Quote:
Originally Posted by Socks
But if your neighbour doesn't raise their kid properly, and doesn't pay for the kid properly, and you see their kid walking alone around shoeless and dirty on the street, what would you do?
Would you take them to the authorities?
Guess who pays for that?
If you don't agree with helping them, then you should just close your blinds and let them wander around until they get hit by a car or something. That way it's less expensive for you, the taxpayer.
We call those people "sociopaths" though, you might want to find a different group of people to belong to.
|
no.. you see, you outline the simple problem with liberal thinking. "who will pay for..." this idea is always followed by the obvious "who can we take the money from to pay for it..."
you should be thinking "why is this person allowed to have children", "why does this person still have custody of his children"... "this person clearly does not deserve custody of his children and is proving that" .. what should the consequences be to this person and other similar people for the burden they have put on all of us?
throwing money at social problems NEVER make the problems go away. you can't continually take money from people who actually produce, from people who actually have their shit together, from people that actually make great decisions, parent their children well, get educations and strive everyday to excel and achieve and toss it to those who just don't.
making sure there are consequences for bad behavior and poor decision making does.
class warfare has bankrupt California... final solution??... take more money from wealthy people. working well so far!! congrats!!
this is where it has all led to and now what?
how many of those children you mention are going to get help next year? more ?? or less ??