You’re the one making the outrageous claim, which is that somehow what works for nearly EVERY other first world country cannot work here because we are somehow “different” and too multicultural (which in case you don’t know, sounds VERY much like there are too many minorities who would abuse any social programs BTW), so YOU back up your claim with evidence.
Again, this is what Romney said in January (emphasis mine):
[QUOTE=Mitt Romney]
“Even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work…I’m willing to spend more giving daycare to allow those parents to go back to work. It’ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.”
[/quote]
So Romney is the one who would spend more; if this is what concerns you, you probably should be aware of this.
What I’m more concerned about is how this “dignity of work” garbage is so clearly intended to target those lazy welfare queens (and we all know who they are, wink wink). It’s the same logic that was behind Gingrich’s asinine proposal that kids in inner-city schools need to be janitors at the school because they lacked a clear example of the work ethic in their lives. It’s basically more of this class warfare that the GOP insists it’s unfair to talk about.
The WORK act calls out Republicans who spend so much time canonizing SAH parents (though that’s usually restricted to mothers) to put their money where their mouth is. The rhetorical contortions they go thru in justifying their prejudice in favor of rich SAH parents would be hilarious if the expected result weren’t so sad.
Im well aware of it.
That what liberals would like to thing it does… Calls out republicans. But to middle America, it looks like you are incentivizing women to have more children when they can’t afford the taxes they do pay and the federal budget is in poor shape. Its subsidizing the poor at the expense of the middle class, that isnt the class warfare liberals should want laid at their door if they want to ein elections. It’s a shame that democrats are so bad at this that they don’t realize the perception they create.
I have no problem with the act…it’s just politically stupid, IMHO.
The “middle class” doesn’t exist. If it ever existed, there was a contiguous period between the 70s and today where it disappeared. Income and quality of life for the median and bottom have remained the same since then for those two groups, while the former has spiked for the top 0.1%. You’re really castigating the Democrats for not buying Republican rhetoric at face value.
A moderate Democrat is ideal for Republicans. If they can convince the public that said Democrat is dangerously progressive, they can be made to forget historic rates of taxation.
Really? First of all who is “they”? Second, you’re an idiot. World class idiot. 3rd I know people who came from poor backgrounds with stay at home moms and are now very successful. One is a pro football player, another is a psychiatrist, another is a women’s college basketball coach…and the list goes on. So if someone works hard, doesn’t abuse the system, then they’ll be ok. Oh and you don’t have to be wealthy to have a child. Jack Ass!! Do you really have a phd? Book knowledge uppity privileged hand me downed ass kid who’s never had to work hard or go through any adversity can say the ridiculous ignorant shit that falls out of your mouth. One can be educated, successful, and accomplished and come from nothing. Come from a stay at home
Mom an welfare for assistance. It just has to be done right. Fool
There’s nothing new or unique about a certain class of people being angry about another class of people having too many children, whether it’s the poor or a minority group or the “criminal class.”
Welcome to the board, ChimaChekwa. You need to know that users are not allowed to insult each other in this forum or any forum except The BBQ Pit. When you post in this forum and the other non-Pit forums, you have to attack the post and not the poster.
More importantly, they were being sarcastic ChimaChekwa.
I can’t speak for Dangerosa, but I think what she is talking about is the way it is getting increasingly difficult for sensible middle class Americans to have children at all. Twenty years ago, many middle-of-the-road insurance plans covered most of pre-natal care and delivery: now there is usually 20% + deductible that is not covered, and that’s several thousand dollars. Now that a woman is likely an equal contributor to the household, 6-12 weeks unpaid leave is a much deeper cut to household income. These two factors alone make having a baby–and certainly a second baby–prohibitively expensive for a lot of people.
For poor households, the opportunity cost of kids is not as high: medicare covers the birth, and if you were unemployed before, maternity leave is not a new expense.
Now, I really do believe that we need a social safety net, and I don’t begrudge medical care or financial assistance to families in need. But there are times I feel like the prodigal son’s sensible brother: my husband and I spent ten years saving enough to be able to have one child responsibly and to be able to have my husband be a SAHD. We couldn’t possibly afford to have a second in any time frame where I am still fertile. So while I am glad there’s a social safety net and I feel blessed we have had the opportunity to even have the one child, it’s hard not to feel like we end up punished for being too sensible to ever just take a plunge and have faith it will all work out somehow.
That is pretty much it. There is a middle class. They are my friends and my neighbors and my coworkers and the fellow members of my congregation. They may be poorer relative to the truly wealthy than ever before, but they exist and they vote. They don’t use the social safety net (unless you include unemployment or Social Security). And they delay kids and make huge sacrifices to have them - and yes, usually one or two - even if they’d like a passel of kids. Many of them decide to continue to work rather than have a stay at home parent - not because they come out ahead with daycare, by the time they pay daycare and gas, a job is a break even proposition - but because post daycare they will still have a career on track and have put money into the 401k and then they’ll be able to save for college. And while many of them think a social safety net is important, they wouldn’t be human not to feel a little resentment over the support given to someone who isn’t responsible when they are so busy doing the “right” thing. Its a misplay to make a big deal over supporting irresponsibility - even if we need to because its the right thing to do, and even if its cheaper to pay a woman to stay home with her kids than to provide daycare.