I speak about this from experience. I was once the woman in the example. Ultimately, I chose to stay on welfare and go to school during my other 20 hours per week. Now I'm an (employed) engineer. I think that if someone is going to take that much time away from parenting their child (especially for a single parent since there is no one else who is going to do it), it should be for something worthwhile. I don't think $2000/year is a very good return, but I do think a marketable degree/trade/skill is.
The biggest misconception about welfare is that a person can stay on it for their whole life. There is a 48-month time limit for which you can receive aid. In my opinion, this isn't supporting a lifestyle, it's investing in a family. But I'm probably what most people would consider a welfare success story, so my point of view is a bit biased.
Note: Thank you, tax payers of California.”
joeyhas on Jun 10, 2012 at 16:20:49
“maybe you can let others know there are options out there like the one you took. I don't think they think about them, only about survival. :)”
“But she IS working, though...The woman in the example probably works 20 hours per week to earn her salary of $16,500/year. If she goes up to $33,000/year that means she now works 40 hours per week (twice as much) for what is, ultimately, only $2000/year extra.
As a parent, I think those additional 20 hours per week are better invested as time spent with her infant and 4 year old, than they are as an extra $2000/year.
Wrong, though it may be in other's eyes, I don't think any parent feels that an $2000/year is worth missing an additional 20 hours per week of your child's life (not to mention commute time). I think society as a whole would be better off if she spent those hours parenting instead of working.”
Eweatherwax on Jun 8, 2012 at 20:41:28
“I agree-I didn't mean to imply that she wasn't working--I understand that. She is working and between working and her welfare, her income is $31K. She could work more and earn $33K. The article (and your own comments) suggest that you feel it is OK for her to decide she would rather spend the extra time with her kids and continue to have her fellow citizens support her. I disagree.
I do not think it is just that you or I should be forced to pay for this woman's voluntary choice not to support herself and her kids. Sure, it probably would be better if she raised her kids rather than having them in daycare. It would probably be better if ALL mothers stayed home to raise their kids rather than putting them in daycare--but then who is going to pay for that? Why is this woman entitled to part of your paycheck to support her choice?
We all have to make choices based on what we can and cannot afford. I believe it is everyone's responsibility to do everything they can no support themselves. For those who truly CANNOT support themselves, I am happy to help. I am not willing to support someone's "lifestyle choices". ”
“I think the difference between "mooching off mom and dad" and being a single parent on welfare with an infant and 4 year old is that the single parent still has obligations at home (i.e., to raise the children, cook, clean up after them, read to them, etc). While I do think it is important to work, I also know that these people work their butts off for meager pay and are then unable to give their children the attention they need. Next thing you know, the kids are getting into trouble and the single parent is being blamed for not raising their kids correctly/spending enough time with them. It becomes an ethical dilemma for the parent--do you raise your kids and depend on the government or do you get a job and have daycare/babysitters do your child-rearing? Which would you choose?”
Eweatherwax on Jun 8, 2012 at 20:11:09
“Lots and lots of working people use daycare. I would prefer not to, but if I have to work, then I have to work.
You are saying that is is OK to decide that you want to stay home with your kids even if you can't afford it, and then make someone else pay the bill. I disagree.
As for obligations at home, every working parent has obligations at home. Why is this woman entitled to not work and have you and I pay her, while we have to put our kids in daycare (which we pay for ourselves) and then go to work--and still take care of all the obligations at home?
Again, I am all for a safety net. I am not at all for supporting people who could support themselves but prefer not to.”
“Dude she didn't choose to be born in a man's body. She didn't choose to be "out there." She chose to live her life as her true self, just as anybody should be able to do. No one should be forced to hide because of their race, gender, religious beliefs, etc. How was having a conversation with a person in a public setting putting her security at risk? The risk exists because there are ignorant people who think that they have the right to know what organ is between someone else's legs, as if it even matters.”
Rick Penticoff on May 3, 2012 at 02:37:33
“Just maybe they are a product of an unhealthy enviroment during a critical phase of their development. If it was a secret how would a passerby even know? You can't go around thinking its all good because for alot of(probobly majority) people this is pegging out the weird meter.”
“Is what she said really insulting to Stay-at-Home moms? I don't think Rosen is saying that they don't do work or that they don't understand economic issues. To the best of my understanding, she is saying that Mitt shouldn't be using his wife's perspective as the general model for understanding women and their concerns about the economy. Not only is Ann Romney not a part of the workforce, but she also doesn't have to think about her family's finances the way you or I do.”
capt hastings on Apr 12, 2012 at 13:47:34
“Not surprisingly, Righties tried to (incorrectly) paint Rosen an an Obama advisor.
The Obama campaign was prompt in denouncing Rosen's comments.
Rosen is a seasoned journalist. As a SAHM, her comment was insulting to me. Had Rosen clarified her intent with comments similar to yours or with statements she has made since this became an issue, I could cut her some slack.
But what she said was, "Guess what?" Rosen said. "His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing."
Clearly, she's minimizing the work of a SAHM because is it not paid work.”
“Personal pet peeve here, but why do so many parents assume their kids are straight? Maybe your daughter will one day prefer her "buddy" over that frat boy for not-so-innocent reasons. Straight privilege. Geez.”
Jodi Rives Meier on Dec 29, 2012 at 20:10:17
“Seriously, physicsfem, read the whole thing.”
hp blogger Amy Wruble on Dec 28, 2012 at 01:38:47
“Yes, yes, I agree! I tried to acknowledge that possibility in my final paragraph (the part about falling in love with girls) but perhaps it was too little, too late. When I went to college in the 80s//90s, my gay friends hadn't even come out yet, and I missed out on that diversity of perspective.”
Apr 27, 2012 at 20:41:59
“What would you do if you found out that your parents weren't your real parents and that you were actually illegally smuggled into this country from Croatia (or somewhere else random). How would you feel to be told that you don't belong here when every moment of your remembered life has been spent here? You have an American identity, not because of a piece of paper, but because you grew up here. It's no different for these children.”
thebarse on May 3, 2012 at 08:51:56
“Incarcerated Women sometimes give birth in Prison. Does the child stay in prison or does the child leave for the outside world? Same goes for illegals. They don't belong in the USA.”
Vicky Valentine Proud on May 1, 2012 at 02:14:02
“That is a totally different scenario, you are talking about someone smuggling you in this country, much like when one is abducted. These kids parents bring them here, granted these kids do not have a choice in the matter, but then their parents should be charged with a crime of kidnapping a foreign resident and broinging them here against their will.”
Jan 12, 2012 at 20:24:45
“As a divorced parent I, too, have opted to own my sexuality. I absolutely do not care about what anyone thinks of me. I spent enough years having my sex life be dictated by ex, I'm not about to give that power to the frustrated mother hens who can't stop clucking/judging.
The combination of maturity and sexual freedom is something every woman should experience. This is the first time in my life that I've had a fulfilling sex life and I'm happier than a college football player. Oh, and before I get any of those comments, my doctor just confirmed my clean bill of health today, thank you very much.
There is a way to have a swinging sex without parading all your partners in front of your kids-- sexual activity doesn't always have to occur at night or in your own home. Come on, people. Be creative. Be safe. And have sex. It's good for you.”
“I appreciate you pointing out that sexual orientation, gender identity, and personal traits/preferences have nothing to do with each other--many people (even "progressive" people) still don't understand that.”
“Her not "fooling around" isn't from a lack of trying--it's from her lack of interest in others. She hasn't met anyone else with whom she wants to share intimate sex. But when she does, I'm sure she will.
Outside of her I prefer only casual sex, so it's not very hard for me to find someone with whom to "fool around."
In truth, I'm at greater risk for heartbreak, but I'm not proprietary over my partner's body or heart. As I said, everyone deserves to have a life of their choosing outside of their relationship with their partner.”
“I know it's hard for you to wrap your mind around this, but everyone isn't jealous and/or insecure around sex. Some people are capable of differentiating between sex as a physical act and sex as an emotional act.”
StrawHat on Jan 5, 2012 at 21:16:19
“You said yourself that you're fooling around and she isn't.
That's a red flag to me that she has very different ideas and feelings about sex than yours, but she's going along with you just to keep you around.
I feel sad for her because I did the same thing in my early 20's. It killed me every time he went on a "date" but I played along because I was desperately in love with him and didn't want to lose him.
Putting up with him was the second-dumbest thing I did in my life.”
“You're right. It's absolutely about me and my happiness. I also happen to think it's my spouse's responsibility to make herself happy. My choice to be non-monogamous is something my partner(s) are aware of and agree to. Getting some on the side does not impede my ability to be a good parent or have a happy home. I don't see the point of sacrificing my sexual autonomy when it doesn't affect anything else in my life.”
“You have missed the critical point of what a person is COMMITTING TO. The commitment you are talking about is a commitment to monogamy, not a commitment to a person or a marriage/relationship. Neither one is a necessary condition for the other to exist.”
“As a woman who openly doesn't practice monogamy, I'm going to want to sleep with other people no matter how satisfied I am with my partner. Some people just can't eat strawberry ice cream for every meal, regardless of how much they love it or how full it makes them.”
StrawHat on Jan 5, 2012 at 19:10:04
“I think part of what you're doing is narcissistic. You can't imaging depriving your magical, wonderful self of everything that you desire.
It's all about you, you, you...
The clue is in your puerile metaphor. That's not a "meal". That's a human being.
When mature people marry, they devote themselves to making their spouse happy, giving their children a safe, loving, stable home, creating a family life that is healthy and fun, etc.
They've out-grown that infantile, narcissistic "need" to have everything be about their own short-term self-gratification.”
“Monogamy works for some people, but let's just be realistic--it' doesn't work for most. It certainly doesn't work for me. Sex has an emotional spectrum from casual to intimate. I enjoy the entire spectrum, practicing intimate sex with my partner and casual sex with everyone else. My partner, on the other hand, only likes to have intimate sex so I'm it for her . Having other sexual partners takes nothing away from our relationship or from the love we share. People need to stop trying to own their significant others. Forget monogamy and practice autonomy--everyone deserves to have a life of their choosing outside of their relationship with their partner.”
StrawHat on Jan 5, 2012 at 19:16:55
“You're probably stabbing her in the heart each time and don't even notice.”
snsanford on Jan 5, 2012 at 19:12:48
“Until one or more of your casual sex partners gets pregnant and wants you to behave like a dad. Uh oh...that kinda shoots a hole in your logic.”
I started dating as soon as we split. I don't mislead anyone into thinking I want a relationship. I just let people take me out, socialize, and have a good time. Oh, and I have plenty of sex. That's the best part about it--lots of great sex with people who don't ask me for a commitment.
“You don't have to be a Casey Anthony supporter to see that:
#1) The prosecution did NOT prove that she murdered her daughter
#2) The defense provided reasonable doubt
Legally, she's not guilty of murder. Enough said.”
alexandra23 on Jul 5, 2011 at 21:06:50
“#1) The prosecution PROVED that Casey Anthony is the ONLY one who could have and would have killed her daughter. Did you even listen to the audio tapes when she told her mother that she didn't "f'king" know where Caylee was, and this was during the same period she was LYING to police and her parents about a non-existent nanny?
#2) The defense DID NOT provide REASONABLE doubt of anything other than they and their client are total and complete liars.
Morally (and legally if the jurors had had any common sense) Casey is 100% guilty of murdering Caylee. But, thanks to people who are determined to believe the defense's nonsense, many more sociopathic pathological liars now feel free to carry on without consequence, including Casey. She will kill again.”