I’m confused. Does Obama want to subsidize the Octuplets Mom or punish her?
I assume this means people who want children. He is correct, in that many European countries have very low birth rates. They are also losing their identity to the Muslim "workers" who they have had to import to keep the social program payments going. A country that has children is a healthy, vibrant country. A country that discourages children is moribund.
Mark Steyn points out the same thing in regard to Euros who just can't understand why Americans have to drive these big cars. It's because Americans are still having children, and you need transport for a family, not for just two people.
Why oh why did this evil little creep’s parents not believe in his twisted philosophy... ?
What does this have to do with science?
It still amazes me how self professed conservatives can do a 180 and turn into big government, “let’s use the tax code for social engineering” and “your tax burden is never too small when it comes to MY kids” when it hits their pocketbooks or even worse, when it comes to others being forced to support their children. I know several arch conservative couples who have 4-6 kids and brag about how they don’t pay hardly any taxes at all...while condemning high taxes in general or criticizing how liberals give tax breaks to their constituencies.
I didn’t ask you to have those 5 or 6 kids and nobody asked my opinion before they raised my taxes and lowered (or eliminated) yours because having children is “such an expense”. Your children are your decision, why do support putting a gun to my head and require through the force of law for me to pay YOU to raise them? What is the oft spoke phrase of conervatives when they see welfare queens having more kids to gain greater benefits? “If you can’t afford them, don’t have them.”
And each time I mention it I get the “MY kids are going to pay YOUR social security!”. Not only do I not want YOUR kids paying MY social security but this has to be the most lame and unsupportable excuse coming out of the mouth of a conservative I’ve ever seen. We all know SS is a ponzi scheme requiring more and more workers paying into the system to cover more and more retirees.
Their response only codifies the system, basically becoming an enabler to the one issue that we all agree is bankrupt and will not be able to serve much longer without drastic changes.
And what will those changes be? It will become a needs based welfare program which means I’ll never see a dime because I was responsible and took care of my own future needs. So you can take “MY kids..pay YOUR..” and stick in the lock box.
There’s nothing more exasperating than a conservative who talks the talk but won’t walk the walk when it hits THEIR pocketbook. You’re an opportunistic poser, nothing more.
Tell you what: cap welfare benefits to a max of two children. Let me know how that turns out.
Czars do not need Senate confirmation
Such taxation schemes are exactly what they have in Sweden - today, the majority of Swedes live alone.
Unless there is only one minority female parent and the children are born out of wedlock to multiple unknown sperm doners.
That’s the “beauty” of appointing czars.
The Administration doesn’t need Congressional approval for the appointment of czars and they are not subject to Congressional oversight.
That’s the “beauty” of appointing czars.
The Administration doesn’t need Congressional approval for the appointment of czars and they are not subject to Congressional oversight.
Does he also believe that there should be no welfare for beyond three children?
Sounds like they want to reduce the responsible population, and let the irresponsible population grow . . .
That good ol’ Second Amendment is looking more important by the day.
Add this Czar to the list, please.
He is a “czar” and does not need senate confirmation since there is no constitutional position for a “czar” in the United States Consititution. He is just a political buddy of Obama whom has been given a federal pay check as a political payoff.