3 ms·

> To phase this more accurately, the second CHILD is on their own. The first child, under your scheme, is educated and receives health benefits. The second chil

by mcny 8y ago

> To phase this more accurately, the second CHILD is on their own. The first child, under your scheme, is educated and receives health benefits. The second child will receive no education and will have to suffer from any health ailments that they receive. The current status quo is bad for our society. Someone mentioned that we need means-testing as a compromise between no social safety net and a social safety net for all regardless of income. What I am proposing is a radical heartless turn that creates two classes of people: the first-born. I would like to remind you that a one-child policy is NOT my first preference. The whole thing goes away if we accept that we need to pay our share for the welfare of our children. Ideally, it won't come to this but if it does, I have faith that we will survive a shrinkage in population. It is the right thing to do (given the hand we are dealt).

selimthegrim 8y ago
Have you looked at African-American child mortality rates recently, especially in the South? Until you can convincingly promise birth visitors and prenatal care (like people got in the New Orleans projects in the forties and fifties, and no one contested that as an expenditure then), don't count on this going down easily with them.
- mcny 8y ago
  I am all for Medicare for all. I'll gladly accept any proposal better than mine. I'm not a politician. I don't have to be popular. I suspect (and it scares me a little) that a majority of the public will support this idea. If you can't afford to have one child, you certainly shouldn't have a second one. Like I said before something has to give. Either convince the taxpayer to pay for the child or you point up the money. In any case, it is cruel and inhumane to bring a child in extreme poverty in these United States.
emodendroket 8y ago
Of the various ideas you could come up with "only the rich should be allowed to have more than one child" doesn't strike me as "the right thing to do."

by mcny 8y ago

selimthegrim 8y ago

Have you looked at African-American child mortality rates recently, especially in the South? Until you can convincingly promise birth visitors and prenatal care (like people got in the New Orleans projects in the forties and fifties, and no one contested that as an expenditure then), don't count on this going down easily with them.

mcny 8y ago
I am all for Medicare for all. I'll gladly accept any proposal better than mine. I'm not a politician. I don't have to be popular. I suspect (and it scares me a little) that a majority of the public will support this idea. If you can't afford to have one child, you certainly shouldn't have a second one. Like I said before something has to give. Either convince the taxpayer to pay for the child or you point up the money. In any case, it is cruel and inhumane to bring a child in extreme poverty in these United States.

emodendroket 8y ago

Of the various ideas you could come up with "only the rich should be allowed to have more than one child" doesn't strike me as "the right thing to do."