View Single Post
Old October 9th, 2012, 01:51 PM   #67
kickstand
sHaMoNe!
 
kickstand's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-20-06
Location: fenton
Posts: 30,768
iTrader: (46)
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by montecarlo33 View Post
IMO I rather my tax dollars pay for cheaper birth control than supporting all these mothers and "paychecks" they birth out. More kids = more tax dollars/tax breaks. NOW NOT EVERY MOTHER, but some of them are just abusing the system and having kids like its their fulltime job. Now if they made an incentive to give women on state help UID's then I bet more of them would do it and more of them would have to work to support their kids. eather way we as tax payers end up picking up the bill on birth control or end up supporting a bunch of low income, multi kid households, food and healthcare and schooling. I see your point kickstand that we shouldnt have to worry about this period, people should practice safe sex and wait to have a child, but lots of people want the gov to take care of them and have every excuse in the book on why they are a drain on this country.
At least you have some sense....so my question is this.

Should we add another government program where we give them birth control, or should we eliminate the welfare program (or at least reform it) to a point where we don't have to give them birth control or pay for their kids?

There is no law out there that says we have to take care of the people who are unable to take care of themselves, just stupid liberal policies that make it possible for those people to live off the rest of us and abuse the system.
kickstand is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.04954 seconds with 11 queries