Right to Life?

1. 70

   Kathleen Cochranposted 22 months ago

   From the Washington Post:
   
   On Tuesday, the Census Bureau released data showing that the rate of child poverty more than doubled to 12.4 percent in 2022, from a record low of 5.2 percent the previous year. Five million kids fell into poverty.
   
   
   This wasn’t the fault of parents. Congress did it by refusing to reauthorize the payments of up to $300 per child each month under President Biden’s expanded child tax credit. The expiration of other benefits provided during the pandemic made things worse.
   
   On the same day, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) had an important announcement to make. In a more humane world, he might have addressed this dramatic turnaround in the lives of children. You’d think that a party committed to rolling back abortion rights would want to demonstrate that its dedication to life extends to children after they are born.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Credence2posted 22 months agoin reply to this

      They are not and never have been. A Total red herring, the Republican hypocrisy in this matter.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         wildernessposted 22 months agoin reply to this

         Are you equating a refusal to allow murder to forcing people to give charity to the parents of any children?  Do one you must do the other or be a hypocrite?
         
         I'm not quite following the logic here, particularly as a great many of those receiving CTC are already getting charity in many forms - enough to get by fine and better than many.

         replyreport
         1. 82

            Credence2posted 22 months agoin reply to this

            If you are pro baby or pro child, as the Republicans are trying to rebrand the issue, you would have to have at least much concern about the welfare of newborns as you do about the fate of a zygote, in my opinion.
            
            I will need to evaluate the CTC, but I speak of overriding principles.

            replyreport
   2. 82

      Sharlee01posted 22 months agoin reply to this

      Could you be more explicit in regard to "Congress did it by refusing to reauthorize the payments of up to $300 per child each month under President Biden’s expanded child tax credit." Just not sure what you are advocating.
      
      Do you feel this should be a permanent law? To resemble a social program, such as Social Security for children?

      replyreport
      1. 77

         wildernessposted 22 months agoin reply to this

         It appears to me that if we don't pay parents to take care of their kids, in addition to feeding them, housing them, educating them, providing day care, providing medical care  etc. etc. then we are at fault when the poverty ceiling is raised and, in theory, children are poverty stricken as a result.
         
         So yes, it appears that handouts to anyone with children are necessary and should be a new permanent program.  In today's world, with all responsibility for everyone shifted to government rather than the people, it makes perfect sense.

         replyreport
         1. 82

            Sharlee01posted 22 months agoin reply to this

            This would be one more step closer to socialism, is it not? Plus, it is well known that Social Security funds are just about gone. How would this kind of social problem be paid for? I would assume taxpayers.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               wildernessposted 22 months agoin reply to this

               Future taxpayers, for it will have to be borrowed.

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Sharlee01posted 22 months agoin reply to this

                  Yes, did not think that

                  replyreport
               2. 60

                  Willowarborposted 22 months agoin reply to this

                  I think that the intention of the original post was to highlight the hypocrisy in caring for the well-being of the zygote but not the fully physically manifested human.  The bump in the child tax credit helped to lift a good number of children out of poverty. That would seem to matter to those who care about the well being of children.  It's concerning to me when folks change their perspective or rationale from case to case. The inconsistencies don't make for a convincing argument. You know you either have a coherent, consistent ideology or you don't.  Here's a thought, the huge tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% and corporations are socialism.

                  replyreport
                  1. 77

                     wildernessposted 22 months agoin reply to this

                     Yes, I think that the intention was to compare murder with giving money to parents of children, supposedly improving their well being.
                     
                     As it was comparing apples to oranges it didn't make much sense.

                     replyreport
         2. 67

            lobobrandonposted 22 months agoin reply to this

            Germany has been doing that for ages and there are absolutely no problems with that. Kids are the future tax payers. It is but capitalistic to invest money wisely.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Willowarborposted 22 months agoin reply to this

               You make complete sense, total common sense. But in this country, we would much rather perpetuate our problems.  It assures continued political fodder.  Americans prefer this to any actual solutions.  If we came together and solved real problems, how could we retain our bitter  partisanship?  Party, above all else has become the mantra here in America. Party tells you what to think, what to say and what to feel.  It certainly doesn't help that our intelligence level is a bit low here, so far too many Americans really don't even understand the complex  issues set before them. We like fast easy binary choices.

               replyreport
               1. 77

                  wildernessposted 22 months agoin reply to this

                  "If we came together and solved real problems, how could we retain our bitter  partisanship?  Party, above all else has become the mantra here in America. Party tells you what to think, what to say and what to feel."
                  
                  This is absolutely true.  Unfortunately the rest of the post is just nonsense.

                  replyreport
            2. 77

               wildernessposted 22 months agoin reply to this

               No, it is the socialist way to force taxpayers to offer charity.

               replyreport
            3. 82

               Sharlee01posted 22 months agoin reply to this

               After conducting some research, I've come across several issues facing Germany, including high taxation rates, significant homelessness statistics, immigration challenges, overall poverty, and alarming hunger statistics. Do you think that the implementation of liberal policies has played a role in exacerbating these problems? Could the adoption of socialist principles be influencing the psyche of German society and potentially doing more harm than good for its citizens?

               replyreport