37yr old woman has 15 kids and is angry the government isn't paying for them all

[altuin]

Charity doesn't work - Humans are naturally greedy. In fact, not to sound overly social darwinist, but by letting those people who cannot support themselves die, we end up with less people to not-support, leaving the more fortunate of us to stay alive

[1714802065]

1714802065

[1714802065]

1714802065

[1714802065]

1714802065

[1714802065]

1714802065

[1714802065]

1714802065

[dancupid]

Charity doesn't work - Humans are naturally greedy. In fact, not to sound overly social darwinist, but by letting those people who cannot support themselves die, we end up with less people to not-support, leaving the more fortunate of us to stay alive

They won't die - the rich will die, becasue the people won't stand for it and the rich will be put up against a wall and shot. That's how social Darwinism works. Darwinism says nothing about 'survival of the richest'. The people who survive will understand what is necessary to survive and it will have nothing to do with money (ask Saddam and Gaddafi who didn't survive despite their wealth)

[dancupid]

The odd thing about socialism is that it is pure capitalism - the rich pay off the poor to ensure the poor have a stable life so as to prevent them from banding together and creating a revolution against the rich.
Pay them enough and they carry on with their normal lives - don't pay them enough and you lose all the advantages of your wealth. Everything is capitalism - you can't escape it anywhere.

[NghtRppr]

Define "rich".

Define "poor".

[dancupid]

Define "rich".

Define "poor".

It's defined by the market - in China 'poor' is defined as less than $1 per day. In the US I don't know. But the market decides - and I'm sure people who are 'poor' know who they are, and if there are enough of them they will react. You can make an decision to prevent this based on your personal economic position - it's just market forces.  You are free to speculate on your future prosperity and safety and vote accordingly

[NghtRppr]

Define "rich".

Define "poor".

It's defined by the market - in China 'poor' is defined as less than $1 per day. In the US I don't know. But the market decides - and I'm sure people who are 'poor' know who they are, and if there are enough of them they will react. You can make an decision to prevent this based on your personal economic position - it's just market forces.  You are free to speculate on your future prosperity and safety and vote accordingly

You didn't actually define anything.

[The Script]

Where is(are) the father(s) in all of this?  If anyone should be paying shouldn't it be the fathers?  Socially pressure the fathers to help pay for things and get private charities involved in helping the family pay the bills until the mother can get a job, including helping her learn new skills that will give her a higher wages.  Government welfare isn't going to solve this problem or provide the incentives to prevent similar ones from happening.

[Bind]

If you take from other people, you need to reimburse them for what you are taking. Simple contract. You shouldnt be taking their money through threat of force and prison just because you are lazy or have failed to prepare.

Need housing, food, and clothing ?

No problem. I will give you housing, food, and clothing in exchange for your labor and all your other worldly possessions of value.

Lets put those old military bases, old prisons, and FEMA camps to good use. You and your kids will develop the land and perform construction as needed, work on infrastructure and reclamation projects, prep, cook, clean, do dishes, wash clothing and linens, tend the fields and gardens, tend the livestock, make furniture, make clothing and linens, cut grass, cut wood, sew, etc... in other words you will work and produce for your own existence and to pay back what you are taking from others.

You wont get a car, computer, big/flat screen tv, cell phone, ipad, xbox or any other gaming station, no fancy clothing and shoes and jewelry, or anything else frivolous or otherwise not needed.

If a profit is made from your work, then you may get a little money you can put away as a managed savings to use when you no longer need assistance, minus what you owe of course..

There will be an auditorium for movies and meetings or speeches, maybe a library, community day rooms for your off-work hours where you can socialize, play games, use a computer, and watch tv, and an ourdoor activity area.

Old people unable to care for themselves or produce will get a pass from doing any work they are unable to do, but hey, I know alot of old people who do lots of arts and crafts, accounting, clerical work, and even counting widgets that could be sold for a profit.

Dont like it?

Then go get a job,or start a business, and be responsible for the family you created and take care of your family elders.

If you are going to steal my money through threat of prison and force, you should at least earn it. I know I earned the money you are stealing that pays for your benefits and privilages. I earned that money you are stealing by my labor ... my blood, sweat, and tears... my work ... and every penny you steal takes away from my ability to provide for my own family and responsibilities, but no one ever talks about that. People are losing their jobs, homes, and ability to survive to allow YOU to prosper and survive from doing absolutely nothing but getting your entitlements.

[film2240]

We have this type of issue in UK as well where people abuse hte benefits system.There was a case where a mom had 11 kids and was with a 17yr old oyfriend (at time of the article).I think it was The Sun that first reported this,I could be wrong.In UK,some people can get free council houses (for the 'needy' with lots of kids lol),tax breaks.This woman had £30,000 ($45,909) worth of benefits a year and still this woman (read leech) is actually demanding things from other people like free money from charity.This case in UK isn't as bad as the case mentioned by OP but I thought I'd add another ridiculous case so people know that this is happening in other parts of the world and to what degree.

The article where you can read about this joker is here:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2025296/30k-year-benefits-mother-Moira-Pearce-asks-charity-money.html
This woman considers £30,000 as a 'wage' from the state for doing nothing.It's almost too shocking to think about.I'm sure you guys in the US/elsewhere will have a good laugh about how the benefits get abused.I certainly had a good laugh from this article.

If you find this ridiculous,you should read about how young offenders in UK prisons get all sorts of creature comforts like a large screen TV,games console and a whole host of other things.It's really shocking.

I wonder how the benefits system from US and UK differ?

[altuin]

Well Of course she demands more. It may be a very abusive system, but in the end, if she doesn't' feed these kids, she will lose money, making it an incentive to put food on the table for 13 people...

[Iyeman]

Next time you donate money to africa, think about the kids in your country.

[brunoshady]

she didn't have money to buy condoms

[snedie]

those are a lot of kids, almost an entire classroom

[SgtSpike]

If you find this ridiculous,you should read about how young offenders in UK prisons get all sorts of creature comforts like a large screen TV,games console and a whole host of other things.It's really shocking.

I wonder how the benefits system from US and UK differ?

US prisons are just as bad from what I hear.  Like you said, PS3's, big screen TV's, etc.  It almost makes me want to go to prison... wouldn't have to work, and could read books and play video games all day, paid for by the state!  No wonder there's people committing crimes and getting caught on purpose.

IMO, prisons should be a place of despair.  Put them in a 4x4 cell, no light, and the nastiest grub you can think of to eat twice a day.  Then, maybe people would actually regret doing something that causes them to go to prison.

On topic:  Welfare recipients should be required to work for their welfare, no exceptions.  If the government is going to give away money, at least make people work for it!  You know, do trash cleanup on the roadsides, or clean laundry for a nursing home, or SOMETHING.  The fact that people get money as a reward for doing absolutely nothing just astounds me.

[dancupid]

work 35 hours instead of 40 and there would be no unemploymentt - or we can make the decision that it's better for us to work longer hours and earn more and then pay off the people we deny work to.

The biggest problem with such government-forced distribution is that sooner or later it starts sinking into communism. The biggest problem with communism is that "spreading the wealth equally" kills the will for competition which then kills the will to work. Consequentially, everything slows down and you have less of everything to spread equally. In the end, "equality" starts being "nobody has anything".

I support the existence of welfare better then the "no questions asked" market where a select few criminals become richer then the rest of the world. But I've seen communism and it ain't pretty to look at... Actually, you can't see it very well with all the electricity reductions every day or two

No - it can be driven by the market. Why does an employer who employs 20 people not employ 21? Because she's made an economic decision. All the government need to do is give economic incentives (tax breaks etc) to encourage employers to redistribute the work they have available.
I can't help thinking that would be better than welfare provision. It's not communism - tax breaks are part of the free market.

[dancupid]

On topic:  Welfare recipients should be required to work for their welfare, no exceptions.  If the government is going to give away money, at least make people work for it!  You know, do trash cleanup on the roadsides, or clean laundry for a nursing home, or SOMETHING.  The fact that people get money as a reward for doing absolutely nothing just astounds me.

Old topic I know, but you don't seem to understand where unemployment comes from.

You really believe there is lots of work in society that isn't currently being done by someone - there aren't contractors already employing people to do this work (clean up trash and wash old peoples clothes)?
Instead of the contractors employing people to do this work, you would like to see them lay off people and let all the work be taken up by people on welfare? (how could they compete with slave labor?)
Why don't the contractors just employ all these people if there is so much extra work that needs doing?

Unemployment exists becasue the work that needs doing is not distributed fairly amongst the people who are available to work.

How many hours a week do you work? - Work less and give someone else a job. Or alternatively, just pay a trivial amount in tax and pay them off.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Here's the problem/solution:

[asdf]

On topic:  Welfare recipients should be required to work for their welfare, no exceptions.  If the government is going to give away money, at least make people work for it!  You know, do trash cleanup on the roadsides, or clean laundry for a nursing home, or SOMETHING.  The fact that people get money as a reward for doing absolutely nothing just astounds me.

Old topic I know, but you don't seem to understand where unemployment comes from.

You really believe there is lots of work in society that isn't currently being done by someone - there aren't contractors already employing people to do this work (clean up trash and wash old peoples clothes)?
Instead of the contractors employing people to do this work, you would like to see them lay off people and let all the work be taken up by people on welfare? (how could they compete with slave labor?)
Why don't the contractors just employ all these people if there is so much extra work that needs doing?

Unemployment exists becasue the work that needs doing is not distributed fairly amongst the people who are available to work.

How many hours a week do you work? - Work less and give someone else a job. Or alternatively, just pay a trivial amount in tax and pay them off.

Unemployment comes from the government interfering with the terms of trade. Minimum wage law prevents the lowest skilled from getting jobs. The 100s of regulations dictating how a person may be employed discourages businesses from hiring (eg. bundling health insurance with wages increases the real cost if hiring). Anti discrimination laws discourage employers from hiring minorities for fear of being sued. The welfare system pays people not to work and breeds dependance and entitlement (woman with 37 kids).

Likely, this woman irresponsibly spawned so many beggars only because she expected someone else to pay for them. Who's fault is that?

Using the state to solve problems through violence is the CAUSE of this and many other problems, NOT the solution. Stop trying to solve social problems by forcing other people to pay for it.

Tax breaks are not a part of the free market, unless it's 100% tax breaks for everyone. Theft is not freedom.

[Foxpup]

Unemployment comes from the government interfering with the terms of trade. Minimum wage law prevents the lowest skilled from getting jobs. The 100s of regulations dictating how a person may be employed discourages businesses from hiring (eg. bundling health insurance with wages increases the real cost if hiring). Anti discrimination laws discourage employers from hiring minorities for fear of being sued. The welfare system pays people not to work and breeds dependance and entitlement (woman with 37 kids).

Likely, this woman irresponsibly spawned so many beggars only because she expected someone else to pay for them. Who's fault is that?

Using the state to solve problems through violence is the CAUSE of this and many other problems, NOT the solution. Stop trying to solve social problems by forcing other people to pay for it.

Tax breaks are not a part of the free market, unless it's 100% tax breaks for everyone. Theft is not freedom.

+1

[dancupid]

On topic:  Welfare recipients should be required to work for their welfare, no exceptions.  If the government is going to give away money, at least make people work for it!  You know, do trash cleanup on the roadsides, or clean laundry for a nursing home, or SOMETHING.  The fact that people get money as a reward for doing absolutely nothing just astounds me.

Old topic I know, but you don't seem to understand where unemployment comes from.

You really believe there is lots of work in society that isn't currently being done by someone - there aren't contractors already employing people to do this work (clean up trash and wash old peoples clothes)?
Instead of the contractors employing people to do this work, you would like to see them lay off people and let all the work be taken up by people on welfare? (how could they compete with slave labor?)
Why don't the contractors just employ all these people if there is so much extra work that needs doing?

Unemployment exists becasue the work that needs doing is not distributed fairly amongst the people who are available to work.

How many hours a week do you work? - Work less and give someone else a job. Or alternatively, just pay a trivial amount in tax and pay them off.

Unemployment comes from the government interfering with the terms of trade. Minimum wage law prevents the lowest skilled from getting jobs. The 100s of regulations dictating how a person may be employed discourages businesses from hiring (eg. bundling health insurance with wages increases the real cost if hiring). Anti discrimination laws discourage employers from hiring minorities for fear of being sued. The welfare system pays people not to work and breeds dependance and entitlement (woman with 37 kids).

Likely, this woman irresponsibly spawned so many beggars only because she expected someone else to pay for them. Who's fault is that?

Using the state to solve problems through violence is the CAUSE of this and many other problems, NOT the solution. Stop trying to solve social problems by forcing other people to pay for it.

Tax breaks are not a part of the free market, unless it's 100% tax breaks for everyone. Theft is not freedom.

I agree with much that you say, but it can't work. The people will mobilize and form unions at best and at worse commit terrorist acts or create a revolution. They will use violence. People are violent especially when they are hungry.

The irony is that if we pay off these people so they feel reasonably comfortable they will not mobilize in this way. We make this decision when we vote in order to protect our own wealth and social position. By paying them off we are better off (hence governments don't actually do much to reduce unemployment by redistributing the work as it's cheaper just to pay tax for their welfare.)