At what point does the basic human decency behind the save the children movement have to give way to financial realities?

[Sixgunsound]

Nobody is disputing whether or not children should be saved, but at what point does subsidizing irresponsible procreation that is only possible because of said subsidy and those lives are only in existence because they get somebody a bigger paycheck have to be given a second look?

[MCheetah]

What is this question? I'm confused.

Is it saying that there's not enough money and resources to go around to save everyone? And that too many people shouldn't be having sex and creating children they can't take care of? If so, I agree. That would be a pro-choice abortion argument. But more so, the belief that people should have safe sex and that those too dumb to not do it, don't deserve to have sex to begin with. Something I REALLY wish could be enforced.

Like stupid people become sterilized and aren't allowed to reproduce until they can prove they won't pollute the gene pool with their idiot genes, or create children that'll have to be raised by the state. I wish that was a reality, by then again, 95% of humanity would probably be sterilized for the greater good then.

Other than that, I don't get the question.

[Guy13]

When inflation is double and interest rate 8-12%.

[NamerOfStars]

Um, quite a few people are debating whether children should be saved- especially since there's so much disagreement on what they should be saved FROM. Some say that kids should be saved from exposure to freakadelic weirdos, and so object to drag queen story hour. Some say that kids should be saved from ignorance of the fact that the world contains freakadelic weirdos, and that they're not all evil, and so DESIRE drag queen story hour. Some say that kids should be saved from death, and oppose abortion; some say they should be saved from poverty and misery, and insist on it.

It's all about priorities, really.

[Sixgunsound]

The intent of the question was more misuse of tax payer funds, but you also make good points.

[Andres77]

Are you talking about the abortion clinic owner talking about how she was hoping to afford a Ferrari soon on hidden camera?

[Sixgunsound]

That’s a new one to me, but then again I don’t watch TV or listen to the radio very much, or have really any social media presence. I was more interested in miss use of taxpayer funds because that’s something that hits us all.

[Jamie05rhs]

Certain cultures and societies don't believe in birth control. So those children are going to exist regardless. Whether they get help or not.

[Sixgunsound]

And cultures that have evolved that way have also figured out solutions for that at point of origin. I still don’t see how it is the fault of western taxpayers or problem of western taxpayers that people overseas make unsustainable choices.

[Jamie05rhs]

"solutions for that at point of origin". What solutions?

[EaterPeter]

Right about now. When we have whole lot of population.

[NathanDavis]

so... "Screw Their Children"?

[Sixgunsound]

If you stop fueling the gravy train, eventually it stops rolling. I do you sincerely believe that as many people would be having as many unsustainable children they could never hope to provide for if there weren’t explodable safety units they were abusing? I would gradually reduce the amount, and then put a hard cap on the number of dependents. The lifeboat is full and the cash box is empty, like it or not something has to give.

[NathanDavis]

so... screw those children?

and let's redirected that money onto children that are more privileged like you and me?

[Sixgunsound]

You might be privileged, but I don’t pretend to be. Are you repeating yourself because you don’t understand my answer or don’t want to?

[NathanDavis]

if you have time for G@G... you are definitely privileged

or will you tell me that your internet and device are paid by welfare with the taxes of others?

let's nor pretend about that lmao... you're not exactly wearing a cheap hat either, are you?

[Sixgunsound]

It’s cute that you assume I paid for the hat, and I’m doing it at my third job.

[Sixgunsound]

Also since I work for the government and I’m using Wi-Fi, technically yes it is paid for by the taxes of others😁

[Sixgunsound]

So are you coming after me because you don’t have a substantive argument, or are you really just that bad at this?

[NathanDavis]

what is cute is that you decided to focus on the one thing I left there as a joke... lmao

and ignored the rest completely...

predictable

[NathanDavis]

I came here to ask a question... if you have not noticed, I did follow up with more questions

that is not an argument per se

and the fact is that you are indeed a very privileged person, just like I am

but not like these kids can be... . so yes, it begs the question, at which point we can ignore our decency and just go with SCREW THOSE CHILDREN, give me my taxes back so I can even a better WI FI

[Sixgunsound]

Honestly I’m fine with Wi-Fi the way it is, I’d be happy with new fire trucks fewer potholes more police officers more structurally sound bridges and lower taxes because we don’t have to subsidize all all the unemployed assholes that just screw all day while I have to feed their kids.

[Sixgunsound]

Why should I subsidize a non-productive “member” of society if they are contributing nothing in return? Almost everybody can do some thing. In fact most of the legitimately disabled people I know would love to do some thing employment wise.

[NathanDavis]

so... Screw Those Poor, Vulnerable, Underprivileged Children As Long As They Are Not Mine... right?

[NathanDavis]

I think we finally found the "point" of basic human decency

[Sixgunsound]

Was that non answer appeal to emotion supposed to be an argument?

[NathanDavis]

that's just how you started your question

appealing to an emotional approach on basic human decency... and you were pretending, what you actually wanted to "argue" about was politics

so, that's how I answered your question with the same style

"why should we care about poor kids that are not ours, let's spend our taxes on something we care for real"

[Sixgunsound]

So if you disagree with my approach why copy it? Copying is the highest form of flattery. It’s not a political issue it’s an economic one ultimately. At some point various layers of government you’re going to realize that printing money will keep them afloat for a short term Crisis, but over the long haul uncomfortable choices are going to have to be made. And since they have political action groups spouting off about how excess children are causing global warming, it seemed as though there was already sufficient agreement with the principal I’m describing. Were you planning on giving a straight and final support or do not support answer at some point?

[NathanDavis]

I didn't disagree with your approach, I went with it from the start

and then we found the point... which is what you were looking for

"as long as it doesn't affect me "

quite simple

[Sixgunsound]

Not willing or not able to commit to an answer, got it. Thank you for letting me know I can stop wasting my time on you.

[NathanDavis]

if you do not want to face the meaning or sense of basic human decency... then don't post your question about decency and do not involve poor vulnerable children

own it