5 ms·

You and I both. How many of us would have to chip in another $10-$20 in taxes to cover those without, so a parent and his/her children can take a shit and dis

You and I both. How many of us would have to chip in another $10-$20 in taxes to cover those without, so a parent and his/her children can take a shit and dispose of it in a way that meats their commitments as appropriate?

epicureanideal 8y ago
As others have said, it's not a question of "having diapers" vs "not having diapers". It's a question of convenience for the parents to not use another cheap alternative -- cloth diapers. Also, we already have many assistance programs and I would like to understand the specifics of a situation that leaves someone without enough money to buy even disposable diapers if they're already on assistance. Further, where does it end? "I want a good brand of disposable diapers, not the cheap ones" (Note: a lot of working families are buying those cheap diapers!) "I want a $1000 stroller with an easy-collapse handle and nice tires so my kids don't get jostled as I take them over bumps in the park" "I need a subsidy for a minivan because a small car is very inconvenient with kids" "I need a subsidy for ORGANIC food, not just any food for my babies." etc. The standard could easily become more than the average US household income, without even trying hard to grow the list. Remember, it's not about ability to have any diapers at all, they're arguing that they deserve a higher standard of convenience. Meanwhile, I need to commute to work an obscene distance because NIMBYs won't allow more housing to be built, keeping me away from my children for many more hours than I would otherwise need to. But please, prioritize taxing me even more to pay for conveniences for people who are home with their kids while I work to feed mine.
- Marazan 8y ago
  It's a question of convenience for the parents to not use another cheap alternative -- cloth diapers Time spent cleaning cloth diapers is time not spent working and earning money. Being poor is expensive. Being poor means you are on an hourly wage in shift work not a salary. That means half an hour late for work means half an hour less money.
- Nition 8y ago
  > It's a question of convenience for the parents to not use another cheap alternative -- cloth diapers. I wouldn't mind a subsidy on cloth diapers to be honest. The landfill waste from disposables is insane.
  - c22 8y ago
    Or a subsidy on diaper cleaning services. Cloth diapers with a service are price-comparable to disposables currently and otherwise better in several other ways.
    - Nition 8y ago
      That'd be great for anyone who doesn't have access to a washing machine as well.
      - hycaria 8y ago
        Isn't it hand washable ?
        Nition 8y ago
        Yes, but time is always a factor. No washing machine makes it harder.
        hycaria 8y ago
        How is time a factor when you don't work ?
        Nition 8y ago
        I have to assume you've never looked after a baby full time, or your babies have been exceptionally well behaved. It's easily a full-time job, especially if you have another child already.
- c22 8y ago
  As a middle class white couple we have never had a problem affording diapers mostly because between showers, grandparents, and other middle class friends with babies, most everything else from strollers to clothing for the first two years has been provided to us for free. Perhaps another unrecognized perk of living in certain social circles?
briandear 8y ago
CHARITY. You can already give money to help the less fortunate. I don’t want to go on your taxation guilt trip.
adrr 8y ago
I'd rather my taxes go to fund paid maternity leave, free higher education, and free health care. Those are my priorities not buying someone diapers because they can't be bothered washing cloth diapers.
ImSkeptical 8y ago
I strongly disagree. I give the government enough money. If they want to give out free diapers, they should build one less fighter plane a year, or something like that. If I saw this woman, and knew she couldn't get the money to buy diapers, I'd have no problem giving her the money in a transaction that went from me to her and done. Getting the government involved is asking for more trouble. They'd need diaper inspectors, and negotiate a no bid diaper contract. Half the money would be lost, or spent on something other than diapers, and it would probably be inconvenient for her to pick up the government issue diapers.

epicureanideal 8y ago

As others have said, it's not a question of "having diapers" vs "not having diapers". It's a question of convenience for the parents to not use another cheap alternative -- cloth diapers. Also, we already have many assistance programs and I would like to understand the specifics of a situation that leaves someone without enough money to buy even disposable diapers if they're already on assistance. Further, where does it end? "I want a good brand of disposable diapers, not the cheap ones" (Note: a lot of working families are buying those cheap diapers!) "I want a $1000 stroller with an easy-collapse handle and nice tires so my kids don't get jostled as I take them over bumps in the park" "I need a subsidy for a minivan because a small car is very inconvenient with kids" "I need a subsidy for ORGANIC food, not just any food for my babies." etc. The standard could easily become more than the average US household income, without even trying hard to grow the list. Remember, it's not about ability to have any diapers at all, they're arguing that they deserve a higher standard of convenience. Meanwhile, I need to commute to work an obscene distance because NIMBYs won't allow more housing to be built, keeping me away from my children for many more hours than I would otherwise need to. But please, prioritize taxing me even more to pay for conveniences for people who are home with their kids while I work to feed mine.

Marazan 8y ago
It's a question of convenience for the parents to not use another cheap alternative -- cloth diapers Time spent cleaning cloth diapers is time not spent working and earning money. Being poor is expensive. Being poor means you are on an hourly wage in shift work not a salary. That means half an hour late for work means half an hour less money.
Nition 8y ago
> It's a question of convenience for the parents to not use another cheap alternative -- cloth diapers. I wouldn't mind a subsidy on cloth diapers to be honest. The landfill waste from disposables is insane.
- c22 8y ago
  Or a subsidy on diaper cleaning services. Cloth diapers with a service are price-comparable to disposables currently and otherwise better in several other ways.
  - Nition 8y ago
    That'd be great for anyone who doesn't have access to a washing machine as well.
    - hycaria 8y ago
      Isn't it hand washable ?
      - Nition 8y ago
        Yes, but time is always a factor. No washing machine makes it harder.
        hycaria 8y ago
        How is time a factor when you don't work ?
        Nition 8y ago
        I have to assume you've never looked after a baby full time, or your babies have been exceptionally well behaved. It's easily a full-time job, especially if you have another child already.
c22 8y ago
As a middle class white couple we have never had a problem affording diapers mostly because between showers, grandparents, and other middle class friends with babies, most everything else from strollers to clothing for the first two years has been provided to us for free. Perhaps another unrecognized perk of living in certain social circles?

briandear 8y ago

CHARITY. You can already give money to help the less fortunate. I don’t want to go on your taxation guilt trip.

adrr 8y ago

I'd rather my taxes go to fund paid maternity leave, free higher education, and free health care. Those are my priorities not buying someone diapers because they can't be bothered washing cloth diapers.

ImSkeptical 8y ago

I strongly disagree. I give the government enough money. If they want to give out free diapers, they should build one less fighter plane a year, or something like that. If I saw this woman, and knew she couldn't get the money to buy diapers, I'd have no problem giving her the money in a transaction that went from me to her and done. Getting the government involved is asking for more trouble. They'd need diaper inspectors, and negotiate a no bid diaper contract. Half the money would be lost, or spent on something other than diapers, and it would probably be inconvenient for her to pick up the government issue diapers.