- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 7/21/14 at 10:54 am to rballa19
I'd be in favor of something limiting government subsidies to only one kid after enrolling in any welfare program.
So lets say a family gets on welfare with 2 kids and a 3rd is on the way. If they had a 4th kid, they'd still receive the same amount as they did with only 3.
So lets say a family gets on welfare with 2 kids and a 3rd is on the way. If they had a 4th kid, they'd still receive the same amount as they did with only 3.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 10:56 am to Golfer
quote:
I'd be in favor of something limiting government subsidies to only one kid after enrolling in any welfare program.
I think most would be in favor of something like this
but a flat child limit? hell no
if I can afford 9 kids, I should be able to have 9 kids
Posted on 7/21/14 at 10:56 am to OMLandshark
quote:
Allow them to have the kid, and then a tube tying for the mother and vasectomy for the father.
What's the government liability for when the woman has a reaction to anesthesia and dies?
Posted on 7/21/14 at 10:59 am to rballa19
quote:
I was thinking about this while mowing
I bet you were out there at fricking 6:30 this morning, you inconsiderate prick.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:00 am to rballa19
quote:
I was thinking about this while mowing
Nice intro. The most random thoughts hit me when I mow too.
Back on topic, if the population out grew our means to produce adequate resources then yes I'd be for it.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:01 am to rballa19
quote:
I was thinking about this while mowing
about what time?
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:01 am to Golfer
I'd prefer that, if on govt assistance, women be required to get depo shot. I think when someone is on Medicaid, they are saying that they want someone else to be responsible for their healthcare. Me, as the taxpayer, I don't want the burden, but now that I have it, I need to look out for my investment. I believe that it would be cheaper to pay for depo shots than it would be to have to pay for kids. Once woman has health ins, through employer or spouse, have as many kids as you want.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:02 am to OMLandshark
quote:
Allow them to have the kid, and then a tube tying for the mother and vasectomy for the father.
Government compelled castration. :yikes:
It's even scarier to think that this was legal not that long ago.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:04 am to meauxjeaux2
quote:
i'm all for frick freedom. Seriously. This country sucks fricking arse now.
Someone holding you here against your will?
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:05 am to rballa19
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:06 am to tigersnipen
Yeah I was about to say ask China how well that worked out for them
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:08 am to High C
quote:
I bet you were out there at fricking 6:30 this morning, you inconsiderate prick.
damn
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:08 am to DelU249
I agree with Fox here. Have as many kids as you want. On your own dime. I shouldn't have to pay more taxes for your bastard children
This post was edited on 7/21/14 at 11:09 am
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:10 am to tigersnipen
quote:
China is reversing its policy due to many issues that the "never" thought about.
quote:
As a result, by 2020, there will be between 30 million and 35 million more Chinese men of marrying age than women.
The mother of all sausage-fests.
Seriously, imagine being a teenaged boy in China right now. That's got to suck.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:12 am to rballa19
For instance, if a person is entirely dependent upon the government (i.e., for food, water, shelter, child support, cell phone, etc.), that person can not have more than two children?
I'd vote for it.
I'd vote for it.
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:14 am to Salmon
quote:
I think most would be in favor of something like this
but a flat child limit? hell no
if I can afford 9 kids, I should be able to have 9 kids
Ok, and you would be in this hypothetical. You would have to fill out an application for the final 7, but
quote:then you should have no problem getting accepted right? It's a slippery slope when dealing with the freedoms that this country was founded upon. Im on both sides of the fence with this because if such a law were put into affect, it would single-handedly fix/cripple many of the problems we have in this country today like lack of education, increasing fatherless households, thuglife breeding, government dependence, etc. These problems could be severly controlled within one generation and the country would be better as a whole for it. There are too many religious people for anything like this to ever take place, but if we are seriously talking about fixing issues in this country, this would no doubt get the job done, and quickly at that.
if I can afford 9 kids
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:14 am to Salmon
quote:You can have the freedom to have as many children as you want, as long as I have the freedom to not pay for them. Deal?
yeah man
frick freedom
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:16 am to Patrick_Bateman
quote:that's why i said frick this pussy arse country. No way in hell would a deal like that even be put on the table.
You can have the freedom to have as many children as you want, as long as I have the freedom to not pay for them. Deal?
Posted on 7/21/14 at 11:17 am to Salmon
quote:There would be no accidents if destitutes were required to have tubals after two kids.
so in this hypothetical, what happens with accidents?
Popular
Back to top


0







