4 ms·

> The state (or the mom) sure isn’t going to volunteer to pay to raise the child if it can avoid it! Really makes you wonder what the point of the state is

lazide 3y ago
The math is simple, albeit no one wants to think about it because if they do then most people aren't interested in playing - and if people aren't playing, then Society has a big problem. 1) raising a kid is very expensive, both in time and money. 2) no one wants to pay if they don't get something out of it - or if they can get away with not paying. Which, perfectly rational. Do you decline the standard deduction when you do your taxes? Same idea. 3) the bio father in these situations is well aware he won't get anything out of it except pain and suffering from the Mom (or just flat out isn't interested), or he wouldn't have bailed. 4) the bio mother already is going to do the child raising - so she is going to put in a lot of time (and will have control). It would be pretty stupid for her to also do a ton of work to make money on top of it if she's going to do that, unless she really has no choice. 5) If someone doesn't pay/end up on the hook convincingly, then the taxpayers will end up dealing with a criminal child, or a dead/starving child, and/or a bunch of emotionally manipulative 'but he was such a good kid!' crying after someone ends up dead, which taxpayers ALSO don't like. So the state is there to make SOMEONE pay, ideally the person most easy to convince is responsible and able to do so, or alternatively whoever can pay/afford the most that they can force to do it. Because if the State ends up paying, then that means the taxpayer ends up paying. I don't know about you, but I don't want to end up paying for some idiots kid if I don't have to. I didn't even get laid! Talk about a shitty deal. Maybe that's better than the resulting crime and heart string pulling, but honestly it depends on the day. Especially if the crime and heart string pulling ends up happening ANYWAY. And if you think I'm a heartless bastard, check the budgets for these kinds of programs vs law enforcement. Near as I can tell, I'm the EMPATHETIC AND KIND ONE in the equation. It's also why in many cases, the state is actively avoiding things like making abortions more accessible, mandatory birth control, etc. etc. They need more bodies. And that.... is why large scale DNA databases are also becoming popular. Also catching 'hard' criminals, of course. The state is trying to identify 'the one who got away'. The state doesn't particularly care if the person pinned is actually responsible, as long as it can convince itself and ideally them that they are the one responsible - and can make them pay. Such is bureaucracy. Have to keep those stats looking good. The other 'big' options - no State, or an ineffective State is arguably even worse for everyone except dudes trying to get laid without the consequences. Because women will want to have sex, on average, and many will have babies even if it involves self sabotaging their birth control or the like. Same with men. Women trying to get laid without consequences usually get a pass of course (unless they get abortions or are on birth control), until after the kid shows up and they're stuck, then shame on them, tsk tsk. That way the guilt hopefully means they'll actually take care of the kid instead of pawning them off on the grandparents or abandoning them at an orphanage to go have fun. You're welcome. Now ideally, the Mother has enough emotional regulation and self control to only have sex with men who are responsible, loyal, provider types - or that can be convinced they are the only ones she is having sex with anyway. Since birth control is not perfect, and 'surprises' are exactly what lead into this type of situation. Dudes will of course do their damnest to have sex with her anyway if they can. And can integrate him into the experience so he can see that he IS getting something - someone he can help mould, that will care about him in his older age and help him succeed, that will be loyal, carry his line forward, etc. And can use that to get him to not only support the child, but work hard to support everyone while she spends the time and energy necessary for the child to grow healthy, and succeed. And support her later when she's less sexy and life is harder, and his 'value' is now higher than hers. Easier said than done. But that's been the ideal 'deal'. Sometimes, it even happened (or happens).

lazide 3y ago

The math is simple, albeit no one wants to think about it because if they do then most people aren't interested in playing - and if people aren't playing, then Society has a big problem. 1) raising a kid is very expensive, both in time and money. 2) no one wants to pay if they don't get something out of it - or if they can get away with not paying. Which, perfectly rational. Do you decline the standard deduction when you do your taxes? Same idea. 3) the bio father in these situations is well aware he won't get anything out of it except pain and suffering from the Mom (or just flat out isn't interested), or he wouldn't have bailed. 4) the bio mother already is going to do the child raising - so she is going to put in a lot of time (and will have control). It would be pretty stupid for her to also do a ton of work to make money on top of it if she's going to do that, unless she really has no choice. 5) If someone doesn't pay/end up on the hook convincingly, then the taxpayers will end up dealing with a criminal child, or a dead/starving child, and/or a bunch of emotionally manipulative 'but he was such a good kid!' crying after someone ends up dead, which taxpayers ALSO don't like. So the state is there to make SOMEONE pay, ideally the person most easy to convince is responsible and able to do so, or alternatively whoever can pay/afford the most that they can force to do it. Because if the State ends up paying, then that means the taxpayer ends up paying. I don't know about you, but I don't want to end up paying for some idiots kid if I don't have to. I didn't even get laid! Talk about a shitty deal. Maybe that's better than the resulting crime and heart string pulling, but honestly it depends on the day. Especially if the crime and heart string pulling ends up happening ANYWAY. And if you think I'm a heartless bastard, check the budgets for these kinds of programs vs law enforcement. Near as I can tell, I'm the EMPATHETIC AND KIND ONE in the equation. It's also why in many cases, the state is actively avoiding things like making abortions more accessible, mandatory birth control, etc. etc. They need more bodies. And that.... is why large scale DNA databases are also becoming popular. Also catching 'hard' criminals, of course. The state is trying to identify 'the one who got away'. The state doesn't particularly care if the person pinned is actually responsible, as long as it can convince itself and ideally them that they are the one responsible - and can make them pay. Such is bureaucracy. Have to keep those stats looking good. The other 'big' options - no State, or an ineffective State is arguably even worse for everyone except dudes trying to get laid without the consequences. Because women will want to have sex, on average, and many will have babies even if it involves self sabotaging their birth control or the like. Same with men. Women trying to get laid without consequences usually get a pass of course (unless they get abortions or are on birth control), until after the kid shows up and they're stuck, then shame on them, tsk tsk. That way the guilt hopefully means they'll actually take care of the kid instead of pawning them off on the grandparents or abandoning them at an orphanage to go have fun. You're welcome. Now ideally, the Mother has enough emotional regulation and self control to only have sex with men who are responsible, loyal, provider types - or that can be convinced they are the only ones she is having sex with anyway. Since birth control is not perfect, and 'surprises' are exactly what lead into this type of situation. Dudes will of course do their damnest to have sex with her anyway if they can. And can integrate him into the experience so he can see that he IS getting something - someone he can help mould, that will care about him in his older age and help him succeed, that will be loyal, carry his line forward, etc. And can use that to get him to not only support the child, but work hard to support everyone while she spends the time and energy necessary for the child to grow healthy, and succeed. And support her later when she's less sexy and life is harder, and his 'value' is now higher than hers. Easier said than done. But that's been the ideal 'deal'. Sometimes, it even happened (or happens).