Should Scott Walker Become creditable & give up his & the legislatures pensions?

[Frank Lee]

I'm forced to pay for people to reproduce, and I'm forced to pay for billionaires' new sports stadiums, and... well, lots of garbage I don't want to. And they ain't even unionized.

[Jim-Bob]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I'm forced to pay for people to reproduce, and I'm forced to pay for billionaires' new sports stadiums, and... well, lots of garbage I don't want to. And they ain't even unionized.

Yes but that is not a logical counter-argument. All it does is change the subject in an attempt to deflect from the original issue.

As far as it goes though, I agree with you on many of those things and find them points of irritation myself. I believe in neither private citizen nor corporate welfare. If a sports team needs a new stadium well then they should foot the bill-not the local tax payers. Sadly though, there is this misguided thinking that seems to permeate most local governments that states that sports teams bring in enough money and prestige to offset their cost. Thus cities will spend a lot of money to lure them from other places. I say this needs to stop. I also want to stop subsidizing the lazy and fertile in this country too. Unless I was abducted by aliens and forcibly bred with someone without my knowledge, I have never had any children. I see little reason why I need pay for the offspring of others through wasteful government agencies with overpaid workers who are damn near impossible to fire.

[Arragonis]

Are you saying that basic education should not be universal ?

Or are you on about people claiming benefits for kids they can't afford ?

[Frank Lee]

I'm saying school funding should be linked to how many kids one has, not to whether you own property or not and how much the assessor says it's worth.

For instance, one consequence of parent welfare re: schooling is that no amount is ever enough to satisfy their desires for the finest, most expensive Taj Mahal facilities and extraneous programs. This is manifested in the annual begging by schools and parent's groups of the voters to approve additional levies; of course the parents all vote for them because of the huge subsidy they get by soaking property owners with the bill.

I'm also saying it defies logic to have government pay people to reproduce when there is no human shortage. In essence govt forces those without dependents to pay those that do.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

Or are you on about people claiming benefits for kids they can't afford ?

If I was King of the World, I'd do China one better. Not only a one-child-per-family policy, but you'd have to put down a deposit before you could have that one - which you'd get back when the kid's grown up and got a job.

[UFO]

I can't believe no one else voted my way on the poll.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

If I was King of the World, I'd do China one better. Not only a one-child-per-family policy, but you'd have to put down a deposit before you could have that one - which you'd get back when the kid's grown up and got a job.

...less interest and handling fees, of course.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

Gov. Walker & the Republican legislative majority in Wisconsin want to strip union rights from all state employees.

Uhmmm, actually, he targeted specific unions. State employees, teachers, yes. Police, firemen, no. Apparently only some unions' costs to the state are busting the budget, and only some unions' collective bargaining rights need to be curtailed to protect said budget in the future.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I'd like to know too. As I previously noted, due to a thing called "open enrollment", we are bussing kids not only within their districts, but to neighboring districts as well. I would imagine the annual U.S. school bus miles accrued has SKYROCKETED. And people wonder why schools cost so much...

Wasn't there a Supreme Court ruling about this? Something about what's good for the public school goose being good for the private/church/parochial school gander; i.e., if property taxes pay for a child in that district to be bussed, they have to pay for any child in that district to be bussed to whatever school they attend. I googled a bit and didn't find anything, but something like that sticks in my memory.

[Jim-Bob]

I wouldn't go as far as to say that the poor children should not get an education. Education coupled with a drive to succeed and common sense is the only way to break generational poverty. Please note that I did not say education and government programs alone can change this. Part of the problem with poor communities-be they projects or trailer parks- is culture. Either it is seen as being uncool to be intelligent and succeed in the business community or they learn poor lifestyles from their parents example. No amount of government spending can change that. In fact, government social spending may well exacerbate the situation by enabling people to live in bad but comfortable lifestyles and never forcing them to strive for something better.

Should we limit childbirth or enact a national eugenics program to eliminate the inferior people? No, that would make us monsters and put us in the same company as people like Margaret Sanger who founded Planned Parenthood for just such purposes. Sadly though we HAVE gone through just such policies in our past. Eugenics boards were set up and any child thought to not be intelligent enough by their teacher was then recommended to the board for forced sterilization. This could have been something as simple as one bad report card. Hundreds of thousands of children, many of which later became well educated adults, were forcibly sterilized by the government in the US in these programs. The last forced sterilization was either in 1973 or 1981 depending on which source you refer to. So, before you start down that road, remember: We have been there before and it did us no good. And for those who think the US government has never violated the human rights of it's citizens, go study history a little more in depth than what you got in the 10th grade. You would be shocked at what you find.

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

If I was King of the World, I'd do China one better. Not only a one-child-per-family policy, but you'd have to put down a deposit before you could have that one - which you'd get back when the kid's grown up and got a job.

You are assuming parents take responsibilities. One of the problems with this kind of rule is that the people who can dodge it will do so. This rule in China lead to many children being abandoned as orphans, and somethimes in orphanages being left to die because nobody wanted them. Why should the children suffer and the parents get away with it ?

Improving a society's wealth increases the health outcomes. Increasing the outcomes means that people decide when to have children - usually later - and how many - usually 1.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I'm saying school funding should be linked to how many kids one has, not to whether you own property or not and how much the assessor says it's worth.

So only parents should pay for schools ?

What would you do about adopting "parents or carers" ?