I have thought of this topic in the past and it popped into my brain again just recently.  I just wanted to know what VGC thought of this idea.  I am all for people having the right to reproduce.  However, if you can't even support your kids and have to depend on the government then I believe there should be a limit.  I would say that limit should be set at 2.  That gives you two children which is enough for someone that relies on taxpayers to bail them out because they keep getting knocked up.  After the second child the mother or father should be required to get their tubes tied.  Passing the burden of financial responsibility onto others because you want to keep reproducing shouldn't be a right (and isn't a sign of a good parent).  If you can take care of your kids then go ahead pop out as many babies as you want.  What do you guys think about this subject?

Edit - After dwelling on the subject even more I suppose the best option would be to limit coverage to two children.  So they can keep reproducing if they want to but will only have the government supporting a maximum of two children.  The lesson should be that the government (tax payers) aren't here to support as many children as possible when one doesn't have the means to support them on their own.

id settle for making it illegal for them to purchase smokes and alcohol. that way when they do it, they get sent to jail and cant have any kids. it bothers me to see a couple spending a third of their money on cigarettes when they have two children.

The government shouldn't have any say in reproductive rights. That being said this system we have where we give people more money the more kids they have should be scrapped.

Yea, a child limit would be pretty intrusive (aka China).  I suppose limiting the money might be better.  However, that might set up a scenario where some kids might starve or be malnourished.  I just thought that forcing one of them to have their tubes tied would prevent a child from even suffering since they were never conceived in the first place.  Something needs to be done because having parents show their kids that the government will always bail you out isn't a good philosophy to teach.  Sure there are cases to disprove this but a majority of kids would grow up with an entitlement ideology.

Yes! Definitely lol.

Really though there should be they people have to learn that they can't just keep giving birth while on welfare it's un fair to tax payers.

Had a big wall of text wrote up, deleted it.

I'll just leave this here and go. I'll just say it's well worth the watch, and the guy is a good speaker so it makes it easy to sit through.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2mjvFNOwmc

It'll also be a fun excercise to find out who the racists are on this forum.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303439/Benefits-couple-claiming-30-000-11-children-ANOTHER-way.html

No, but that's based on the fact I think there should be no government welfare/child support/daycare at all.

In our current system, Yes, number of children should be limited for lower class families that use government assistance.

No, but there should be an intelligence test before giving birth. Otherwise you pay some kind of fee based on your income.