I ignored it because you don’t make sense. It is unpaid. The “rewards” of raising children are not monetary.
We were talking about having a sense of accomplishment at a low wage job, and that plenty of people do (did in my case) it for the money. Your response is a tangent.
We’re not arguing about this – I was referring to the title of the WSJ opinion article about the one-time payment study mentioned in this post, which referred to it as “free money.” Another tangent.
Yes, but often it’s an uninformed decision. Prospective parents don’t always know or even think about how much daycare costs. The desire to have a family is blinding. Maybe they hope the grandparents or other family would always be there to help, etc. But it doesn’t always work out that way.
But they are a payment, which is what you initially said.
So you did not have a sense of accomplishment by getting out of it?
Regardless of what you were referring to, you said free payment. There is no such thing as a free payment, although Commies, Socialists, Progressives, and some Democrats tend to (mis)use the phrase more frequently than others.
Even with all of the money thrown at sex-ed? You’ve gotta be kidding. Maybe we should go back to societal snubbing. That seemed to have better results, and was a lot cheaper than sex-ed. 
I said it’s an unpaid job. The emotional rewards of raising children are not “a payment.”
The original argument was about people having a sense of accomplishment from doing a job, not from getting out of it.
The subject of the discussion was “The High Cost of Free Money”. I shouldn’t have to explain this, if you’re not following, that’s on you. It’s free to the recipient.
Again, there are millions Americans, mostly biological mothers, who disagree with you.
So you got no sense of accomplishment from doing the job, as a way of getting out of it? That’s how most people look at entry level, low paying (possibly minimum wage) jobs. It’s a stepping stone. If you your goal is to never get out of that job, I can understand your lack of self-worth.
Again, that’s a Vlad argument. There is no free payment. If my popcorn wasn’t ready, I’d argue that it’s also not free to the recipient, but I suspect you know that already.
Because RvW, duh! It obviously takes that choice away!
(Shhh, dont you dare mention all the choices the woman has to make to get to that point at all…)
And yet we’re the ones continuously chastized for our lack of empathy and compassion for what other’s feel…
There is something satisfying to seeing a shelf fully stocked with product, or a floor that is nice and shiny. Plenty of low-wage workers do feel accomplished when doing their jobs, no matter how hard people like scripta try to degrade them. Those are the people I tend to respect the most, because they’re generally happy and dont give a crap about what anyone else thinks.
Nope.
Cost of doing business.
And I believe it’s too high of a cost. I respect Darwin too much.
The real test is whether one is willing to, say, cut off food stamps to someone for food stamp fraud. Take their kids away and throw the fraudster in jail, or just look the other way like we do now.
Food stamps are soooo much cheaper than what we spend on jailing people.
Thats part of my UBI thinking.
I also would endorse free internet and netflix just to keep the useless people placated.
My city is currently working on spending something crazy around $40k per homless person on our local homless population. Crazy wasteful.
Thats another data point that makes me think UBI would be better.
edit to correct : 40k is city one state over, just to relocate a camp. We’re spending 50k
Depends how many fake kids they’re claiming, right? Plus you can stop paying their welfare and sec 8 too when you jail them.
I just like this as a litmus test to whether any amount of bad / criminal behavior is enough to revoke these types of benefits for the poor.
I remember when I lived in Cleveland in the early 90’s. Those were the days of cradle to grave welfare benefits. Plenty of grandmas raising children and the family staying home. It didn’t work.
People want more than just a place to live and food on the table. Once you have Netflix and internet, you want the expensive sneakers, cars, golden necklaces, etc. etc.
Yeah, something needs done with the “lost causes”. I’m pretty sure executing them wouldn’t go over well, so they’re either going to be an unbearable nuisance on everyone else or they’re going to cost some money to keep out of everyone else’s hair.
That’s all the west coast liberals care about. For decades, the homeless population wasn’t a problem for them. But now that they actually can’t avoid homeless people when they go about their daily lives in neighborhoods where they didn’t have to encounter them before, homelessness is all of a sudden a huge problem.
Gold covered dark chocolate snickers?
You think food stamps are cheaper …
Don’t forget short-fused grenades. That would be much cheaper than housing, feeding, entertaining, jailing, medicating (either way), narcanning, babysitting, etc. 
Thanks. Fixed it.