Jump to content

Should people who receive welfare be forced to undergo mandatory sterilization?


2pointslow

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i think if you have been on welfare for more than 5 years you should, if you are just going through a temporary rough spell then no, but if you don't plan on ever getting a decent job then yes you should.

 

5 years? No, you should only be allowed to have 1 kid while on welfare and it has to be within the 1st year. After 2 years, mandatory abortion and then after 3 years sterilization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but drug tests should be mandatory.

 

x2

 

I don't agree with recipients popping out one kid after another, and I know a lot of them could care less about the kids they have, but after becoming a father this year I could never have it in my heart to deny somebody else that joy. This is The Kitchen, and that may have sounded gay as fuck, but it's how I really feel. Nothing at all that I've ever experienced in my life can compare to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 years? No, you should only be allowed to have 1 kid while on welfare and it has to be within the 1st year. After 2 years, mandatory abortion and then after 3 years sterilization.

 

So you're advocating population control through mandatory abortion? That's probably the best solution. "We could just cut off your assistance and force you to work and pay your own bills, but instead we're just going to kill your unborn children for the next year and then sterilize you."

 

:dumb:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The drug test thing sounds good, but the way the would do/are doing it will just end up costing tax payers more. They get a notice in plenty of time to pass the test themselves and if they don't stop using long enough to pass the test, alternative clean piss is easy to come by. Tax payers will be the ones paying for the test. If the test is failed, all the welfare recipient would have to say is they have a drug problem, from there, we as tax payers, would fund their trip to rehab and the drug test after. Then just continue paying for their welfare
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My neighbor is ballin.......she has 4 kids single mom (29) , living in an apt thats overlooking the ocean (2,000) , goes to sdsu fulltime, only works part time on base, drives a bmw suv. Invites all the neighbors over every ppv fight, bbq, beer, herbs. She works on fucking base at the 7day store......you can even look online its 10 bucks an hour.........How is this shit even possible?! They need to give this bitch some Yaz before the state gets her a lambo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My neighbor is ballin.......she has 4 kids single mom (29) , living in an apt thats overlooking the ocean (2,000) , goes to sdsu fulltime, only works part time on base, drives a bmw suv. Invites all the neighbors over every ppv fight, bbq, beer, herbs. She works on fucking base at the 7day store......you can even look online its 10 bucks an hour.........How is this shit even possible?! They need to give this bitch some Yaz before the state gets her a lambo.

 

Hooker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but drug tests should be mandatory.

 

In Florida this was shown to be extremely costly to taxpayers. Fewer than 3% of welfare recipients ended up being denied welfare due to failed drug tests, and the state had to reimburse those who passed the tests. It ended up costing the state significantly more to reimburse people than they saved by denying benefits to drug users.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us/no-savings-found-in-florida-welfare-drug-tests.html?_r=0

 

I understand the concept and the purpose of denying benefits to drug users, but this is obviously not a cost-effective way of doing it.

 

 

 

As for sterilization, everyone should be sterilized in a reversible fashion at birth or in youth. When you reach 18, you must pass a test. That test would include things like:

 

-drug screen

-how to develop and stick to a budget

-understanding credit cards and debt

-how to care for a child

-are you employed/employable?

-mental fitness test

 

if you're able to meet a certain baseline, congrats! you can reproduce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Florida this was shown to be extremely costly to taxpayers. Fewer than 3% of welfare recipients ended up being denied welfare due to failed drug tests, and the state had to reimburse those who passed the tests. It ended up costing the state significantly more to reimburse people than they saved by denying benefits to drug users.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us/no-savings-found-in-florida-welfare-drug-tests.html?_r=0

 

I understand the concept and the purpose of denying benefits to drug users, but this is obviously not a cost-effective way of doing it.

 

Easy fix don't reimburse them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...