Some of these people didn't plan on having kids, they are kinda strange in
that sometimes they just happen. now 99% of the time it can be prevented
before hand. And lets please not get into abortion. but mistakes happen,
and she is trying.
I don't mind tax dollars going to help somebody who is legitimately trying,
or to execute a person who deserves it. It is the times when the money is
going to people who are playing the system that make me get mad at the system.
It is not necessarily a political thing, most people agree with this. But
now the politics to get it changed are so out of wack it is almost not
worth the trouble for some people.
At 08:28 PM 6/12/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>LOL I totally understand your feelings (well mostly, my fianc�e and I have
>no kids and plan to have the same number later, we have dogs LOL)
>
>"What about the Marva down at the trailer park who only has 2 children and a
>job that pays slightly over minimum wage. Should we tax her enough to cover
>the cost of educating her kids... tax her enough so that she can't afford
>food."
>
>I feel this way, if Marva has a low paying job and little to no prospects,
>then she shouldn't be having kids, I'd applaud her for not being assisted,
>but people who are on the razors edge, should really weigh the returns, I'm
>sure kids are great and all that but I don't think I should have to pay more
>because she wanted to have kids when she should have been wise enough to
>know she had no means of supporting them. That's a major cop out in my book,
>"have kids now, worry about money and the children later" that's just bad
>from all angles.
>
>I think if there is an answer to this issue it's somewhere between my "fixed
>after two pay for your own" policy and the "let's support the lower class no
>matter how many kids they have because the kids are the future" policy. I
>just hope one day we figure out where that middle ground is before everyone
>is living in 200 story apartments because there isn't enough room left in
>the country.
>
>I have no problem with the gov't taking my money for lots of things, but I
>think each person should get to decide where their portion goes. I'd pay for
>a road in Anchorage before I'd send some ones kids to school because they
>wanted a family but make 6.00 an hour part time, that's their deal.
>
>While we're on the subject of where our money goes, I'd rather pay for a
>phone booth in Queens before I spent a dime on a missile shield that's been
>a boondoggle since it was thought up.
>
>Just my 1.6 cents... I'm a little short it was a long day :-)
>
>
>
>John Wilker
>Web Applications Consultant
>Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Developer
>
>www.red-omega.com <http://www.red-omega.com>
>
>Pepsi's "Come Alive With the Pepsi Generation" translated into "Pepsi Brings
>Your Ancestors Back From the Grave" in Chinese.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 8:00 PM
>To: CF-Community
>Subject: RE: Revenge has it's place
>
>
>
> > This may not be a popular opinion and I know it would never fly,
> > unfortunately, but China was (I'm not sure if this is still the
> > policy) but
> > 2 kids is enough. I know some of us have more and all but way too many
> > people treat babies as paychecks, and I'd give up my right to 3 or more if
>
>That is just plain wrong. Don't blame the majority of hard working, loving
>parents for the sins of a minority who abuse the welfare system. My wife is
>from a large family, she is one of eight, and her parents never went on
>welfare, nor do a majority of large families. Plus, it's easy to 'give up
>your right to 3 or more' if you didn't struggle to have one.
>
>Geeze, and this is not just a reaction to you, John, but to a few of you
>guys on this list, but what's with the attitude against families? (I'm not
>trying to attack, just being curious.) I've seen more than one poster talk
>about families as if the only people who have kids are on welfare. Or how
>they shouldn't have to pay for educating someone elses children. I hate to
>quote Ms "Drug Runner" Houston, but the children _are_ our future. If we
>screw them up, we screw up the world.
>
>I'll quote Judith here (and again, I'm just curious, not attacking):
>
>"What's wrong with being selfish? I paid for my kids' education. They are
>grown. Why should have I to pay for a bunch more kids just because
>Maybelline down at the trailer park decides to pump out another rug rat
>every year?"
>
>What about the Marva down at the trailer park who only has 2 children and a
>job that pays slightly over minimum wage. Should we tax her enough to cover
>the cost of educating her kids... tax her enough so that she can't afford
>food.
>
>Or maybe Marva's kids can get 1-2 years of education and then be shipped off
>to the salt mines to help pay for their education? Personally, I don't mind
>the government taking part of my check to pay for education. It means
>smarter doctors, police officers, lawyers, builders, etc.
>
>Your tax money goes to pay for roads you never go down. For hospitals. For
>numerous services and other things that may not directly affect you, but do
>make the country a better place. Yes, our government can waste quite a bit
>of dough, but let's not forget that it actually does do some things right.
>We live in a country where some people are homeless, some people are
>starving, some people are injustly convicted, but we are also one of the
>most richest and free countries in the world.
>
>Just my 2 cents.
>
>Raymond Camden
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
