Trump nominates Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 11337
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Vilepagan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:50 am

Bick, why don't you just make your point. I have no idea what you mean by "conferred rights".


There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:37 am

Rights given to us as citizens of the US.

I'm trying to understand if there some nuanced difference you're trying to make as it relates to the responsibility that goes along with those rights.

My intent is to find a foundation to have a productive discussion by finding what we can agree upon. Looking back at all the various discussions, it's clear there are volumes of disagreements. I'm trying to find out why. No judgement.

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 11337
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Vilepagan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:03 am

Well, you speak of rights that are "given to us' and I would speak of rights we have as citizens of this country. IMO, rights aren't "given" or "granted" by anyone or anything, they are our birthright as citizens of this country and we are born with them regardless of any action or inaction by another party.

As to "responsibility", I've given you my opinion of that, but perhaps you could provide an example or two of these "responsibilities" you speak of.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

crayegg
Oversight Committee
Posts: 3963
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:13 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby crayegg » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:22 am

I'll give it a shot.

We have the right of free speech. But it comes with the responsibility not to falsely shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

:2cents:

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:29 am

Vilepagan wrote:Source of the post Well, you speak of rights that are "given to us' and I would speak of rights we have as citizens of this country. IMO, rights aren't "given" or "granted" by anyone or anything, they are our birthright as citizens of this country and we are born with them regardless of any action or inaction by another party.

As to "responsibility", I've given you my opinion of that, but perhaps you could provide an example or two of these "responsibilities" you speak of.


We are in agreement with your first statement. As US citizens we've got those rights either by birth or naturalization. Changes to those rights should require changes to the constitution.

Cray's example of the responsibility that goes with the right of free speech is a good one. Freedom of speech lately is a pretty good topic. I believe there are groups that actively work against this right.

As it relates to a woman's rights to her body, I believe she alone has the responsibility to raise the child or pay for the abortion if she engages in activities that lead to the consequence of an unwanted pregnancy. Do you agree?

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 11337
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Vilepagan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:57 am

Bick wrote:Source of the post Cray's example of the responsibility that goes with the right of free speech is a good one. Freedom of speech lately is a pretty good topic. I believe there are groups that actively work against this right.


Well, that goes along with my statement earlier that we do have the responsibility to respect the rights of others.

As it relates to a woman's rights to her body, I believe she alone has the responsibility to raise the child or pay for the abortion if she engages in activities that lead to the consequence of an unwanted pregnancy. Do you agree?


Not entirely. I think when you attempt to legislate biology things get a little messy. Pregnancy isn't a singles game and if I were to say it's all up to the woman that would preclude any input from the father of the child. I do think the woman has the right to chose whether or not to carry the child to term and I think that's her decision alone, but if she does decide to keep the child she should reasonably expect some help, either from the father or society at large. Now I might agree with you that technically society shouldn't be expected to pay any bills in this matter but it's simply in our interest to do so. As a society we're better off if we don't let these 'unwanted' children die in misery in the gutter.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

MDDad
Posts: 11143
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby MDDad » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:28 am

Jesus, VP, do you have a rough estimate as to how many "unwanted children die in misery in the gutter" in America every year, or was that just a blatant attempt at sensationalism?

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:43 am

VP - Here's the rub on the safety net you're advocating. Like all safety nets, it makes the consequences of risky behavior less severe - much like the net under a trapeze artist - and encourages those risk takers to continue to engage in that behavior.

I believe the mindset of your last sentence flies in the face of the responsibility that should come with the right to do with your body what you will. Given the increasing number of unwed mothers in the minority communities (72% black, 40+% hispanic) I also believe that is the genesis of the current problems with crime / gangs they face in their communities. Without fathers at home, they're seeking their "families" on the street.

My "fix" to this would be to stop rewarding these women by providing assistance for their kids on a go forward basis. If they are unable to care for those kids, and no relatives would support them, they would go into a foster system. I would support increased funding for a foster care system that would be subsidized by the reduction in welfare.

And yes, if the dads are identified, they would be responsible for their choice(s) as well.

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:47 am

MDDad wrote:Source of the post Jesus, VP, do you have a rough estimate as to how many "unwanted children die in misery in the gutter" in America every year, or was that just a blatant attempt at sensationalism?


In fairness, the argument to that would rightfully be that some would be avoided.

You'll recall the impetus for Reagan's EMTLA disaster was the outrage that a single person died on the steps of a hospital.

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 11337
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Vilepagan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:43 pm

MDDad wrote:Source of the post Jesus, VP...


It was a figure of speech which conveyed my meaning nicely. Unwad your panties MDDad.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 11337
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Vilepagan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:50 pm

Bick wrote:Source of the post VP - Here's the rub on the safety net you're advocating. Like all safety nets, it makes the consequences of risky behavior less severe...


Yes it does, and it can have the effect of encouraging the very behavior you're "safety-netting", but I think it's preferable to letting these kids fall through the cracks.

I also believe that is the genesis of the current problems with crime / gangs they face in their communities. Without fathers at home, they're seeking their "families" on the street.


I believe that's probably true in a lot of cases as well.

My "fix" to this would be to stop rewarding these women by providing assistance for their kids on a go forward basis. If they are unable to care for those kids, and no relatives would support them, they would go into a foster system. I would support increased funding for a foster care system that would be subsidized by the reduction in welfare.


I wonder....how many foster parents out there are waiting for kids, or are there kids waiting for foster parents? I don't know but I suspect there are more kids than willing parents, and I also suspect that a foster system increase would need more funding than you'd get from the decreased welfare payments.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

User avatar
Omar Bongo
Posts: 5946
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:59 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Omar Bongo » Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:24 pm

I also suspect that a foster system increase would need more funding than you'd get from the decreased welfare payments

Billions more. Not to mention that many foster parents are themselves recipients of TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), also known as welfare.

Children in foster care are at high risk for poor educational outcomes and demonstrate low levels of engagement at school. They are also are also more likely to have physical and mental health problems than children who do not grow up in foster care. Then consider the longer-term costs that society incurs because of the developmental risks associated with child maltreatment and family disruption that can occur with foster care.

It's much better for everyone, and in the long run cheaper, to keep children with their parents by providing government assistance to the biological parent(s).
"Trump is what he is, a floundering, inarticulate jumble of gnawing insecurities and not-at-all compensating vanities, which is pathetic."
George Will

"How stupid is our country?"
Donald Trump

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:45 am

Vilepagan wrote:Source of the post Yes it does, and it can have the effect of encouraging the very behavior you're "safety-netting", but I think it's preferable to letting these kids fall through the cracks.


I believe continuing down the current path this 72% single parent birthrate with blacks is doing more harm to these kids and their communities than any measure of falling thru the cracks. You bring up a good point about foster care, which may actually be more of the same mechanism in place. I haven't looked into the costs to support the argument. Maybe supervised Group Homes / Orphanages is the better answer for kids left to their own devices?

But the status quo of incentives to those single mothers for having more kids they can't support on their own has to stop.

broman
Posts: 3118
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:52 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby broman » Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:10 am

This deserves a little research......

1. Poor women have more children because of the “financial incentives” of welfare benefits.

Repeated studies show no correlation between benefit levels and women’s choice to have children. (See, for example, Urban Institute Policy and Research Report, Fall/93.) States providing relatively higher benefits do not show higher birth rates among recipients.

In any case, welfare allowances are far too low to serve as any kind of “incentive”: A mother on welfare can expect about $90 in additional AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) benefits if she has another child.

Furthermore, the real value of AFDC benefits, which do not rise with inflation, has fallen 37 percent during the last two decades (The Nation, 12/12/94). Birth rates among poor women have not dropped correspondingly.

The average family receiving AFDC has 1.9 children — about the same as the national average.
https://fair.org/extra/five-media-myths-about-welfare/

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:14 pm

OK Bro. So what's causing this, and what's your fix?

I say it's the safety net of women not being fully responsible for their choice of spreading their legs. AFDC started in 1935, but there was a significant change to the slope of the curve starting in the mid 60's that coincides with the activities of a welfare rights organization at the same time.

Image

broman
Posts: 3118
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:52 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby broman » Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:31 pm

Access to public assistance or a increasing amount of public assistance is not a primary factor when it comes to single women having children. One big change that took place in the 1970's was that it was a culture norm to wait until you had a career to start a family. Not a job, a career in which you had formal training.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 16351
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby John Q. Public » Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:16 pm

Just curious - what is that graph supposed to show and why didn't Hispanics get the memo until 1990?
Don't look at me, I just work here.

Bick
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "the inevitable disaster that will be the Trump Administration"

Postby Bick » Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:05 pm

broman wrote:Source of the post Access to public assistance or a increasing amount of public assistance is not a primary factor when it comes to single women having children. One big change that took place in the 1970's was that it was a culture norm to wait until you had a career to start a family. Not a job, a career in which you had formal training.


Discussion VP and I were having was that incentives drives actions, and choices should have consequences. You want to believe some sudden change in the culture norm caused the single parent birth rate to go from 25% to 50% in 10 years, so be it. Usually cultural changes are more gradual. Note also the slight decline in the single parent birthrate in the mid 90's. That coincided with Clinton's welfare reform in 1996. Those reforms BTW, were undone by the last guy, and the single mom birthrate now is around 77%

JQP - single parent birth rate by race. I think Hispanics were considered "white" prior to 1990, but I'm guessing you already knew the answer to both.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 16351
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Trump appoints Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court

Postby John Q. Public » Sat Jul 14, 2018 6:19 pm

Nope. Didn't know that. You were talking about people on welfare, so I thought it might have been that. Graphs aren't of much use if they aren't labeled. And if that's what it is, yes, it's absolutely from the change in the cultural norm - or more descriptively, the cultural "upheaval" that took place in the '60's and '70's.

And if you think $3 a day is going to inspire someone to have more kids, either they or you are very bad at math. It doesn't come anywhere close to covering the cost.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Omar Bongo
Posts: 5946
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:59 pm

Re: Trump appoints Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court

Postby Omar Bongo » Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:00 pm

JQP - single parent birth rate by race.

I guess we'll have to take your word for it. No labeling, context or source. That "graph" is no better than a meme.
"Trump is what he is, a floundering, inarticulate jumble of gnawing insecurities and not-at-all compensating vanities, which is pathetic."
George Will

"How stupid is our country?"
Donald Trump

Return to “National”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest