Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #3 - icedmantwo (11/15/2012) [-]
are you perhaps implying that a low income family has =/< intelligence than the average deer?
User avatar #54 to #3 - ManicalMayhem (11/16/2012) [-]
It isn't implying intelligence in any way, it actually is saying that based in instinct is that people who are given things for nothing will continue to want things for nothing. it's not intelligence... it's natural instinct which is the same for animals as it is people.
#4 to #3 - jefflsu (11/15/2012) [-]
PRECISELY! Look i'm 20 live out on my own since i was 18. Having said that I in no way shape or form have a at best descent income. I still stand on my own feet without sucking on uncle sam's tit. SHAQUEESA WITH HER 6 BABIES THAT I"M PAYING FOR OUT MY TAXES ARE AS USEFULL AS TITS ON A BULL AND SHOULD STARVE NOW CAN I GET AN AMEN!!!
User avatar #5 to #4 - monkeyyninja (11/15/2012) [-]
**** yes, amen! The most ANY welfare system should do is to provide [very] short term aid; a system that can be exploited to the point that baby factory **** head cunts can make more money milking the system than someone who works 50 hours a week is broken.
User avatar #46 to #5 - Chuckaholic (11/16/2012) [-]
Make welfare enough so that people can have water, food, electricity and enough basic necessities to survive in the western world. If you want to lower the welfare problem make minimum wage higher, by a fair margin, to incentivate people to get jobs. It's a possibility.
#32 to #5 - stripeygreenhat (11/15/2012) [-]
But in the process of punishing the irresponsible mom you also punish her children. Unfortunately, a lot of children would starve if welfare was suddenly cut off.

That is to say, I think welfare should be improved/reformed to diminish the problem but still exist.
User avatar #61 to #32 - ManicalMayhem (11/16/2012) [-]
Charge the irresponsible mother with Neglect if the child is unhealthy, or harmed in any way, and give the child a foster home. Because if you harm or injure a life in any way by not feeding them is still illegal. Welfare does need to end completely even if you have a little bit of welfare people will still "live off of it" and still neglect the children.

the best help someone can get is no help, cause then they will be forced to find a way to produce on their own.
User avatar #33 to #32 - monkeyyninja (11/15/2012) [-]
I said nothing of punishing them; there are far too many private/local welfare/aid programs in place for anyone in that situation to actually starve, and as I said, the welfare systems that should be in place should be short term (more of a helping hand towards self-sufficiency). However, a figurative slap in the face of those people would be beneficial for everyone.
User avatar #8 to #5 - icedmantwo (11/15/2012) [-]
so you are then say that we should increase sex ed so that people know how to properly have safe sex and not have a ton of kids then, with affordable abortions within x days of pregnancy
#1 - cactaur (11/15/2012) [-]
...yes
...yes
 Friends (0)