Korean Job Discussion Forums

[mises]

[Bryan]

No, welfare shouldn't exist at all. It taxes the productive people and reduces the productivity of the economy as a whole, thus making the poor people poorer.

Eliminating the minimum wage would be a good alternative to welfare. Then nobody would be unemployed if they didn't want to be.

[Kuros]

Bryan,

Having children is a productive activity. They are tomorrow's workforce. Which means not simply that they'll pay for my old age, but they'll be the force in the economy with which my retirement fund can continue to grow.

Mises,

Depending on the welfare subsidies, this might be a cheap purchase. However, one has to be a little wary of the long-term implications here.

A preferred strategy would be to encourage working women to have children by providing favorable laws for family and maternity leave. This is the system that China is setting up. At first I thought that China was making a mistake: throwing your economy in the balance of the employees might discourage investment. But then it occurred to me. All the Asian countries with low-birth rates had terrible work environments for families. Encouraging some leniance might be smart in the long-term by allowing families to have children, and thus creating a future for the state.

[mises]

[Canucksaram]

Having a kid on the state's dime (whether you're the mother or father)? Sure, we're nice, you get a caution (yellow card), and good luck to you and your child. We hope that you work hard to bring the kid up right.

Having a second kid completely on the state's dime, or otherwise reproducing in violation of a lawful order not to reproduce (e.g., you're deemed unfit to be a parent), well...you now have a red card. Stop. Do not pass go. Either submit to surgical sterility and receive the appropriate state support, or to hell with you. Your progeny are either given to the other parent (if appropriate) or are taken into state custody.

Kids three, four, five, or any more than this, upon the state's dime? You are anathema. You must undergo mandatory sterilization and social readjustment/re-education. If you don't consent to such therapy, then you are put to death. This applies regardless of your gender. Make 'em with your seed or bring them to term within your womb...it's all one and the same...you're a parasite, at this level, and deserve to be squeezed like a tick.

[Juregen]

[ernie]

this sounds like a classic case of confusing cause and effect: what came first: the children or the welfare?

[Cornfed]

[doc_ido]

The OP (by which I mean Dr. Perry) does make a telling omission in his post. Here are the pertinent bits he left out:

[ernie]

that's ^ funny: "our study shows this... ummm, actually it doesn't, really".

[ontheway]

[Czarjorge]

I wish the social scientists that do this work would look into the underlying cause. My theory is that poor people screw. They screw because they're too poor to do anything else. Maybe they can afford cable, maybe some booze or drugs, maybe not, but screwing is ALWAYS free. Even the nastiest person can find someone to have sex with if their standards are low enough. So, they also have babies. Surprised? You shouldn't be, screwing causes babies, that's how it works.

The solution isn't to eliminate welfare. It sure as hell isn't the backwards welfare-to-work programs most states have now. The solution is to truly raise the socioeconomic level of these people. How? Invest in education. How? Well, municipalities and states are going to have to evenly distribute school funding rather than the ridiculous area based property tax method that is currently use. It'll probably require higher taxes, or shifting tax income from other areas. BUT, the reason the US economic surged after WWII was EDUCATION. Our populace was educated, motivated, hopeful, and therefore more productive. We need that back, not to say 'screw you, you're lazy' (or poor or whatever) and give up on people, as that leads to higher crime rates as poor people with no options turn to crime. Surprised? You shouldn't be. Everyone's got to eat.

[ontheway]

[Cheonmunka]

In NZ's case there is a public welfare scheme that provides parents with additional income to cover their children's needs. The beauty of the scheme is that working parent(s) can receive this as well as any other parent. It is asset tested yet even a family or a single mom/dad earning 40k can receive a full amount for child welfare, which serves to take a great load off when dealing with the expenses/budgetting nightmare.

[peppermint]

I suspect sex ed, and not just the "abstinence only" variety that's currently in favor would bring these numbers down as would subsidizing birth control pills. Education in general is also a good idea, so long as there are jobs available, so it can be put to use.