Moms: I cannot afford to work!!

page: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
edit on 19-4-2012 by DavidWillts because: wrong thread




posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
The real problem is lack of affordable day care and there are still so many workplaces that don't step in by providing space and childminders as a benefit/incentive.

-------

Yet, some do it seems.

As we progress through the 21st century, corporate America is becoming more savvy and creative in the employee benefits offered in an effort to not only retain current employees but also attract the new employee. With child care as a major issue affecting employee performance and attendance, offering a childcare option, through on-site services or by network, will provide for an increased overall productivity.

voices.yahoo.com...



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Vixen~
Couples planning to have a family need to do the math BEFOREHAND to ensure that they can properly provide for that child.

Depending on circumstances, sometimes it's more cost effective for a parent to stay home and raise the kids. In other cases having two incomes works out better. I guess I'm weird in that I really enjoyed working, and that, in conjunction with the additional income, made it worth me going back to work after a few weeks of maternity leave.
edit on 4/19/2012 by ~Vixen~ because: (no reason given)


That is not quite fair or realistic. Consider this.

What happens when you and spouse have great jobs, a tidy little nest egg and decide "let's have a baby" and then TSHTF ...


and one or both of you lose your jobs? Say it's a deep recession and lasts for months or years and wages have dropped and jobs are more part time than full time....You can't plan on that scenario.

I saw this attitude pop up a couple times across this thread and I find it to be disheartening that selfish people say things like that...Do you really think if they chose differently it would effect what Uncle Sam is going to suck out of your paycheck? Hahaha....they are still going to take it and just spend it on more bullets and bombs.

Not everyone out there decided to have a child just to go on the dole...shiz happens sometimes that no one can possibly plan for.

But all that aside, if you do the math, it is not so hard to see why it becomes counter productive for both parents to work. Sure, you may have to adjust your lifestyle but so be it. It can be done and still be a good life....if you don't pine for wealth, extravagance and shiny toys and distractions.

My wife stayed at home till my youngest daughter was in high school and capable of getting herself in the house and fed after school. We didn't have a flashy life, but we had all we needed....and both kids turned out pretty good...scholarships and all.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


We've struggled with this.
In our situation half of my wife's paycheck goes to childcare.

I feel the pain.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


We've struggled with this.
In our situation half of my wife's paycheck goes to childcare.

I feel the pain.


Snap.

We've chosen to let the welfare junkies procreate on our behalf.

Cause we can't afford it, but they always seem to manage



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
can anyone guess what
"you shouldn't have kids till you can afford them" and " you shouldn't have sex, unless you want a kid" equals???

let's all freak all those conservatives out and become celibate!!!
edit on 19-4-2012 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
can anyone guess what
"you shouldn't have kids till you can afford them" and " you should have sex, unless you want a kid" equals???

let's all freak all those conservatives out and become celibate!!!


I know what you are trying to say but that is not the same thing, and that second one does not really make sense. You are trying to politicize an issue that really has nothing to do with conservative or left vs right.
It is common sense, you should not have a kid if you can't afford one. Well everyone is within their rights to have a child whenever they please it does not mean they are obligated to. If you choose to have a child you cannot afford that does not mean the "system" is broken it means you are stupid.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by InTheLight
 


Or better yet, save even more money, by allowing as many people as possible work out of their homes. A whole lot of people sitting in cubicles or at desks, could be just as, if not more productive working on a computer in their own house.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 

it's a sign of frustration!!

you shouldn't have kids unless you can afford them, and are sure you will be able to afford them 20 years down the line..
you shouldn't have sex, unless you want kids!!!
and let's keep knocking the availability of birth control pills....no, don't expect help if you want to take them, don't expect your insurance to pay for them...

it only leads to one solution.....
be celibate!!!

the problem is, too many people, and I am not talking about the poor, are exploiting the programs that are there in attempt to help the poor!!!
everything that subsidized increases at a big inflation rate!! how much has college tuition gone up?? food?? rent?? child care??? medical care!!!
just saying that people shouldn't have kids if they can't afford them, just doesn't cut the grade!!
now, my suggestion, if enough of the right people took it seriously, (like the spouses of those exploiters!!!), well that might achieve something!!! become celebate!!
having a miscarriage can get your a prison term in some states..
having a baby can pose some serious risks to the women, and well, in today's climate, well, it's possible that they could legally let you die, for the sake of the baby of course...
no birth control is 100% effective...
between gas and childcare, a teacher's salary isn't enough to make working worth it!!
and, well, most of the people just don't get it, they don't seem to want to comprehend what is going let alone get us off this insane direction we are on!! so all of this is just gonna keep getting worse!! ya, maybe you will be doing fine this year, but eventually, that cost of living will exceed you income also, and well.....have fun!!
there's a thread on ats I was just reading...
guy planned good, had savings, had ira, good job, ect.....got hurt, and well, had to dig into his ira account....
and well, he now appearantly owes the gov't around 30 thousand.....he's had no income all year...and, he owes them over 30,000!!!
that's what your planning is gonna do for ya!! it's like playing poker in a rigged game!! no matter what you do, you are gonna lose, unless you are priviledged enough to rub elbows with the right people, be born into the right family!!
they come up with all these nice solutions....
can't afford a baby, don't have one...
don't make enough money, go to school learn a skill, so you can get a better one (and end up with a nice student loan to pay also!!)

it everybody took these suggestions seriously and did them, our society would be in chaos!!!
those low wage earners are all over the place, doing all kinds of things. things that are necessary for our society to function...heck, navy plans rely on those low wage earners having the skill got cut the gaskets accurately according to the specs they provide...
I am just saying we should all just do what they suggest....
I used to say if you didn't want kids, don't have sex, but I guess I now have to change it...
if you can't afford kids, or don't want kids, well, just don't bother having the sex.....
if enough us did this, I bet the climate in this country would change!!!



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 




you shouldn't have kids unless you can afford them, and are sure you will be able to afford them 20 years down the line..

At 20 years old your child should not need daycare...



you shouldn't have sex, unless you want kids!!!

With so many birth control options today that mentality is really not necessary.



and let's keep knocking the availability of birth control pills....no, don't expect help if you want to take them, don't expect your insurance to pay for them...

Why should insurance pay for them? You can get them at any planned parenthood for dirt cheap and the pill is not the only option.



just saying that people shouldn't have kids if they can't afford them, just doesn't cut the grade!!

I don't see how eliminating personal responsibility will help anything.



having a miscarriage can get your a prison term in some states..

That is just not true, if you want to make things up im sure that there are plenty of people who will argue about delusions.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 


The system is most assuredly broken and the evidence of its wretched carcass lies in the numerous posts using welfare as an excuse to ignore certain people's rights. No one ever wants to discuss just doing away with welfare system. Both sides love the welfare system, not for any "welfare" it brings, but for the power both sides assume by it. If we're going to have a welfare system then those who accept assistance do not in any way what-so-ever surrender their rights. If the pompous and preening "taxpayer" has a problem with this then do away with welfare, but do not use welfare as a justification to argue against people's rights.

There are some families who put off having a family until certain financial goals were met. This is fine, and as advise goes it is probably not a bad idea to actually plan a parenthood, but then again it would probably be nice if Planned Parenthood was exactly what the name implies instead of a contraceptive and abortion clinic. Advise is advise, and unsolicited advice runs the risk of discovering its exact value to the advised. Just because some plan their families according to their bank accounts does not mean this is how other parents should do it.

Get rid of federal welfare programs, keep the federal government out of the families homes and bedrooms, and live and let live. Having a baby under unstable economic circumstances is not a crime. There are plenty of good, decent, bright and well adjusted kids who came from families who had little to no money.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damrod

Originally posted by ~Vixen~
Couples planning to have a family need to do the math BEFOREHAND to ensure that they can properly provide for that child.

Depending on circumstances, sometimes it's more cost effective for a parent to stay home and raise the kids. In other cases having two incomes works out better. I guess I'm weird in that I really enjoyed working, and that, in conjunction with the additional income, made it worth me going back to work after a few weeks of maternity leave.
edit on 4/19/2012 by ~Vixen~ because: (no reason given)


That is not quite fair or realistic. Consider this.

What happens when you and spouse have great jobs, a tidy little nest egg and decide "let's have a baby" and then TSHTF ...


and one or both of you lose your jobs? Say it's a deep recession and lasts for months or years and wages have dropped and jobs are more part time than full time....You can't plan on that scenario.

I saw this attitude pop up a couple times across this thread and I find it to be disheartening that selfish people say things like that...Do you really think if they chose differently it would effect what Uncle Sam is going to suck out of your paycheck? Hahaha....they are still going to take it and just spend it on more bullets and bombs.

Not everyone out there decided to have a child just to go on the dole...shiz happens sometimes that no one can possibly plan for.

But all that aside, if you do the math, it is not so hard to see why it becomes counter productive for both parents to work. Sure, you may have to adjust your lifestyle but so be it. It can be done and still be a good life....if you don't pine for wealth, extravagance and shiny toys and distractions.

My wife stayed at home till my youngest daughter was in high school and capable of getting herself in the house and fed after school. We didn't have a flashy life, but we had all we needed....and both kids turned out pretty good...scholarships and all.

Potential loss of income/reduced income are other factors that need to be factored into the equation. We're talking about providing for your kids, and that's not a duty that couples should take lightly. I understand the difficulties associated with a diminished income. I spent time as a divorced parent, struggled to make ends meet, etc. It's not easy, and it should e avoided at all costs, but too many people just pop out the kids expecting to make things happen "somehow."

I've been through periods when my husband and I were both between jobs, but we survived that year because we were responsible and had contingency plans. We had savings and investments. How many out there can survive 6 months without any income? Very few. Therein lies the problem. It's not about supporting a lavish lifestyle, but too many fall short of even meeting minimum food and shelter requirements. That's irresponsible.


Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
There are some families who put off having a family until certain financial goals were met. This is fine, and as advise goes it is probably not a bad idea to actually plan a parenthood, but then again it would probably be nice if Planned Parenthood was exactly what the name implies instead of a contraceptive and abortion clinic.

Most people hate Planned Parenthood over abortions, but that only accounts for 3% of their operations. Contraception is an integral part of family planning. I really don't see how that's a problem.

edit on 4/19/2012 by ~Vixen~ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




If we're going to have a welfare system then those who accept assistance do not in any way what-so-ever surrender their rights. If the pompous and preening "taxpayer" has a problem with this then do away with welfare, but do not use welfare as a justification to argue against people's rights.

I'm not sure what you mean, what do you mean by welfare as a justification to argue against people's rights? Im just not seeing that.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




If we're going to have a welfare system then those who accept assistance do not in any way what-so-ever surrender their rights. If the pompous and preening "taxpayer" has a problem with this then do away with welfare, but do not use welfare as a justification to argue against people's rights.

I'm not sure what you mean, what do you mean by welfare as a justification to argue against people's rights? Im just not seeing that.


It is just nobody's business which adults have children when and how much they have in their bank accounts at the time of conception. All through this thread I've seen plenty of insinuations that women on welfare should not have children. I take you to task for defending a system that is quite clearly broken. This broken system sounds a lot like a broken record yammering on and on and on about how those people over there shouldn't be doing that, and these people over here have a lot of nerve even considering that.

Just where the hell would one draw the line? What if one, or two, three, four, or more of those prudent parents who planned and saved and scrimped and built a bank account to pay for the child they then conceived, then lost all their money? What then? Would those smug parents be posting about how they planned and built a financial portfolio to pay for the children, but the double dip recession following the dot.com burst destroyed that money so they just offed their little child and buried them in the backyard? I doubt it. Rich or poor the smug little parents will love their child just the same.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Vixen~
 





Most people hate Planned Parenthood over abortions, but that only accounts for 3% of their operations. Contraception is an integral part of family planning. I really don't see how that's a problem.


Deflecting is not going to change the fact that all these smug people insisting that the way they went about planning their families could not have relied upon Planned Parenthood to help them do so. Anyone walking into a Planned Parenthood today with their mate and announcing they would like to start planning a family will be treated with suspicion and curtly told they cannot be helped.

But hey, let's pretend like I made some other argument so you can then plug Planned Parenthood and their "services".



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
and so much of this is irrelevant...
we're talking about professionals here that are opting to not work because child care is eating up their paycheck!!!
they're professonals, I think they planned just as well as anyone else!!
the most irresponsible out there, well, they don't have this problem, they can work if they want, they don't seem to have to work, if they don't want to....doesn't matter, they will still eat, their kids still will get medical attention, they will have a house over their head...ect...

if no one sees a problem with professonals like teachers having to retire because their paycheck is getting eaten up by childcare....the discussion is probably useless!!!



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




It is just nobody's business which adults have children when and how much they have in their bank accounts at the time of conception.

I strongly disagree, if you are going to make the taxpayers pay for your children you are really making it their business by every definition of the word.


All through this thread I've seen plenty of insinuations that women on welfare should not have children.

They shouldn't but im not saying we should take away their right to have children. When you sign up for welfare to agree to their terms. One of those is that they are not going to cover any more children you decide to have.
People should be responsible for their stupid decisions. Just saying that they should not have more children (which is true) is not taking their right away. They still maintain the right to have as many children as they can squeeze out, nobody is taking that away.
I have the "right" to buy cats, that does not mean that the state should have to pay me because i decide I want to own 400 cats.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 


I haven't made the pretentious, pompous, and preening "taxpayer" do a damn thing, and it was I who went straight to the elimination of welfare, and it was also I who asserted that neither side wanted anything to do with that, and here you are proving my point. You don't want to do away with welfare, because then you can't make pretentious arguments like "if the "taxpayer" is going to be made to pay for blah, blah, blah..."




They shouldn't but im not saying we should take away their right to have children. When you sign up for welfare to agree to their terms. One of those is that they are not going to cover any more children you decide to have.


Note the not so subtle change in pronoun from "their" to "you". Let's get this straight. I have never been on welfare, and I am the one arguing let's get rid of welfare...you know that bomb I dropped that you're ignoring so you can keep blah, blah, blahing about "taxpayers" and "welfare" rules.

Your advocacy of a welfare system is worse than the hand wringing liberals.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




I haven't made the pretentious, pompous, and preening "taxpayer" do a damn thing, and it was I who went straight to the elimination of welfare, and it was also I who asserted that neither side wanted anything to do with that, and here you are proving my point. You don't want to do away with welfare, because then you can't make pretentious arguments like "if the "taxpayer" is going to be made to pay for blah, blah, blah..."


Note the not so subtle change in pronoun from "their" to "you".
Let's get this straight. I have never been on welfare, and I am the one arguing let's get rid of welfare...you know that bomb I dropped that you're ignoring so you can keep blah, blah, blahing about "taxpayers" and "welfare" rules.

Your advocacy of a welfare system is worse than the hand wringing liberals.


I crossed out all the rhetoric that really had nothing to do with what I posted, i will leave you with this.
I do want to get rid of welfare, but I have learned two things.
1. You must really like just reading what you write
2. You like to make things up
And that is why i am done here.
edit on 19-4-2012 by DavidWillts because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




You don't want to do away with welfare, because then you can't make pretentious arguments like "if the "taxpayer" is going to be made to pay for blah, blah, blah..."


I do want to get rid of welfare, but I have learned two things.
1. You must really like just reading what you write
2. You like to make things up to
And that is why i am done here.


I have not made anything up. In my first reply to one of your posts, I made the strong assertion that welfare should be eliminated. You ignored this assertion and after briefly playing as if you didn't understand, you went straight to this:




I strongly disagree, if you are going to make the taxpayers pay for your children you are really making it their business by every definition of the word.


I would much rather be writing in my diary something like this:

Dear Diary;

Today the world rejoiced because unalienable rights were respected by all, and each and every person kept their noses out of others affairs and just busily minded their own business.





top topics
 
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join