In case no one has mentioned it in the prior 16 pages - OP, this is a STUPID question.

No reasonable person is talking about sterilization.

People don't start out planning to have large families on welfare, or even ever being on welfare. Stuff happens, jobs are insecure, people loose health coverage, disability and unemployment can happen to anyone.

America has had a policy of sterilizing the 'undesirables'. South Carolina is one state where the practice went wild and they are still to compensate the victims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Nevertheless I just quoted TANF data which comes from HHS. So you can try to imply things with your teen birth statistic, but when we actually look at welfare families the data is what it is: 1.7.

That's pretty close to the national average of 1.9. If you are on assistance, I would imagine you would want something close to 1 at the max.

there are many states that have fertility rates below that 1.7.

First of all, average fertility includes people who have no children at all. You have to compare families vs families. Second, you falsely assume that family size is something decided after going on welfare. By definition, anyone on TANF already has one or more children before they even start. So if the average is 1.7, most of that is probably children born before going on in the first place and a minority having additional children. Also, the average time is less than two years. The typical family is not on TANF for their entire childbearing years.

Watch the documentary "Paycheck to Paycheck" on HBO

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Nevertheless I just quoted TANF data which comes from HHS. So you can try to imply things with your teen birth statistic, but when we actually look at welfare families the data is what it is: 1.7.

That's pretty close to the national average of 1.9. If you are on assistance, I would imagine you would want something close to 1 at the max.

there are many states that have fertility rates below that 1.7.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Nevertheless I just quoted TANF data which comes from HHS. So you can try to imply things with your teen birth statistic, but when we actually look at welfare families the data is what it is: 1.7.

Not pp - Can we really believe ANY data coming out of HHS?

Yes. Can you really believe that a collection of news stories from Fox represents a balanced view of welfare?

Wouldn’t know - don’t watch it. Maybe someone who does can answer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Nevertheless I just quoted TANF data which comes from HHS. So you can try to imply things with your teen birth statistic, but when we actually look at welfare families the data is what it is: 1.7.

Not pp - Can we really believe ANY data coming out of HHS?

Yes. Can you really believe that a collection of news stories from Fox represents a balanced view of welfare?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Nevertheless I just quoted TANF data which comes from HHS. So you can try to imply things with your teen birth statistic, but when we actually look at welfare families the data is what it is: 1.7.

Not pp - Can we really believe ANY data coming out of HHS?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Nevertheless I just quoted TANF data which comes from HHS. So you can try to imply things with your teen birth statistic, but when we actually look at welfare families the data is what it is: 1.7.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

Health and Human Services numbers are not mine.

Anonymous wrote:And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

The average TANF family has 1.7 children. That does not sound as out of control as you would like to portray it. That sounds less than the national average.

And then we have the birth tourist business for citizenship:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/pregnancy/147652/chinese_moms_birthing_anchor_babies

35 years ago I met people who came to birth. Middle Eastern. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/19/alejandrina-gisselle-guzman-salazar-drug-lord-daughter_n_2333593.html

Now here is an interesting statistic. Almost 1 in 5 teen births are the 2nd child [or more] for the teen mother in 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html

If I had a magic wand I would provide better benefits to US citizens [non anchor babies], create jobs in areas with advanced training , provide incentives to bring manufacturing and tech etc back to USA. Factories [light] and service dept's in places like DC. Workplaces with daycare.

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has answered the question: Why is it either/or? Why do you keep saying we need to work on things like why we build tanks or give corporate welfare and other abuses INSTEAD OF or FIRST, BEFORE dealing with anything else?

I happen to think we need to work on ALL of the problems.

It's a legitimate question - but as long as you are clouded by partisan bias it's nothing but gamesmanship - and out of that will never come any solutions to deal with ANY of the problems.

Fine, let's stop bullshitting and get down to brass tacks.
The main thing that needs to be dealt with is the poor because they don't contribute anything to the economy (only drain it) and they don't contribute anything to society (only corrupt it) so if we get rid of these shiftless lazy criminals i.e. the poor we'll improve the country 200% - all the other problems will practically resolve themselves. The real issue is how to get rid of the poor. It's inhumane to just kill them off and its unconstitutional to just quarantine them - well...technically we do that with prisons and ghettos and its constitutional but its just too expensive to do that. The only tangible solution is to decrease their population, hence introducing laws that limit the number of children they can have since they obviously can't afford them or just outright injecting them with hormonal contraceptives. Whichever way you want to do it is fine so long as it gets done. The population of poor people in this country is growing exponentially and we simply cannot feed them all...we cannot house them all. Tanks and corporate welfare pale in comparison to problem of poverty, plain and simple.

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has answered the question: Why is it either/or? Why do you keep saying we need to work on things like why we build tanks or give corporate welfare and other abuses INSTEAD OF or FIRST, BEFORE dealing with anything else?

I happen to think we need to work on ALL of the problems.

It's a legitimate question - but as long as you are clouded by partisan bias it's nothing but gamesmanship - and out of that will never come any solutions to deal with ANY of the problems.

Because the people who want to go after welfare cost don't often want to go after corporate welfare. This suggests that their agenda is really to disparage poor people.