Forums - General Discussion - Should there be a child limit on those that rely on government assistance?

Should there be a limit on children for those that can't support their own kids?

Yes 34 61.82%
 
No 14 25.45%
 
See Results 7 12.73%
 
Total:55

Should they be able to outright say: You can only have 2 kids? No. But I'm 100% for benefits being limited to 2 children for people depending on the government.

I'm sick and tired of my tax money going to irresponsible dickheads who know damned well they can't afford to raise a kid, yet decide to continue having them.

Regardless, in the realm of things, it isn't this that is leading to money issues for the US government. Do things like this add up? Yes, but there are much more massive things that have a lot more money being wasted that I would rather they fix before doing anything about this.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Around the Network

no but they should cap the amount after a certain amount no matter how many kids you have, but you cant prevent people from having kids that rediculous cough china



sethnintendo said:

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.

This actually sounds OK. Originally I was going to say no because I don't approve of such restricting policies but this sounds fine.



It really just depends on the place, in China you had the infamous one child policy due to severe overpopulation, but in Sweden you get huge benefits for having more kids, the government encourages you to fuck, and then rewards you for doing so!!
I don't think there should be any set rules, but governments should offer benefits for sticking to what's ideal. For example: China now does something similar to this, if you only have 1 or 2 kids, you'll get discounts on healthcare, school or housing, but if you have more, those benefits are taken away. It's not a severe punishment like what we had in the early days of the one child policy, but it's still an effective way of controlling population growth.



oldschoolfool said:
thranx said:
oldschoolfool said:
i'd say no. who is the govment to tell people,how many kids to have?


well in that case. why is the government going to take care of kids that people have that they cant care of? People seem to want it both ways i am free to decide how many kids i have, but i expect the government (my nieghbors) to pick up my slack. The ones really hurt are the kids who are brought up by parents that are unable to do so, either financially, mentally, or dont have the time to do so.


well,america is'nt china. I mean,what's next is america going to ban sugar,fatty foods,soda,guns,and anything that's a burden on the health system and goverment. I mean,I don't have the answer's,but I just don't think the govment telling people how to live there lives is the answer. 

Well, it's unlikely that corporations would ever allow that to happen. They'll most likely lobby like hell and fund faux research and stuff.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)