Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_jdy3tsu wrote

[deleted]

−17

ChocolateDiligent t1_jdy5scr wrote

People who can’t afford housing shouldn’t have it either! Losers!

4

[deleted] t1_jdymv6f wrote

[deleted]

−2

ChocolateDiligent t1_je0d6rz wrote

It’s the logic of your own argument, one cannot afford something therefore… Do you believe abstinence works? People have children, most people who care would rather find solutions for inevitabilities, rather than denying their existence or someones rights.

0

[deleted] t1_je0oa7v wrote

[deleted]

2

ChocolateDiligent t1_je1k4rv wrote

Of course abstinence doesn't work, that is my point. Are you on a parade to provide birth control to people for free? It's comments like your original one that misses the mark. People have kids, it is inevitable, planned or unplanned. You can wish people were smarter, but they are not.

So my question is what do you do with that information? Do we support children and their parents knowing that it helps the majority of people who receive funding or not? I'm guessing you are in the not, camp. You unfortunately cannot legislate laws or credit to those who are smart and those who are not, it doesn't work like that.
edit: You still haven't proved why people who can't afford housing shouldn't have it comment is unrelated, it certainly isn't. At the core of your argument lies the same logic, how would you differ from this position if "someone can't afford something they shouldn't have it" and not contradict yourself?

1

Rogers_Ebert t1_je577lf wrote

Humans have been having babies and raising families before the advent of the written and spoken word. There are people that lived in huts made of sod that bore children.

The main issue here is that this is a tax credit meaning it's absolving the parents of an already owed tax liability. Depending on your feelings of the State and government, taxes I'm Vermo t are already too high for their return.

2