Should there be a child limit on those that rely on government assistance?

[SvennoJ]

No. You might as well say there should be a child limit or no children when both parents work 2 jobs and don'
t have enough time to bring up children.

And why stop there, if your genes aren't perfect then you shouldn't reproduce since your kids might become a burden on the medical system?

It's not only morally wrong, it's also never going to work. Someone with 3 kids looses their job, what are you going to do? Hit them harder by taking support away or take one of their children away to foster care?

Fighting the symptoms by not allowing poor people children is not going to solve the problem. Race is also still an issue although nowadays it is ok to say, 'they' are just using the race card to blame their problems on. It's more popular then ever nowadays to blame the victim.

What I don't get is people are always ready to be generous to fight hunger and poverty abroad yet conveniently ignore it at home. Or even try to hide the problem by not allowing people to give out food. There are children that rely on school meals for food and go hungry in the weekends. What did those kids ever do to deserve that?

Kids shouldn't be a curse to have. Yet plenty of employers rather not give a job to a pregnant women. Today's society is all about maximum productivity for minimum wages, leaving little room to raise children and teach them values. I'm not saying we should go back to mom staying at home to raise the kids, but it's a shame that a lot of families can't get by anymore with just 1 working parent.