Thread: Does this make anyone else mad?

Trying to judge someone without knowing them is rarely fruitful.

Well I know NBC paid her 300k for coverage, she got 8k for posing naked, 28k in June for doing appearances, and she is constantly accepting donations off her website. Most people work all year to make 28K. So yes I have a right to judge someone who wastes money and asks for my tax dollars to pay for it. I think that is wrong.

Originally Posted by OCDshaver

To an extent I do. The government is not here to feed us. I don’t know this woman’s circumstances but when I see people with a large number of children and they are on welfare, it DOES bother me that they didn’t bother to consider how they were going to care for these kids before they had them. OR, perhaps as I eluded to, they knew that we would pick up the tab through government programs. Safety nets are one thing but it should not be the concern of government to feed its citizens under normal circumstances. Creating an environment where people can trade their labor for a paycheck should be of greater concern.

The things is, you NEVER can guarantee that you're not needing welfare when you get kids. Bad things can happen to you too. Even if you are rich you can end up poor by a twist of fate with a sprinkling of bad luck. And no matter what, I think as a society we are better than to let kids starve just because their parents had a stroke of bad luck.

As parents we should be prepared to deal with the expected finanical impact of having kids. You can't be prepared for an unexpected stroke of bad luck that suddenly lands you in the red through no fault of your own.

I can understand why people are made, "mad" by her. I'm not getting on people who have lots of kids, if you can support them, and give them time and attention, go for it. It's how she got the kids is what I feel is wrong. Someone receiving financial aid does not bother me, it should be a hand up, not a hand out as it has become for many, and some are third generation receptients. Where she comes in on it, was her and her allies proclaiming that, Look, look, she requires no help from the government! She can handle it herself, and them making a deal out of it to garner support for her and change public opinion of her. Personally, and only my opinion, I think she has mental problems. I feel she's selfish. I feel she's all about herself and went ahead of carrying that many kids to full term, for her own attempt to gain notoriety. Her doctor should not be allowed to practice medicine.

Take the time to read her story from the start. Don't get side tracked by nude photos, Gloria Alreid, or what ever that ambulance chaser is called, and stupid, mindless reality show stories. Just try to see who she is and how she got to where she is.

I am 38 and have no kids. I have consciously avoided having kids and probably will never have them. Nothing against those who do. I just know I cannot handle the burden of having kids. I think for most people they do they best they can and good for them. I have seen people that should not be having kids with too many of them. I would be in favor of forced sterilization. However, that is a little too Hitler-esque. 'Cause once you start down that road where do you stop. Anyway, sort of rambled a bit on that one.

Mad ???? Hmmmmm no, but where is CPS on this ???


One of my favorite lines about Parenthood

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31pQOiclaTo

What it all boils down to is that all too many individuals cannot/will not take responsibility for their choices in life. The entitlement mentality is a major flaw in society today. When the government actually advertises about how easy it is to apply for food stamps etc., we are doomed to fail as a society.

The US government is actually advertising on Mexican soap opera tv programs that it is very simple to cross the border and apply for welfare, medical benefits and anything else they might need when they get here. The government is shooting us in the foot on a daily basis. Again, we are doomed.

Belize, here I come!!!!! I heard good reports about Equador too !!

Originally Posted by Bruno

The things is, you NEVER can guarantee that you're not needing welfare when you get kids. Bad things can happen to you too. Even if you are rich you can end up poor by a twist of fate with a sprinkling of bad luck. And no matter what, I think as a society we are better than to let kids starve just because their parents had a stroke of bad luck.

As parents we should be prepared to deal with the expected finanical impact of having kids. You can't be prepared for an unexpected stroke of bad luck that suddenly lands you in the red through no fault of your own.

What you speak of is the safety net that I think we are all comfortable having for such circumstances. Its the generations of welfare recipients that we are concerned with. And, in my case, how government has failed to provide the circumstances under which a person can find adequate work.

Do the Banks have the right to expect handouts from the American people because of their excesses?
Couple 100$ a month to her- couple billion a month to them.

Originally Posted by Johnus

Do the Banks have the right to expect handouts from the American people because of their excesses?
Couple 100$ a month to her- couple billion a month to them.

People like myself would argue that they don’t and that bailing them out of their mess set a precedent just as lousy as welfare. However, at least the loans to the banks under TARP were mostly repaid with interest. And, to be fair, a lot of what happened in that mess could have been directly attributed to government policies that helped create the inevitable crash – cheap money, artificially low interest rates, gov’t meddling in the housing and lending markets, and the government institutions of Fannie and Freddie. But no, the government should stay out of that area as well. Then the next time a bank fails, they can wash their hands of it knowing that it wasn’t gov’t meddling that was responsible for it in the first place.