suck, and you are not paying your share to support black kids in the inner city..its just about that simple to him......
