40% of babies born are out of wedlock.

I don't think I'm that old. But I hear ya. Why do you think we have so many affeminate men nowadays. To many fatherless boys with nothing but mommy to look to. So we have Girly Men now. UH!
 
All this time I thought a BASTARD was not dis-similar to a WOP (with out parents); in Elementray School we learned that those special children usually grew up as activists and claim they could make frogs drop from the skies and spread the waters of the seas.

As for the Girly men... I think that phase is called the Rosie Greer syndrome. Not just mother cudlers but needle point hobbiest. Thats why this country should encourage women with guns....they are not just for hunting anymore..... and make it mandatory that any "marital aids" should be locked away from children.
 
chollyjohn said:
As for the Girly men...Thats why this country should encourage women with guns....they are not just for hunting anymore....
Click to expand...

My cousin's wife has used her Taurus Judge pistol for skeet shooting...and she's raising her daughter to know how to shoot as well.
 
chollyjohn said:
All this time I thought a BASTARD was not dis-similar to a WOP (with out parents)
Click to expand...
Early to mid last century, on the east coast, WOP typically meant 'without papers' and was generally an insult toward immigrants (often Italian). Never heard it applied to orphans.
 
That is the way I understood it as well. Kind of like when you assume illegal immigrants today are spanish speaking.
 
Don't kid yourself. A lot of that 40% have the father in the babys life or living with the baby. Once again the goverment made it an advantage to be a single parent. Tax laws, earned income credit, health care and college tuition all make it an advantage for the single parent. Being self employed I could of saved myself $120,000 or more if I was a single father. Don't get me wrong I think these programs are good. However people twist the rules. If I would of divorced my wife and dropped my income below $20,000 I would of recieved all kind of benifits. My kids would of had almost free college tuition. I know more than 1 person whose family makes over $100,000 and has free college tuition for their kids. It kinda stinks playing by the rules when you see all the free handouts.
 
Ignoring the fact that dropping your income level that low brings on a whole other set of hassles. I'm as displeased as anyone else about paying six digits worth of taxes, but I don't kid myself that it's somehow unfair when some poor bastard gets what amounts to less than 1% of my income as 'benefits'. If all it costs me to avoid BEING that poor soul is taxes, well, then fine.

The article plays pretty loose with throwing percentages about. But then it's just journalism, not actual facts of importance.
 
Go hang out in any big city and I bet that figure jumps to 95%. What is reported and what is earned tend to be two different numbers in "low income urban areas". They got the game down and kids are the ticket to the E ride.
 
I don't think you got my point. I'm saying that 40% is wrong. I'm not hammering the people who get free college tuition or health care or tax breaks. I'm hammering a system which makes it better to be single than married. Yea we pay over six digit taxes also. As long as we both keep working and have a good living I will pay what we have to without an issue. What I'm saying is I know people who make a combined income of $70,000 with no or little help for their kids college. I also know people who earn a combined income of $150,000 or more whose kids get free college tuition. all I'm saying is that the way the system is set up it makes it better for a lot of people to get divorced or stay single. That is why that we have 40% single parents.
 
TurtleTone said:
Go hang out in any big city and I bet that figure jumps to 95%. What is reported and what is earned tend to be two different numbers in "low income urban areas". They got the game down and kids are the ticket to the E ride.
Click to expand...

You've got that right. My wife has worked a day a week at the local Volunteer Income Tax Assistance program, and she will confirm your statement. She also notes that this office has three paid staffers serving relatively few "clients" each day, and money would be saved to shut down this program and give each "client" a voucher to get their taxes filed by H&R Block or Jackson Hewitt.
 
Just an example. Someone close to me got married young and had kids young. He worked construction and she was a bank teller. They just kept their heads above water. 4 kids later and 15 years down the road she decides to go back to school to become a R.N. Took out some student loans and got her degree. Now she starts making $50,000 a year. The next year her oldest child starts college. Income level to high so more student loans. Then the other three kids went to school more loans no aid. The last kid finished school and now her husband is out of work and they have student loans that they pay $800 month on till he is 80. You don't think they wish they would of gamed the system. It's easy when you bring in $200,000 a year to pay your bills and kids college. It's the people like my friend who just started making $80,000 and got hammered with college cost that are having a tough time. That was my point. It's not just the poor, it's the people in that $75,000 to $90,000 range with kids in college who are having a tough time.
 
Get divorced, have some more kids, get a cash job. Problem solved.
 
What's wrong with the kids taking out student loans, if you can help them out great.
 
I agree about the kids getting loans. If the kids college is say $20,000 a year and you make in the $80,000 range your kids will not get a intrest free fasfa loan. Plus you will have to pay some and co-sign for the rest. That's my point. It's crazy how it is set up. All I'm saying is for some people they would be better off divorced or single. If my friend would of waited till her kids started college to go back to school and her husband would of worked cash she would be ahead $800 every month for the rest of her life. And yes some people have figured that out. Just saying.
 
I hear ya, a few years ago a family rented a house across the street from me. they had 3 kids and weren’t married, she told my wife she'd loose to much money if they got married.WTF :smt021
 
It is not necessarily a change of times or morals per se though. People are getting married later in life, resulting in more chances of "out of wedlock" babies being born. As well, women are empowered to decide to have babies on their own.

In addition more and more people are deciding not to get married at all for various reasons, not all of them nefarious, but still want children.

And so what anyway? Why is it such a bad thing to be outside of marriage and have kids? Yes, the scum that breeds to have a handout disgust me, but lumping everyone into the same stew is silly. I would rather a real article/study showing percentages of children out of wedlock for specific reasons, not just a lump sum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,170
Messages
1,427,765
Members
61,080
Latest member
Jfeg
Back
Top