Out-of-wedlock child birth is the new norm

[Loves Vintage]

Looks like it's more like 50% on average, but yes, some states as high as 69%. http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/births-financed-by-medicaid/ I googled it because I couldn't believe it. I would have guessed 10%! I guess I really have no idea.

 

[Laila619]

Anyone making assumptions and judging unmarried parents can kiss my pregnant, unmarried a$$.

Ew, you pathetic welfare abuser!


Omg! Urse!!!!!! You're preggo!!!! Congratulations! Tell us more!

Forgot to insert my sarcastic emoti between the comments, oops.

Oh, don't worry madelise, your meaning was clear even without the emoti. Thanks for the well wishes! I'm 22 weeks along, doing well, and both I and the baby girl are healthy so far. The father and I are in a committed relationship but are choosing not to get married for our own reasons. We are professionals in our thirties. Our situation is probably not the typical demographic of unwed parents, but some of the responses in this thread made me so angry that I had to say something. I very much appreciate all of the people who have posted pointing out the sweeping judgements and false generalizations that have been stated here.

Urseberry, I know it's probably too personal, but can you maybe share why you don't ever plan to marry him? You were married before, right? Do you live together? Please don't answer if you don't feel comfortable, I'm genuinely just curious. Congrats again on your daughter, I posted to you on the other thread when you first announced.

 

[Rhea]

My husband's parents never married. They've been together for over 35 years and just never did it. The pregnancy was unexpected, but they live together, raised their son together, and own a business together. I think it's dangerous to assume that an out of wedlock birth means a single, struggling mother on welfare. My husband was raised in a two parent household with parents who are still together and afforded him an incredible education my married parents could only dream of for their children. I understand that may not be the norm of what an out of wedlock birth is, but times are changing and people don't feel the need to do something just because society once deemed it to be the only way. DH's parents worried over us getting married, although I don't think it's that they don't believe in or like marriage, just that they never thought to consider it.

 

[liaerfbv]

Hi,

This has been discussed before. Seventy percent of ALL births in the U.S. are paid for by Medicaid. That means the taxpayer is paying for most of the babes born in the US. I very much like Niel, but would like to ask if she or her boyfriend had insurance so that they could pay for their decision. I doubt it.

That's pretty **edited by moderator, no swearing please** rude, honestly.



We defund Planned Parenthood, restrict accurate sex education for children (it's PROVEN that abstinence only doesn't work), legislate as much as we can to keep access to birth control low, restrict abortion access - seriously make it damn near impossible for some women to terminate pregnancies, THEN we ask judgmental questions about her health insurance status, THEN judge her for being a single mom who may need government assistance!

ARE YOU KIDDING ME.

 

[aljdewey]

I'm not talking about couples who live together but are unmarried, I'm talking about single women whose significant others do not live with them.

So perhaps the thread would have been better named "non cohabitating co-parents instead of out-of-wedlock".....?

It is FREAKIN' HARD when you have to be up for the day in two hours and the baby has slept for approximately 33 minutes all night, and dad is off at his place chilling and catching some sleep. And I'm sure someone will come along shortly and say "that could happen with a married couple if the dad doesn't help" etc. Not as likely.

I couldn't disagree with this more.....most of the moms I know (who are overwhelming married and living under same roof) cite lack of partner involvement/initiative as the single biggest frustration they face. In most cases, one parent (normally the mom, but not always) is viewed as the 'default responsibility' party, while the other views him/herself as 'helping', not truly co-responsible.

 

[Rhea]

Hi,

This has been discussed before. Seventy percent of ALL births in the U.S. are paid for by Medicaid. That means the taxpayer is paying for most of the babes born in the US. I very much like Niel, but would like to ask if she or her boyfriend had insurance so that they could pay for their decision. I doubt it.

That's pretty **edited by moderator, no swearing please** rude, honestly.



We defund Planned Parenthood, restrict accurate sex education for children (it's PROVEN that abstinence only doesn't work), legislate as much as we can to keep access to birth control low, restrict abortion access - seriously make it damn near impossible for some women to terminate pregnancies, THEN we ask judgmental questions about her health insurance status, THEN judge her for being a single mom who may need government assistance!

ARE YOU KIDDING ME.

Thanks for this. I went to respond a couple of times and gave up out of frustration. You covered my feelings exactly!

 

[OreoRosies86]

Hi,

This has been discussed before. Seventy percent of ALL births in the U.S. are paid for by Medicaid. That means the taxpayer is paying for most of the babes born in the US. I very much like Niel, but would like to ask if she or her boyfriend had insurance so that they could pay for their decision. I doubt it.

That's pretty **edited by moderator, no swearing please** rude, honestly.



We defund Planned Parenthood, restrict accurate sex education for children (it's PROVEN that abstinence only doesn't work), legislate as much as we can to keep access to birth control low, restrict abortion access - seriously make it damn near impossible for some women to terminate pregnancies, THEN we ask judgmental questions about her health insurance status, THEN judge her for being a single mom who may need government assistance!

ARE YOU KIDDING ME.

Yes to all this. PREACH.

 

[Niel]

To answer your question I was working while I was in school and after graduation so i had a full time job with benifits. I paid for my insurance, as well as my daughter's.

I also paid for the thousands of dollars of out of pocket expenses my insurance did not cover.

 

[aljdewey]

....can you maybe share why you don't ever plan to marry him? You were married before, right? Do you live together? Please don't answer if you don't feel comfortable, I'm genuinely just curious.

I can't answer for Urseberry, but I can offer a related opinion.

Marriage is not the be-all, end-all for everyone. It is not one-size-fits-all. There are a multitude of reasons why some folks don't pursue marriage, and they aren't all 'bad experience' motivated. Yes, some have witnesses acrimonious unions, some have personally endured negative outcomes, but some also just don't feel it's necessary, and some flat-out don't believe in the institution itself.

The reasons for not marrying can be as varied as the reasons for marrying.

I can respect that some folks tremendously value marriage - in fact, I'm one of them when it's done right. But I don't ascribe to marriage for the mere sake of it, or because it matters to others, or because it's seen as more morally acceptable to others. I don't ascribe to the notion that it's the only successful framework for raising stable, healthy children.

ETA: In my very humble opinion, it's a fallacy to think that marriage itself somehow bestows a magical feeling of personal responsibility upon parents. The sole significant impact I see legal marriage having on parenting is to empower government to pursue those who *don't* already have a personal sense of responsibility and hold them financially responsible (which as pointed out earlier was the primary impetus for legal marriage at inception - to hold someone legally/financially accountable to support their children).

 

[Arcadian]

I had to erase several responses to this thread.

yep....

Some of you should never come outside of your glass houses.

 

[GK2]

Having a newborn is a very tiring, life-changing experience. I'm not sure some of these single women (note I said SOME) realize how hard it is when they decide to do it alone. I'm not talking about couples who live together but are unmarried, I'm talking about single women whose significant others do not live with them. It is FREAKIN' HARD when you have to be up for the day in two hours and the baby has slept for approximately 33 minutes all night, and dad is off at his place chilling and catching some sleep. And I'm sure someone will come along shortly and say "that could happen with a married couple if the dad doesn't help" etc. Not as likely. Having another person there to take turns and spell each other when things get hairy can be a real lifesaver. People can do whatever they want (as long as it's legal/ethical). I just don't understand why someone would want to do it alone. Not my choice, not my business, I get it. Just wanted to have a conversation about it.

And what about the hundreds of thousands of military wives who are married and have a child but their husbands are gone for a year at a time? Do you propose they not have kids since they can't both be there to raise the kid, even though they are married? Once again, your assumption that "wedlock" is the be all, end all is incorrect.

Nope, totally different situation.

I'm sorry, but please can you explain why - in your view- it's a totally different situation? Or have I missed your workings out somewhere?

 

[liaerfbv]

Yes to all this. PREACH.

It just honestly baffles me that conservatives do not see the repercussions of the laws they pass. If you don't want your taxpayer dollars to go toward supporting single parents "who made bad choices" and "won't get married" -- HELP US EDUCATE TEENAGERS ON HOW TO HAVE SAFE SEX. Give away condoms! Give away birth control! Open healthcare clinics on every corner where girls/boys feel safe to go and ask questions! Help women who are in crisis terminate pregnancies when they cannot care for the babies, pass legislation to cut through all of the damn unnecessary red tape on adoptions so people can afford to adopt!

If you are voting for candidates (local, state, or national) who vote against these and other similar measures, YOU ARE PART OF THE "WELFARE" PROBLEM.

Maybe there would even be more people for whom it would make financial sense to get married if there WAS an unintended pregnancy, if that's important to you. Sheesh.

(Okay, I'm really done ranting now. I think. Maybe. )

 

[momhappy]

For what it's worth, all that matters to me is if a child is born into a healthy environment (and by "healthy" I mean: happy, stable, etc.). I don't really care if a child comes from an unmarried couple, a single parent, etc. as long as they are raised in a loving, supportive environment.

 

[urseberry]

Urseberry, I know it's probably too personal, but can you maybe share why you don't ever plan to marry him? You were married before, right? Do you live together? Please don't answer if you don't feel comfortable, I'm genuinely just curious. Congrats again on your daughter, I posted to you on the other thread when you first announced.

My partner and I do live together. We don't plan to get married in the foreseeable future. I haven't completely ruled it out. At this time, I don't find it necessary to get married. I'm a little gun-shy after my divorce, too. It made me question pretty much everything, and think deeply about what I really want and need. Trust and commitment, yes. A wedding and legal marriage, no. We will have to do some additional paperwork to get some of the legal benefits that normally come automatically with marriage. Interestingly, in our current tax bracket, we will have a smaller overall income tax burden if we stay unmarried.

 

[maccers]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

 

[Niel]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

Wouldn't that be nice. With my daughter I paid out of pocket, for prenatal and labor, about 5 grand, and that's me rounding down

 

[maccers]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

Wouldn't that be nice. With my daughter I paid out of pocket, for prenatal and labor, about 5 grand, and that's me rounding down

I can't imagine how different life would be to have to factor in that kind of expense. And that's assuming you and baby have a routine delivery. Our little stay in the hospital might have cost tens of thousands? Or over 100K? I have no way of knowing. Do people put off going to the hospital or delay going because they want to minimize the expense?

Eta: sorry for taking this way off the original topic.

 

[GK2]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

Maccers - I couldn't agree more. I'm in the UK so for me the non provision of free for all healthcare is anathema as is the judgement on people who have to seek assistance or who choose not to make things official. Of course, I'm assuming that the OP includes married gay couples in her original statement

Are there people who know how to play the system in the UK? Of course, but I don't begrudge anyone anything. That's why I happily pay my taxes because should anything happen to me, I want to know the system will help me survive until I'm in a position to contribute again.

There are some jaw dropping opinions expressed on this thread. No wonder there are so many of us in the UK and Europe wondering what will happen in November...

 

[liaerfbv]

There are some jaw dropping opinions expressed on this thread. No wonder there are so many of us in the UK and Europe wondering what will happen in November...

Trust me, there are plenty of us in the US who are also wondering (I mean worrying).

 

[Niel]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

Wouldn't that be nice. With my daughter I paid out of pocket, for prenatal and labor, about 5 grand, and that's me rounding down

I can't imagine how different life would be to have to factor in that kind of expense. And that's assuming you and baby have a routine delivery. Our little stay in the hospital might have cost tens of thousands? Or over 100K? I have no way of knowing. Do people put off going to the hospital or delay going because they want to minimize the expense?

Eta: sorry for taking this way off the original topic.

My labor was induced, took about 30sum hours, then they had to monitor my daughter for 48 hours becuase of something or another. All together we spend 4-5 days in the hospital. But no nicu or anything.

Interestingly enough, my epidural I had for her cost me out of pocket 1k. I decided I couldn't afford that with our second and went natural (up until the emergency c section, obviously)

I feel like that's a decision a woman shouldn't have to make based on finances. (I say this having has 2 9lb 8 oz babies lol)

 

[AdaBeta27]

I'm not really sure the point you were trying to make here, other than offering a repeat of your blatantly uninformed opinion. I am not on government assistance, my friends aren't on government assistance, I do not work in a field related to government assistance - I merely hold the (informed) opinion that the majority of people on welfare programs are not in fact receiving a living wage that replaces income they would earn at a job. Claiming otherwise really just makes it look like you don't know how to Google something.

There will always be exceptions to a rule, and there will always be situations where someone might lose or gain disposable income related to benefits they qualify for, but again, I'm talking about the majority of people receiving benefits. As to paying taxes on subsidies received (unrelated to government benefits received), if you are living at or below the federal poverty limit for your family size, you are eligible for deductions and credits. Do you take tax deductions? Why are your tax deductions somehow more "proper" than tax deductions taken by lower income families?

Pardon me if I think that the person who wrote that just can't see the actual conditions of the region that I live in. (Read that as "Don't call me stupid, Dearie. I consider you the utterly clueless one.") In reply to the first paragraph quoted: I live in a Rust Belt community, in a quasi-rural area that has lost virtually all of the well-paying jobs in metals, automobile industry, components for automobiles, banking. Even education and med have taken severe hits in the past 10 years due to massive consolidation and closure of facilities and layoffs in the local healthcare industry, and school closures and teacher and staff layoffs due to aging population and outward migration. Per the most current U.S. Census figures available online, the % of the adult population over age 25 who have college degrees ranges 8% to 16% depending on what community you look at. Females in mine gross $20,000 per year, and males gross $25,000 per year. There is NO WAY that the average high school grad or dropout or G.E.D. single mom in this town can get a better deal than the government. Those $25,000/year males aren't looking to get married or support kids. The average hourly rate for males in the industries here is about $13/hr, but there is downward pressure to get that reduced to more like $10. Millwrights and electricians and other prized maintenance people can earn a lot more due to $19/hr base rates plus much OT. Lots of jobs here are only part-time and are retail and other services that pay minwage to $10/hr, offer no benefits, and are very unstable and variable in the number of hours scheduled per week.
Houses, well one can buy houses in these towns for $45,000 for a nice well-maintained estate-sale house down to maybe $9,000 or $10,000 for something that, with a little patchup, will do nicely for Section 8 rental work.
So, I do know quite a bit about how the lower gradients live, and where their money comes from, and how they work the system, and how they decimate neighborhoods. I am literally almost surrounded by them. I definitely will not be living the rest of my life in this cesspool of a town, surrounded by crackpot losers.

In response to the second paragraph: When the number of losers outnumbers the number of decent people in a neighborhood, then even the do-gooders pack up their tents and leave.

 

[Maria D]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

Wouldn't that be nice. With my daughter I paid out of pocket, for prenatal and labor, about 5 grand, and that's me rounding down

Without any advance planning or forethought, my husband and I happened to be permanent residents of Canada when birth controlled failed and I got pregnant. Our out-of-pocket costs for pre- and post-natal care, labor, delivery and pediatric care were of course $0. At the time, I didn't even know that wasn't the norm in the US - I thought all medical insurance policies completely covered pregnancy & childbirth. It wasn't until a (US) friend complained to me that she had to go back to work earlier than she wanted in order to pay all the hospital bills that I realized this wasn't true. In contrast, I got maternity leave pay for 6 months (I think you get a year now). And not because I worked for some great progressive company, but because it is mandated by the Canadian government.

For whatever **edited by moderator, no swearing please** up reason, Americans believe that it's ok for things like education, highway infrastructure, parks & recreation, water & sewer, etc. to be funded through taxpayer dollars. But not health care. Health care is for people who deserve it by working hard at the "right" place or who marry someone who is doing that or who are born wealthy.

So that kid we had in Canada ended up growing up in the US after we moved back, but then chose to go to university in Canada. Again without any planning or forethought, DH and I saved tens of thousands of tuition dollars because the cost of an excellent education there is a fraction of what it costs here. She graduated and is staying in Canada for the foreseeable future. She might have to sponsor us to come back after President Trump's inauguration.

 

[kenny]

I feel so sad and disillusioned that there isn't free universal healthcare in the US. I can't stand the mentality of 'you are on welfare and I am paying for you. You don't deserve healthcare and therefore you should act accordingly'. I live in Canada, so things like labour and delivery are covered. When my daughter was born, she was in the Nicu 10 days, I was in the hospital 7 days and it was free. Yes, I pay taxes, work full time as does my husband, and we both feel that everyone deserves the same care whether they're on social assistance or not. It's a human right. This thread blows my mind.

Wouldn't that be nice. With my daughter I paid out of pocket, for prenatal and labor, about 5 grand, and that's me rounding down

Without any advance planning or forethought, my husband and I happened to be permanent residents of Canada when birth controlled failed and I got pregnant. Our out-of-pocket costs for pre- and post-natal care, labor, delivery and pediatric care were of course $0. At the time, I didn't even know that wasn't the norm in the US - I thought all medical insurance policies completely covered pregnancy & childbirth. It wasn't until a (US) friend complained to me that she had to go back to work earlier than she wanted to pay all the hospital bills that I realized this wasn't true. In contrast, I got maternity leave pay for 6 months (I think you get a year now). And not because I worked for some great progressive company, but because it is mandated by the Canadian government.

For whatever ****ed up reason, Americans believe that it's ok for things like education, highway infrastructure, parks & recreation, water & sewer, etc. to be funded through taxpayer dollars. But not health care. Health care is for people who deserve it by working hard at the "right" place or who marry someone who is doing that or who are born wealthy.

So that kid we had in Canada ended up growing up in the US after we moved back, but then chose to go to university in Canada. Again without any planning or forethought, DH and I saved tens of thousands of tuition dollars because the cost of an excellent education there is a fraction of what it costs here. She graduated and is staying in Canada for the foreseeable future. She might have to sponsor us to come back after President Trump's inauguration.

America is for and by rich people.
Fvck everyone else.

 

[Maria D]

I'm not really sure the point you were trying to make here, other than offering a repeat of your blatantly uninformed opinion. I am not on government assistance, my friends aren't on government assistance, I do not work in a field related to government assistance - I merely hold the (informed) opinion that the majority of people on welfare programs are not in fact receiving a living wage that replaces income they would earn at a job. Claiming otherwise really just makes it look like you don't know how to Google something.

There will always be exceptions to a rule, and there will always be situations where someone might lose or gain disposable income related to benefits they qualify for, but again, I'm talking about the majority of people receiving benefits. As to paying taxes on subsidies received (unrelated to government benefits received), if you are living at or below the federal poverty limit for your family size, you are eligible for deductions and credits. Do you take tax deductions? Why are your tax deductions somehow more "proper" than tax deductions taken by lower income families?

Pardon me if I think that the person who wrote that just can't see the actual conditions of the region that I live in. (Read that as "Don't call me stupid, Dearie. I consider you the utterly clueless one.") In reply to the first paragraph quoted: I live in a Rust Belt community, in a quasi-rural area that has lost virtually all of the well-paying jobs in metals, automobile industry, components for automobiles, banking. Even education and med have taken severe hits in the past 10 years due to massive consolidation and closure of facilities and layoffs in the local healthcare industry, and school closures and teacher and staff layoffs due to aging population and outward migration. Per the most current U.S. Census figures available online, the % of the adult population over age 25 who have college degrees ranges 8% to 16% depending on what community you look at. Females in mine gross $20,000 per year, and males gross $25,000 per year. There is NO WAY that the average high school grad or dropout or G.E.D. single mom in this town can get a better deal than the government. Those $25,000/year males aren't looking to get married or support kids. The average hourly rate for males in the industries here is about $13/hr, but there is downward pressure to get that reduced to more like $10. Millwrights and electricians and other prized maintenance people can earn a lot more due to $19/hr base rates plus much OT. Lots of jobs here are only part-time and are retail and other services that pay minwage to $10/hr, offer no benefits, and are very unstable and variable in the number of hours scheduled per week.
Houses, well one can buy houses in these towns for $45,000 for a nice well-maintained estate-sale house down to maybe $9,000 or $10,000 for something that, with a little patchup, will do nicely for Section 8 rental work.
So, I do know quite a bit about how the lower gradients live, and where their money comes from, and how they work the system, and how they decimate neighborhoods. I am literally almost surrounded by them. I definitely will not be living the rest of my life in this cesspool of a town, surrounded by crackpot losers.

In response to the second paragraph: When the number of losers outnumbers the number of decent people in a neighborhood, then even the do-gooders pack up their tents and leave.

Amazing that with all that crap going on you reserve your vitriol for the victims of it rather than the cause. Did the crackpot losers close the schools and move the good jobs elsewhere? Or was that the lower gradients.

 

[liaerfbv]

I'm not really sure the point you were trying to make here, other than offering a repeat of your blatantly uninformed opinion. I am not on government assistance, my friends aren't on government assistance, I do not work in a field related to government assistance - I merely hold the (informed) opinion that the majority of people on welfare programs are not in fact receiving a living wage that replaces income they would earn at a job. Claiming otherwise really just makes it look like you don't know how to Google something.

There will always be exceptions to a rule, and there will always be situations where someone might lose or gain disposable income related to benefits they qualify for, but again, I'm talking about the majority of people receiving benefits. As to paying taxes on subsidies received (unrelated to government benefits received), if you are living at or below the federal poverty limit for your family size, you are eligible for deductions and credits. Do you take tax deductions? Why are your tax deductions somehow more "proper" than tax deductions taken by lower income families?

Pardon me if I think that the person who wrote that just can't see the actual conditions of the region that I live in. (Read that as "Don't call me stupid, Dearie. I consider you the utterly clueless one.") In reply to the first paragraph quoted: I live in a Rust Belt community, in a quasi-rural area that has lost virtually all of the well-paying jobs in metals, automobile industry, components for automobiles, banking. Even education and med have taken severe hits in the past 10 years due to massive consolidation and closure of facilities and layoffs in the local healthcare industry, and school closures and teacher and staff layoffs due to aging population and outward migration. Per the most current U.S. Census figures available online, the % of the adult population over age 25 who have college degrees ranges 8% to 16% depending on what community you look at. Females in mine gross $20,000 per year, and males gross $25,000 per year. There is NO WAY that the average high school grad or dropout or G.E.D. single mom in this town can get a better deal than the government. Those $25,000/year males aren't looking to get married or support kids. The average hourly rate for males in the industries here is about $13/hr, but there is downward pressure to get that reduced to more like $10. Millwrights and electricians and other prized maintenance people can earn a lot more due to $19/hr base rates plus much OT. Lots of jobs here are only part-time and are retail and other services that pay minwage to $10/hr, offer no benefits, and are very unstable and variable in the number of hours scheduled per week.
Houses, well one can buy houses in these towns for $45,000 for a nice well-maintained estate-sale house down to maybe $9,000 or $10,000 for something that, with a little patchup, will do nicely for Section 8 rental work.
So, I do know quite a bit about how the lower gradients live, and where their money comes from, and how they work the system, and how they decimate neighborhoods. I am literally almost surrounded by them. I definitely will not be living the rest of my life in this cesspool of a town, surrounded by crackpot losers.

In response to the second paragraph: When the number of losers outnumbers the number of decent people in a neighborhood, then even the do-gooders pack up their tents and leave.

Ada, I'm sorry that you live in an area that doesn't have great job prospects, but it sounds like you're blaming the people who can't get work rather than the circumstances that caused the poor economy (whatever you think that might be). There's clearly a systemic problem and I'm sure the people in your town would also appreciate it if they had better work opportunities. However, statistically speaking, those born in a poor socioeconomic area are around 70% likely to remain the same socioeconomic circumstance their whole life. It's incredibly hard (not impossible of course) to save money when you're making $20,000 or $25,000 a year. So do we say, well, you were born poor, sucks for you, guess you can't have kids? There aren't any educational or work opportunities here for you, we recognize you don't have enough money to leave and not enough education to do anything if you manage to get out, so we'll just go ahead and sterilize you -- or force you to marry someone when you inevitably get pregnant because you're poor and stupid and don't know any better (please read that as sarcasm). No, we'll just shame you for applying for government benefits and claim you ruined the town, that definitely sounds like the most helpful solution to this problem.

I'm truly asking you - what do you think the answer is here? If all these "crackpot losers" have NO OPPORTUNITIES in their lives, as you outlined above, what the hell are they supposed to do?

 

[Haven]

For those who consider the underprivileged to be losers or crackpots, I wonder how much interaction you have had with people who find themselves in dire circumstances. And by interaction I mean more than standing in line behind someone and scoffing when they use government assistance to buy an item that you believe to be too luxurious for someone without means. (Birthday cakes are only for children of means, after all. How dare you waste your assistance on empty calories!) Do you really *know* any people who rely on government assistance for survival?

I ask because after working with underprivileged individuals for over a decade, I find it impossible to feel anything but anger towards the systemic disadvantages that keep these individuals down, compassion for the people who through no fault of their own find themselves victimized by such systems, and gratitude that I somehow managed to be born in a time and place and family that allowed me to escape such victimization.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

Niel,
Thanks for answering my question. It is true I commend you for being responsible for your decisions. When this topic turned up a while ago, I used another woman who frequented this board, also very nice, like yourself. Her husband was a PHD, in-between a teaching job at a University, and she , a college graduate, had quit her job in anticipation of their move. They were married and used Medicaid for the birth of their child. I still question that scenario.

This is not Canada, or England and while many in this country used to say,(as in my mother and her generation) "My goodness, the Gov't is giving me money to live in retirement". She was thrilled, as I am. Some peoples expectations are such that they just say I want, I want, and if you don't give me what I want, I will curse you. Water, Infrastructure, roads are all items we as a society use. Your children are your decision, not mine.

Userberry-- There are always people who can handle life outside the box. I'm sure you will consider how things are going. Legally, women and children do have protections within marriage. I actually am not really a proponent of marriage. I was divorced at ago 26 and never remarried.

And to those ultra leftist persons who are always indignant by anything they can possible lecture us about abortion, birthcontrol, and planned parenthood, I"ll say you sound irrational to me. I actually don't want a conversation with you. I'm too polite to tell you what I really think. So rant on!

Annette

 

[liaerfbv]

And to those ultra leftist persons who are always indignant by anything they can possible lecture us about abortion, birthcontrol, and planned parenthood, I"ll say you sound irrational to me. I actually don't want a conversation with you. I'm too polite to tell you what I really think. So rant on!

But clearly not too polite to assume that someone wasn't covered by health insurance when she gave birth (only due to the fact that she was unmarried), thus forcing you to bear her financial burden.