What bears repeating is that it’s not about the costs from taxes, it’s about the costs to society that rewarding irresponsibility breeds. If these programs meant lower crime, cleaner streets, and a better work ethic, the costs in taxes would mean nothing. But instead they promote the exact opposite.
According to who? All I’ve read are some broad generalizations about a family in line at Walgreens with food stamps and a friend of a friend who got knocked up by three different guys. Do you have any cites to back up your theories? Any actual evidence that people would be better off without welfare? How about people that run into financial problems after they have kids? What do you propose anyway? Not allowing people below a certain income to have kids?
I know it’s enjoyable to look down your nose and judge people like life is a Jerry Springer or Judge Judy show but did you ever think there are probably people in a better financial situation than you are in judging you the same way?
“For 2004, the newest data available, the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that families making $70,200 a year or more will spend a whopping $269,520 to raise a child from birth through age 17. Higher-income families in urban areas in the West spend the most, $284,460… $184,320 for families earning $41,700 to $70,200.”
That doesn’t include medical expenses, private school or college.
Who knows, maybe someone will think you shouldn’t have kids. Maybe someone will decide that people shouldn’t have children unless you have about $300,000 in the bank. Think anyone has a right to say that?
*You doesn’t refer to anyone personally, just a general you.
Heh it’s not so bad. Take me to San Francisco and I can show you four great bakery garbage cans full of day old bread (including a fancy french bakery with all-you-can-eat tarts and croissants), gourmet grocery garbage cans filled with items a day past date, the very infamous chocolate factory garbage can (which once provided a party I went to with 40 lbs of high-grade chocolate that had been processed on a machine that had once been used with nuts, and did not have the proper lable), and places will all the fresh but slightly imperfect produce you could eat.
I know a lot of people who consider themselves “freegans”, who live wonderful work-free lives without spending a cent or theirs or anyone’s money- by living off the bounty of America’s waste. Whenever you go to a freegan home, it’s always overflowing with food- most of it real good stuff.
Now, I don’t think a free-gan lifestyle is appropriate for a child. But I’d like to illustrate the insane degree of excess that we live in (and how insane it is to be stingy to those in need- we end up paying for all that food left to the landfills every day.) Yesterday I tried to throw out some rice literally crawling in bugs- more black than white. My neighbors caught me and thought I was nuts. We spend the evening sorting out the rice and bugs, laughing and joking, and sharing the food (including the rice) that I cooked that evening.
There are two fights in this thread- people on welfare should not have children, and people who are poor should not have children. As for welfare, I don’t have much to say about that.
But for the poor- if it wern’t for poor people having kids, none of us would be here. I can promise none of our great-great-great-great-great grandmother’s homes would have passed a CPS inspection. The idea that you need a room and bathroom for each kids, a bigger car, a bazillion toys, baby mozart tapes and enough money to shop at Baby Gap before you can be a loveing responsible parent is absurd.
As far as we can deduce, the reason my SiL waited until age 30 and the end of her medical training to have her first was that she was terrified she might have a certain genetic defect and pass it on. She got tested for it as soon as the test became available, got the results (negative) and not only did she give her husband the go-ahead, she’s been noticeably more relaxed for sex.
The reason she wants a second one is that “he’s too big already, I like babies, not children!”
And this is an edumacated woman, eh! But her doctor-brain and her me-brain don’t always talk to each other.
Another perspective on this topic - when I saw the thread title, the first thing I thought of was an article in Sunday’s N.Y. Times (registration likely required) about a woman (who evidently had some sort of fertility treatment/procedure) finding out via ultrasound that she was carrying triplets. She was counseled about the risks of trying to carry all three to term (including the dangers to her and the elevated chances of birth defects) but decided her impending triplets were “inseparable” and went through pregnancy and delivery at 26 weeks. There were multiple problems and a prolonged stay in the intensive care nursery. Her hospital bill was in the range of a million dollars (covered by her medical insurance). Of course, she’s certain she made the right decision.
That to me is one good definition of having kids you can’t afford (unless everyone else in your plan pays the freight for you).
Somehow I doubt there’ll be more willingness to limit this sort of expenditure under universal health coverage.
Dang, girl, you know how to have a good time. 
I was the one who brought up the girl who got knocked up by three different guys. She’s not a ‘friend of a friend’, though. She’s my good friend’s sister.
She’s 20. She had the first of her three kids at 17, and they’ve followed yearly after that. She was pregnant with the first when she met the father of the second, and pregnant with the second when she met the father of the third, and is now with a fourth guy. She’s had a couple of fast-food type counter-service jobs since dropping out of high school, but works no more than a couple of months at a time before she either quits or is fired for poor attendance. She does not have a driver’s license or a high school diploma. Her housing is paid for by HUD, she receives welfare, food stamps, and WIC currently, and her kids have health insurance furnished by the state. She collects some amount of child support from each of the three fathers, which is meager considering that the fathers are seldom-employed high school drop outs themselves.
I don’t think she’s intentionally getting pregnant once a year, but she certainly has an aversion to birth control. She’s had it provided to her before but it was just too damn much work to try to get to the pharmacy to get her pills refilled, so she quit taking them. I don’t know how many kids it’s physically possible for her to have, but I don’t see it stopping any time soon.
Even her own family told her after the second kid before age 20 that she was being irresponsible and they were tired of her sitting on her lazy ass, getting pregnant and sucking up welfare. She did, at that point, get a job.
It lasted about two months and then she announced that she could no longer work because she was too tired because she was pregnant again. Her parents love their grandkids, and they love her, but they still disapprove of her unwillingness to do anything other than breed and remain on welfare.
This chafes me. These feel good articles about the mothers of high risk pregnancies whom everything works out for. (Doesn’t the McConahee 7 or 8tuplets from Iowa have a host of medical issues? )
What about the hundreds of other stories where the mother of a high risk case ignores council ( and trusts God) and end up with a severely retarded/handicapped child? Those stories never make the Pregnancy Magazines and articles because they are so goddamn depressing and soul sucking.
When I hear, " God never gives you more than you can handle." I shoot back, " Huh. Really. Then why do people go insane or have nervous breakdowns. I guess the Pharmacuetical Industry can be replaced by God."
It should be mandatory in this day an age that any pregnant women who is having a difficult pregnancy visit several Special Ed classes (from elementary age through Adult ed stuff that is like a day care place for mentally retarded up to the age of 25, group homes (where most end up because they either outlive the parental units or the family cannot handle them anymore.) and the like, and talk to other parents with several handicapped children to gauge what reality is.
I’m not looking to create the Perfect Master Race, I’m trying to give these mom’s and dad’s a hit on the head with a Clue By Four.
I suppose that would be too harsh and mean. They just want the warm and fuzzies.
Don’t we all.
As a note, I have a cousin who has 8 kids ( Catholic and homeschools) and they are not mooching off the government and their kids are the most well behaved kids I’ve ever met. I also have a friend who is pregnant with her 9th - Catholic - and again, superb children, no welfare, and very hands on parenting. None of these children are named Jinger.
Here’s some more information about the NCPA:
www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Policy_Analysis
www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=10242
Obviously, my sources are liberal. I’m sure you can find other sources who just love the NCPA.
I’m sure I could, but I don’t think it’s that important. As I said, the data came from the census bureau, and the analysis seems legitimate to me. If you disagree, that’s fine, but the fact that it’s a right-wing/libertarian organization doesn’t necessarily mean the data is incorrect.
And, incidentally, SusanStoHelit already mentioned that they are libertarian and conservative when she posted the link, so I don’t think anyone was operating here under the belief that they are a neutral party.
–jaw drops-- Might I respectfully suggest that in most of the situations that are being cited regarding multiple pregnancies due to drugs, it is the exact opposite:
God is being replaced by the Pharmaceutical Industry. Quite handily, too.
YOu have a valid point there, my learned Doper Colleage.
Bible: Apply Directly to Forehead Wham!
This is the point I was trying to make, as well. IMO, as long as the parents of the children are willing to make whatever sacrifices they need to in order to raise this children, then I say, more power to them…have a big family. Some people believe that lots of children and a loving household are infinitely more important than material possessions, and I certainly am not going to criticize that attitude. To me, the key is that it’s the parents making the sacrifices, and not society…their choice, their responsibility.
That’s a good point. A few months ago there were some threads on the families in the “Quiverfull” movement. The couple interviewed had just had baby #16, but he was a very successfull realtor and she was frugal and they were making it.
IIRC, the SDMB concensus was that it was weird but not evil. There were some question about how effectively one woman and one man can parent 16 children, and concerns about the older children being forced into the role of “mini parent”, but nobody suggested sterilizing the woman or taking her kids away.
Lets not forget that the good people of Arkansas are paying for their health insurance. He was an assemblyman and it’s my understanding that they have benefits for life.
They get LOTS and lots of donations. They’ve never disclosed exactly how much but as they practically hawk Home Depot and hold their little drills so the camera shows the make so I’m sure most of that stuff was donated too. They get paid for TV shows and public appearances.
Also, their house is considered a ‘church’ so they don’t pay taxes on the building.
I don’t think what they’re doing is terrible. They seem like nice people and so do their kids. But they certainly didn’t get that huge house and all the furnishings just by being frugal.
I saw a show (about "science of superhero powers- I was tired, OK?) in which some scientists had bred super-long-lived mice, by keeping the mice from breeding until late in life for many generations. If that’s the case for humans, those of us who wait to have our kids are not only likely to avoid poverty, we’re also breeding more long-lived humans 
gags
I am NEVER eating at your house.
I read pimple threads while eating, and enjoy it.
But the thought of eating food that has been in garbage cans… will somebody please come over here and hold my hair while I throw up?
You’ve made me happier with my life, though- now I’m glad that I don’t socialize much outside of work, so I’m not likely to meet any “freegans” or get invited to their homes.
That’s so cool…and now I feel much better about having kids so late in life…who knew I was helping breed a race of super humans! 
Just be careful or you might give birth to a bunch of super long-lived mice. You’d really have some explaining to do. OTOH, you’ll save a bloody fortune in daycare and tuition.
Same here! I could be quite upset that my money is being used to kill people and destroy their land, but I just imagine that my money is going to social programs and the money of people who honor the military is going to that ($400 billion plus). Food stamps, WIC and Medicaid are available to the working poor so the budget numbers mentioned earlier aren’t going solely to “welfare queens” with large families.
Some people feel that children who have filled their lives with joy are a gift, and if they believe in God they believe all good things come from Him. And if you are referring to the Immaculate Conception, it doesn’t mean what you think it means.
And a bloody fortune in cat food.
Somebody save me a window seat on the bus to hell, OK?
It never ceases to amaze me the number of saints we have on these boards.
They resent the inequalities of income between sections of the populace and give the impression that if for example ,they won a couple of million on the lottery,they’d immediatly redistribute it amongst the poor .
It is so easy to be “holier then thou” about having lots of money when you haven’t actually got any yourself.
I’m not rich myself but dont resent those who are ,given the chance to be rich myself I’d jump at it and would feel no guilt whatsoever,and I suspect everyone else on this board would do the same ,including the “saints”
I’m always suspicious of people who say they work hard ,pay a lot of tax and are happy for the permamently ,able bodied unemployed who have large families to receive their hard earned tax dollars/pounds sterling for doing nothing all of their lives.
I work hard and earn a quite respectable wage and I DO resent idle scroungers who make a career of living off of welfare with financial top ups of a little bit of car crime,a little bit of drug dealing,shoplifting and burgulary.
I have no illusions about the people who do this ,I grew up on a rough ,crime infested council estate in England and while a good many of the people were and are honest,responsible and hard working there were and are a good many of the opposite .
I’ve noticed that many of those who were raised in scrounger families grow up to have scrounger families of their own ,and so on and so on.