Why it is irresponsible, illogical, immoral, & selfish for the poorer American c

1. 85

   gmwilliamsposted 8 years ago

   Why it is irresponsible, illogical, immoral, & selfish for the poorer American classes to even
   
   consider having children when there are overwhelming odds stacked against them in terms of  intellectual/ mental/emotional/psychological development; nutrition, medical/health/dental care, academic/educational opportunities, & job/career attainment?  Studies have substantiated that poorer children have inferior quality nutrition & medical care. Their brains have impaired functioning as a result of the poor nutrition and the lack of intellectual stimulation in the home. They also tend to be behind academically which has a negative impact upon future educational & job/career opportunities.
   
   

   replyreport
2. 78

   Say Yes To Lifeposted 8 years ago

   According to what I've noticed, poor people usually don't have the knowledge to consider such things.  It's often not even a decision; life "just happens".  My pastor in Seattle told me his father, as a farmer, realized he could make only so much money, and so based his life decisions that way.  My pastor was one of 4 children; though they weren't rich, they lived good lives.  When I tell people this, they look at me funny; it's as if you're not supposed to consider such things when having a family.
   Though I didn't grow up poor (though my folks were always complaining about lack of money), I did come from an extremely negative environment.  It is for that reason I chose not to have kids.  People look at me funny when I say that, too.  Even my own brother does, though he has kids, and on some level, regrets it.
   People of ALL income levels and backgrounds need to be educated on what's involved in becoming parents, and really give the matter thought.  The Cherokee Native Americans planned for seven generations into the future when they married.  Many people of this day and age don't even think about themselves, let alone their children or descendants!

   replyreport
3. 85

   gmwilliamsposted 8 years ago

   
   
   The lower socioeconomic classes exist in a culture of instant & immediate gratification.  They are only concerned of the here & now.  They are furthermore concerned with their immediate wants.  Their premise is I want what I want w/o any concerns for future consequences.   The lower socioeconomic classes have no concern nor thought about the future.  Their main emphasis is always immediate.
   
   The lower socioeconomic classes have no concept of the future because their existence is highly tenuous, even precarious.  If they survive the next day, or even the next minute unscathed, they consider that an accomplishment.  The lower socioeconomic classes have a more instinctive mindset, mentality, & philosophy than those in the more affluent socioeconomic classes.   They view struggle, impoverishment, & even penury as acceptable, even normative lifestyles.   They "reason" that if they can live that day, so can their children.
   
   Many lower socioeconomic classes just have children.  They do not plan, organize, & strategize regarding having children as the more affluent socioeconomic classes do.  They contend what is good enough for them, is good enough for their children, pure & simple.  It really does not bother them that their children will have little or no life opportunities-NOT IN THE LEAST.  They consider such to be normative & expected.  In fact, they are of the school that socioeconomic deprivation builds children's character & "make them hardened, tough."  They may even rationalize this, saying that they are far superior to the affluent classes "who are soft".

   replyreport