Study: Single parents cost taxpayers $112 billion

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by gauchogolfer, Apr 15, 2008.

  1. gauchogolfer macrumors 603

    gauchogolfer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Location:
    American Riviera
    #1
    Brought to you by the lovely folks at Focus on the Family:

    Here's the link from CNN.com.

    I think most of the counterargument analysis in the article was actually pretty well done.
     
  2. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #2
    LOOK OUT!!

    Instead of circumcision (personal hygiene has rendered this unnecessary in our time) we should put tiny little clamps on the ductus deferon.

    When a couple get married, part of the ceremony would be the removal of said clamps.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #3
    So four groups paid for a study and the results of the study fell in line w/the groups' agendas. How uncanny...


    Lethal
     
  4. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #4
    Didn't anyone tell them divorce is good for the economy? Why stop at one household when you can have two at (more than) twice the price? Two rent/mortgage checks, two light bills, etc etc. Not to mention all the billable hours that lawyers can rack up going back to court.

    Sarcasm aside, I find it rather ironic that these sponsors are wanting the government to pony up more money "for the married" when the government is at least partially responsible for making such a mess of it in the first place.

    If you want to bolster marriage, a good starting point is making is not so easy to get divorced and doing away with incentives like alimony.
     
  5. pooky macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    #5
    So you want to make it more difficult for people to get out of relationships that are miserable? I wonder if this would lead to an increase of violence against spouses, spousal abandonment, and/or suicide. I'm guessing it would.

    A better proposal to reduce the divorce rate would be to make getting married more difficult. Why should you be able to do in 5 minutes what it takes 6 months or more and untold attorney's fees to undo? It should be just as difficult to get married as it is to get divorced. Or make them both easy, it doesn't matter to me. Just don't welcome people into marriage with a simple, easy process, then trap them there.
     
  6. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #6
    Well, in an ideal world, if it were harder to get a divorce then people might think a bit harder about getting married, but the idea of the masses thinking thinking things through isn't something in which I have much faith. See covenant marriages and how they're not such the hot ticket they were once thought to be.

    I suppose I should have clarified a bit - I was referring to putting an end to copouts like no-fault divorce and the ability to break a marriage contract with impunity.
     
  7. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #7
    Neo-cons, get your narrow BS views on how society should be managed, out of our lives. The last thing America needs is to have the government involved with family matters.
     
  8. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #8
    Just thought you might want to put that in your signature.

    You're opposed to alimony? How would you propose to deal with financial responsibility for the children that are the result of the (contract of) marriage?
     
  9. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #9
    I would guess that the view is that child support is not alimony.

    However what about the case of a long time marriage where the wife or husband has been a stay-at-home parent/homemaker for many years and is not necessarily qualified for jobs that would be able to support them? Or should those people just have to suck it up and live in poverty? At some point in the marriage a decision was made that having a spouse at home was worth sacrificing an extra $X per year that could be generated as income. Shouldn't they be entitled to some of the household income even though the job that the stay-at-home spouse had was not an income generating job?
     
  10. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #10
    My bad. You're right. Two separate things.

    Really, that's pretty rough. Not surprisingly, I imagine the right is both supportive of the idea of a woman staying at home, and opposed to alimony. Not hard to figure out that rationale.
     
  11. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #11
    .. is clearly most distasteful.
     
  12. stevegmu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    A stone's throw from the White House.
    #12
    I get the impression you have no idea what the Neo-Con movement is about. It is more than just a liberal buzzword.
     
  13. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #13
    Both sides of the aisle love to push their theories on family management and development on society at large. Trying to pin the blame on the side you disagree with is shortsighted and hypocritical.
     
  14. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #14
    Sorry to blow your wild-a** guess out of the water. I have read extensively on the subject, beginning with the writings of Robert Altemeyer who is considered the foremost scholar on the psychology of authoritarianism. Also included in my readings are John Dean, Jerry Fallwell, Pat Robertson, Irving Kristol, James Dobson, Craig Unger and countless others.

    The Christian neo-con movement wants to rewrite the Constitution and create a theocracy. They want the laws to be based on the 10 commandments and Christianity to be formally recognized as a requirement for living in America. They want to order society in a manner which is based on Christian fundamentalism and a strict interpretation of the bible. These are not my 'opinions'. All of this is very well documented and comes from their own words and writings.

    The neocon 'movement' is the greatest threat our country now faces. Now THAT is an opinion.
     
  15. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #15
    Sorry, I am not taking the bait.
     
  16. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #16
    Coming from someone who regularly makes even worse comments about liberals, and those he deems liberals whether true or not, I find this comment kinda funny.

    What do the liberals try to tell people to do with their families?
     
  17. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #17
    Study: Pointless war in Iraq costs US way more than issues with "family values."

    Priorities people, priorities.

    I'd say that the loss of thousands of American troops, sons and daughters all of them, in Iraq has done more damage to families than single parents or divorcees.
     
  18. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #18
    No kidding:

    Nearly 1 in 5 troops has mental problems after war service

    So many of them having problems, getting divorces, turning to substance abuse. And yet some people don't want to help them because then we'd lose retention or something and because it would cost too much. :rolleyes: My Cousin seems to have escaped most of that, though sometimes I wonder. My best friend seems to be doing alright to, but it did take it's toll on him, and he just isn't the same. Told me he'd kick my ass if I ever joined up after he did. His Brother isn't as lucky. He got out alive, and not that injured, so thankful for that (know a guy who still has shrapnel in his arm that the VA won't fix and another who has the kind of cancer you can only get from radiation), but it killed his marriage. He's got 2 kids too. Currently living with his Brother. There's a single parent these people should be caring more about. :mad:
     

Share This Page