Quote:
Originally posted by Superman
Candidly, economists seem to fairly regularly narrow down the "living wage" figure to about THREE TIMES the federal minimum wage. So while the employer pays $5, you taxpayers are subsidizing with an additional $10. And while the single mom is working three jobs to make ends meet for her two kids.......she's NEVER HOME. Don't pretend to be surprised when those kids fail to learn values from mom. She's either at work or sleeping!
|
Maybe she shouldn't have had those kids? I'm all for social programs that aim high but is it my job to fund other folks families? Sure you could say that it's the Dad's fault for leaving, maybe he's a dead beat but um...the fact is she picked him didn't she? This single mother bears some responsibility for her own plight, helping these women ideally should be for charities dedicated to it (there are more than a few of them). The government in my mind could assist with child care and subsidizing her education but where should the subsidizing stop for these folks who often are poor decision makers? Something should be done to educate rather than just giving them a hand out. Educating a person does much more for them than handing them money to help out.
The minimum wage is not designed to give people enough money to live off of alone nor should it be changed to do so. Be realistic here, generally speaking people need to learn that they are responsible for their actions. If you have children with a douchbag and he leaves you - who is to blame? You would have us believe that it is the tax payer's responsibility to care for her children and I would suggest that it is her responsibility. She's the one who had sex with a douchbag; she should have been more careful.
I'm not saying don't help but I am saying the help should be in educating her to help herself rather than a handout. This is one democrat who thinks highly of capitalism and thinks ALL handouts should stop today.