Philadelphia paying women to get pregnant have babies

[ohio jones]

Seems to me like Philadelphia's money would be better spent, and their population more financially prosperous in the long run, by covering relocation expenses to send their black residents (pregnant or not) to San Francisco.

OJ, I usually appreciate your point of view but this feels a bit callous, maybe it comes across in ways not intended. But how would you feel about a society that decides you are not productive enough and wants to move you 3,000 miles away.

Possibly you were protesting the underlying assumption that economics should dominate policy without concern for human cost?

Perhaps I posted too Swiftly, but it's intended as a Modest Proposal. Also sort of wondering if SF has thought through what might happen if there's an influx.

[Josh]

Here's a much better idea: how about fathers support the mothers of their children?

Single moms with dependent children are a byproduct of our society and its choices over the past decades. I don't care how much welfare the government or private charity sends their way, they will always suffer financially and otherwise from their situation. And I'm not saying that aid should not be given. If men won't be responsible to provide for their own families voluntarily, then let them do it through the tax, alimony, and child support payment systems.

The unfortunate thing is many of these men are not motivated to work to the best level of their productivity because of the child support and alimony they have to pay. And so it is likely that the working families who are not in these situations end up paying for the programs that support people who are suffering from their own bad choices. It's just the way it is.

I'm glad it's not on me to solve these problems. Those of us who were born in settings where our parents and communities taught us how to manage our lives and live by rigid social standards ought to thank God for it, and try to be understanding toward those who weren't so privileged.

I would go a step farther and say that everyone who chooses fornication does so knowingly and willingly. It’s not like marriage is some big secret.

[Sliceitup]

Seems to me like Philadelphia's money would be better spent, and their population more financially prosperous in the long run, by covering relocation expenses to send their black residents (pregnant or not) to San Francisco.

OJ, I usually appreciate your point of view but this feels a bit callous, maybe it comes across in ways not intended. But how would you feel about a society that decides you are not productive enough and wants to move you 3,000 miles away.

Possibly you were protesting the underlying assumption that economics should dominate policy without concern for human cost?

Perhaps I posted too Swiftly, but it's intended as a Modest Proposal. Also sort of wondering if SF has thought through what might happen if there's an influx.

I really don’t think this was your intention but what you suggested (to forcibly relocate a classification of people) is usually considered to be an act of genocide.

[HondurasKeiser]

Seems to me like Philadelphia's money would be better spent, and their population more financially prosperous in the long run, by covering relocation expenses to send their black residents (pregnant or not) to San Francisco.

OJ, I usually appreciate your point of view but this feels a bit callous, maybe it comes across in ways not intended. But how would you feel about a society that decides you are not productive enough and wants to move you 3,000 miles away.

Possibly you were protesting the underlying assumption that economics should dominate policy without concern for human cost?

Perhaps I posted too Swiftly, but it's intended as a Modest Proposal. Also sort of wondering if SF has thought through what might happen if there's an influx.

It strikes me that the ‘callousness’ of the statement is meant to highlight just how unwise such a policy is inasmuch as it seems like a fairly dehumanizing program all around.

[mike]

Here's a much better idea: how about fathers support the mothers of their children?

Single moms with dependent children are a byproduct of our society and its choices over the past decades. I don't care how much welfare the government or private charity sends their way, they will always suffer financially and otherwise from their situation. And I'm not saying that aid should not be given. If men won't be responsible to provide for their own families voluntarily, then let them do it through the tax, alimony, and child support payment systems.

The unfortunate thing is many of these men are not motivated to work to the best level of their productivity because of the child support and alimony they have to pay. And so it is likely that the working families who are not in these situations end up paying for the programs that support people who are suffering from their own bad choices. It's just the way it is.

I'm glad it's not on me to solve these problems. Those of us who were born in settings where our parents and communities taught us how to manage our lives and live by rigid social standards ought to thank God for it, and try to be understanding toward those who weren't so privileged.

I would go a step farther and say that everyone who chooses fornication does so knowingly and willingly. It’s not like marriage is some big secret.

Sure, and let them bear the consequences. I'm fine with aiding people who have made bad choices so they don't starve, die for lack of medical care, or have to live in the streets, but I don't know whether society owes them much more than that. The unfortunate thing is, though, that people's bad choices affect many others, who end up reaping the consequences through no fault of their own. Such as the children of fornication. That's the real tragedy, and is another reason why welfare programs should exist. It isn't the kids' fault that their mom shacked up with their dad, who then disappeared or is in jail, or doesn't care about providing for them.

[GaryK]

OJ, I usually appreciate your point of view but this feels a bit callous, maybe it comes across in ways not intended. But how would you feel about a society that decides you are not productive enough and wants to move you 3,000 miles away.

Possibly you were protesting the underlying assumption that economics should dominate policy without concern for human cost?

Perhaps I posted too Swiftly, but it's intended as a Modest Proposal. Also sort of wondering if SF has thought through what might happen if there's an influx.

I really don’t think this was your intention but what you suggested (to forcibly relocate a classification of people) is usually considered to be an act of genocide.

I'm guessing OJ is saying that with SF's reparations proposal of $5,000,000.00 per African American, both Philadelphia and blacks would be better of financially if Philadelphia's black population would move to SF.

[barnhart]

I'm guessing OJ is saying that with SF's reparations proposal of $5,000,000.00 per African American, both Philadelphia and blacks would be better of financially if Philadelphia's black population would move to SF.

GaryK, I often appreciate your point of view but it also seems a bit harsh to suggest Philadelphia would be better off financially if only they could export the black folks... Maybe you made a grammar error by including the city into the subject of that last clause?

[RZehr]

The financial comparison is simply $18,000 vs. $5,000,000. The only reason black people are mentioned at all, is simply because they are the only ones eligible for the SF money. Both white and black people are eligible for the Philly money. I suppose it would still be financially better off for Philly if they'd ship the white people to SF too. Then Philly wouldn't need to shell out $18,000. Is it callous to point that out? I don't feel callous, and no one is seriously trying to make either happen. Its simply casually pointing out the obvious. Come to think of it, knowing Californias reputation for handing people money, maybe the white person would indeed be better off there than in Philly.

[GaryK]

I'm guessing OJ is saying that with SF's reparations proposal of $5,000,000.00 per African American, both Philadelphia and blacks would be better of financially if Philadelphia's black population would move to SF.

GaryK, I often appreciate your point of view but it also seems a bit harsh to suggest Philadelphia would be better off financially if only they could export the black folks... Maybe you made a grammar error by including the city into the subject of that last clause?

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting anything. I just thought no one was getting that OJ was probably referring to San Francisco's reparations proposal when he made his comment. Were you aware of the SF proposal?

[barnhart]

Yes, I have heard that mentioned.