You've always had my back!

 

I'm not exactly sure why though. I thought you hated me.

You're entertaining as s***, it's just like "oh for f***'s sake, really? not again... omg I have to suspend his ass"

Glenn Beck, World's Best Troll, compares dead Norwegian camp youth to "Hitler Youth"

You're entertaining as s***, it's just like "oh for f***'s sake, really? not again... omg I have to suspend his ass"

 

Sometimes someone has to say what everyone's secretly thinking!

I hope you know that post in the other thread was in jest

I hope you know that post in the other thread was in jest

 

You're in jest!

I hope you know that post in the other thread was in jest

Not sure where to post this, but:

I just found out that friends of mine are on WIC because they want the wife to be a stay at home mom. The wife is perfectly capable of having/finding a job, but she CHOOSES to stay home. I think that kinds pisses me off. My wife could stay home too if we wanted to live off the government, but we choose to provide for ourselves.

Edited July 26, 201114 yr by Athomeboy_2000

Not sure where to post this, but:

I just found out that friends of mine are on WIC because they want the wife to be a stay at home mom. The wife is perfectly capable of having/finding a job, but she CHOOSES to stay home. I think that kinds pisses me off. My wife could stay home too if we wanted to live off the government, but we choose to provide for ourselves.

 

Are they doing it because they want their wives to be home to raise their kids? Or are they doing it just because they can? If it's the latter, I agree with you...that's the opposite of what the system was designed for.

Could she find enough to cover daycare? It was impossible for a friend of mind without government assistance for the daycare.

If the family doesn't make enough money to pay for daycare and they also qualify for federal assistance then I don't see a problem with this scenario.

Are they doing it because they want their wives to be home to raise their kids? Or are they doing it just because they can? If it's the latter, I agree with you...that's the opposite of what the system was designed for.

I get the impression they are doing it to raise the kids. They're a a conservative couple (dad's a pastor) with the "old values" where the wife should stay home with the kids.

 

If the family doesn't make enough money to pay for daycare and they also qualify for federal assistance then I don't see a problem with this scenario.

Could she find enough to cover daycare? It was impossible for a friend of mind without government assistance for the daycare.

I dont know if her having a full time job would cover daycare. I have no problem with having the government subsidize the overpriced daycare system we have now.

 

 

 

Edited July 26, 201114 yr by Athomeboy_2000

I get the impression they are doing it to raise the kids. They're a a conservative couple (dad's a pastor) with the "old values" where the wife should stay home with the kids.

 

I don't see a problem with this then, unless it's a permanent move...those systems are designed to help when necessary, and while raising a child may be necessary, after they're in school, etc...or you have other means to make sure they are ok, you need to get off the dole.

Yeah, I've got zero problems with helping support stay-at-home moms, even if I loathe the conservative "women's work" ideology that drives some of those choices.

Absolutely ridiculous. How about not having a kid until they can afford it?

lol

Families: Only for Wealthy People!

 

I want to amend this to Families: Not for the Poor! because it's a little more accurate.

Edited July 26, 201114 yr by StrangeSox

lol

 

 

Families: Only for Wealthy People!

And what about strict Catholic families that wouldn't dare touch birth control? Guess they have to give up their kids to adoption until they increase their salaries.

Absolutely ridiculous. How about not having a kid until they can afford it?

The economics of having kids today is insane. Childcare costs are absolutely NUTS (especially newborn care) unless you can find an in-home solution like my wife and I have. My wife and I could afford having two kids because we BOTH have jobs and found affordable in-home care. For some people (like them, a young pastor and a teacher), there may NEVER bee a good time to have kids. But, those that do, should FIND a way to make it work, we did and it hasnt always been easy.

Edited July 26, 201114 yr by Athomeboy_2000

But, those that do, should FIND a way to make it work, we did and it hasnt always been easy.

 

Isn't using WIC an example of finding a way to make it work?

That sort of attitude makes me so f***ing angry. My wife and I would LOVE, LOVE, LOVE to have a kid. Hell, multiple kids. But you know what? They're f***ing expensive. I get it, it sucks and it shouldn't cost what it does. But neither she or I could ever imagine the following thought process: "I want to have a kid. I'm perfectly capable of working, but why work when the government will give me a check to stay at home so I can raise my kids."

 

This country is so f***ing ass backwards it literally makes me sick to my stomach. I'm sorry dude, but your friends suck. Get a f***ing job and make ends meat like the rest of middle America. Why the f*** should other people in similiar situations have to pay for her to stay home while the rest of us bust our asses to prepare ourselves to have kids.

I guess the crux of my complaint is that people shouldn't be using the government unless they have a legitimate hardship, not because they made the choice to be a low-income family..

Isn't using WIC an example of finding a way to make it work?

But i get the impression they are using it because she made the CHOICE to stay home, not because she was forced to.

Get a f***ing job and make ends meat like the rest of middle America.

 

Perhaps you haven't seen the unemployment rate recently.

Perhaps you haven't seen the unemployment rate recently.

 

THEN DON'T START A f***ING FAMILY