question for Beastie

[_ajax18]

Probably dozens more reasons. Oh, and by the way, last I checked it still took a prick to get pregnant. Why are men choosing to "have these kids if they can't afford them?"

Men do so because they're wired to want sex. I'm sure many of these jerks just have sex with women they have no intention of marrying or wanting a child with because the sex is offered and the woman sees it as a way to trap him.

And yet the biological urge to propagate a mans genome and reproduce (not just have sex) exists in men as well just like all other animals. Some men have even admitted to me that they want to impregnate as many women as possible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/desmond-hatchett-30-kids_n_1528850.html

Desmond Hatchett is only 33 and already has 30 children with 11 different women. He works a minimum wage job and some of the kids get less than $1.75/month in child support. And as the law currently is, nothing is stopping him from having 30 more in the next 10 years. Why is it perfectly ok to disparage Mormons as rabbits and destroyers of the environment because they have 6 or 7 kids (that they pay for on their own!) Yet when I mention this story, I get back the mantra, "Racist, you hate brown people blah, blah, blah." If this man could afford thirty children, honestly it wouldn't upset me. But it does piss me off when I'm taxed for this type of behavior when I myself couldn't afford one child for a long time because I demand a higher standard of living for my offspring than these men do. I don't demand richs, but simply a middle class working American lifestyle, not a Latin American lifestyle.

But ultimately it's not the man's decision to have a child or not. It's the womans. If it's her decision, it should be her responsibility (as well as the man who shows up on the paternity test). It's not my woman and it's not my child. It shouldn't be my responsibility.

[_just me]

Some other reasons I came up with are drug addiction and mental illness.

So, are you for killing anyone with disabilities that make them unable to work? I'm wondering because that seems the logical conclusion to your belief system.

Are you for infanticide of children born to parents who live in poverty? Or simply let the children die slowly of starvation? Forced abortions for those who fall under a certain income level?

What exactly is your solution?

[_just me]

It shouldn't be my responsibility.

It's not. You aren't in a high enough tax bracket for you to really be concerned. Besides, think of all the jobs that are being created!

[_ajax18]

It shouldn't be my responsibility.

It's not. You aren't in a high enough tax bracket for you to really be concerned. Besides, think of all the jobs that are being created!

How do you figure? I paid 35% before I had the right to make a single decision or pay my loans, professional fees and other costs to make me eligible to do this job. When you add up all the welfare costs, a large portion of that 35% went to welfare (the biggest reason for which is child poverty). After this election it's due to get even higher. And since we still don't collect enough taxes, what money we have is being devalued further due to the debt. Taxing the 1% at 100% wouldn't pay the debt our country has accumulated thus far. Everyone's taxes will be going up to pay for things that are not our responsibility because we have no right to make the decisions that need to be made to reduce the cost.

[_Quasimodo]

How do you figure? I paid 35% before I had the right to make a single decision or pay my loans, professional fees and other costs to make me eligible to do this job. When you add up all the welfare costs, a large portion of that 35% went to welfare (the biggest reason for which is child poverty). After this election it's due to get even higher. And since we still don't collect enough taxes, what money we have is being devalued further due to the debt. Taxing the 1% at 100% wouldn't pay the debt our country has accumulated thus far. Everyone's taxes will be going up to pay for things that are not our responsibility because we have no right to make the decisions that need to be made to reduce the cost.

Horse biscuits! Still just making it up as you go along, Ajax?

[_krose]

But it does piss me off when I'm taxed for this type of behavior...

I would like to see Ajax's tax forms. That way I could figure, roughly, how much of "his" tax money is actually going toward children born to poor mothers who can't afford them.

I could almost guarantee that much more of "my" money (quotes because it's not mine anymore after it is paid in taxes) is going to fund immoral purposes such as wars and weapon systems. The main difference is I don't spend any time or energy whining about it. I accept it and do what I can to support people who will cut the bloated war-machine budget.

[_beastie]

Like I said, ajax, the choice is pretty simple.

1. Society helps support these children with medical, nutrition, and education in the hopes that, despite their lack of advantage in life, they will grow up to be productive adults.

2. Society ignores these children ("it's not MY responsibility"), and they grow up angry, poorly educated, and unhealthy. Without options, they turn to crime or substance abuse. So society still ends up paying in prison costs.

The way I see it, choice 1 is less painful all the way around.

You just seem to want to stamp your feet and say it isn't fair. Maybe not, but then life often is not. If you don't want to have to pay for any of the mistakes of other human beings, I suggest you move to a deserted island.

[_beastie]

Frankly, I'm more PO'd about how much the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are going to cost us. At least when we're assisting children in poverty, there's some hope of a payback one day, in terms of helping create a productive citizen. What hope of any decent payback do we have to those two wars? It seems to be that the payback is even more hatred of the US.

by the way, I posted this before reading krose's comments, who already addressed this

[_beastie]

Ajax,

You ought to ask ldsfaq this question. From what I recall of his life story that he shared openly on ZLMB, he could answer it with first-hand knowledge.

[_ajax18]

I could almost guarantee that much more of "my" money (quotes because it's not mine anymore after it is paid in taxes) is going to fund immoral purposes such as wars and weapon systems. The main difference is I don't spend any time or energy whining about it. I accept it and do what I can to support people who will cut the bloated war-machine budget.

Why not calculate it out with your own tax returns. Let's just use a hypothetical person making $100k/year. Remember to deduct student loans, and every other business cost that it cost to get you that job in the first place.