Pay welfare women $5000 to get sterilized. Good idea?

We should also do the rest of the singapore program- No maternity leave for the 3rd kid-More hospitals charges for 3rd+ kid-no income tax deductions for the 3rd+ kid-3+ kids get lower priority for education-Only get into top schools if parents sterilized before 40.-push abortion hard if the woman already has 2 kids.Program worked so well that they pretty much bailed on it by the mid 80s. It should also be pointed out that you don't need to get sterilized to get cash in singapore. You can go on birth control.

who my baby daddy? wrote:

I think this is a great idea. It worked well in Singapore.

Singapore is an example of a country with a sterilization incentive program. In the 1980s, Singapore offered $5000 (US) to women who elected to be sterilized. Interestingly, the conditions associated with receiving this grant were fairly obvious in their aim at targeting low income and less educated parents. It specified that both parents should be below a specified educational level and that their combined income should not exceed $750 per month.[29] This program, among other birth control incentives and education programs, greatly reduced Singapore’s birth rate, female mortality rate, and infant mortality rate, while increasing family income, female participation in the labor force, and rise in educational attainment among other social benefits. These are the intended results of most incentivizing programs, although questions of their ethicality remain.

vivalarepublica wrote:

Yes, I support. In terms of economics, the government probably spends more than $5000 each year for a welfare goblin with a few kids after adding up food stamps, tax credits, Section 8, any other program I might be forgetting. Offer the program for men as well.

Considering that most people that have a gaggle of kids and are dirt poor probably do not understand the long-term cost of children, they will take the $5000 and run.

But the religious right would put up a huge fight, so it would never work in this country.

Religious right? Are you nuts? This would have the bleeding heart liberals all up in arms.

Jeff Wigand wrote:

And not men?

especially the men.

Why not just buy off the poor? Take the money we dole out to them for housing, food stamps, afdc, bundle it up into one big cash payment BUT that is IT. No going back.

Mojo Jerkin wrote:

You guys know this was actually done in the US, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#United_States

You know the difference between compulsory and voluntary, right?

adsadfsfas wrote:

We should also do the rest of the singapore program

And this

Citizens in Singapore must obtain a license to lawfully possess firearms and/or ammunition; applicants must provide justification for the license, such as target shooting or self-defense. Target shooting licenses permit ownership of a gun, stored in an approved and protected firing range. Self-defense permits are nearly never granted, unless one can justify the 'imminent threat to life that cannot be reasonably removed'.

When a license is obtained there is no restriction on types of arms one may own.

* wrote:

Yes. A single poor man can be responsible for many more children than a single poor woman.

And the sterilization process is easier for men.

Are you really that dumb? Sterilizing men is pretty much irrelevant. You could sterilize 80% of poor/dumb men and it would have no impact on the number of welfare babies. Sterilize 80% of the poor/dumb women and welfare babies drop by 60 - 70%.

Think people! Try to think! At least TRY!

Yes, it is a VERY GOOD idea.

What the What wrote:

Are you really that dumb? Sterilizing men is pretty much irrelevant. You could sterilize 80% of poor/dumb men and it would have no impact on the number of welfare babies. Sterilize 80% of the poor/dumb women and welfare babies drop by 60 - 70%.

Think people! Try to think! At least TRY!

So you are saying that poor/dumb women are typically having babies from men of means?

If a poor/dumb woman gets knocked up by a tax paying man she will get child support.

If she gets knocked up by a poor/dumb man she goes on welfare.

This guy had 30 kids with 11 women and was asking for state help.

Fix guys like him.

Two things:

1) Re-institute the draft. Clean out the housing projects,barrios, trailer parks, and Appalacian mountain dwellers.

2) Start a good, long, ground war.

For every kid out of the ghetto or trailer park that gets killed, that's at least 2 kids not fathered. Draft women and the number goes up even farther.

WarWhatIsItGood4 wrote:

Two things:

1) Re-institute the draft. Clean out the housing projects,barrios, trailer parks, and Appalacian mountain dwellers.

2) Start a good, long, ground war.

For every kid out of the ghetto or trailer park that gets killed, that's at least 2 kids not fathered. Draft women and the number goes up even farther.

Significantly cheaper to go with the $5,000 payouts. We already spend nearly $1 trillion per year on military fun, but that's another topic.

* wrote:

What the What wrote:

Are you really that dumb? Sterilizing men is pretty much irrelevant. You could sterilize 80% of poor/dumb men and it would have no impact on the number of welfare babies. Sterilize 80% of the poor/dumb women and welfare babies drop by 60 - 70%.

Think people! Try to think! At least TRY!

So you are saying that poor/dumb women are typically having babies from men of means?

If a poor/dumb woman gets knocked up by a tax paying man she will get child support.

If she gets knocked up by a poor/dumb man she goes on welfare.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/desmond-hatchett-30-kids_n_1528850.html

This guy had 30 kids with 11 women and was asking for state help.

Fix guys like him.

OK, so you have confirmed that you really are that dumb.

"So you are saying that poor/dumb women are typically having babies from men of means?"

Ummm... No. Ever heard of a woman getting pregnant pretty much whenever she wanted to? Or perhaps you did not hear about the fact that the remaining 20% of unsterilized poor/dumb men are WAY more than enough to do the deed.

Please stop posting. You are beyond moronic.

WarWhatIsItGood4 wrote:

Two things:

1) Re-institute the draft. Clean out the housing projects,barrios, trailer parks, and Appalacian mountain dwellers.

2) Start a good, long, ground war.

For every kid out of the ghetto or trailer park that gets killed, that's at least 2 kids not fathered. Draft women and the number goes up even farther.

If that's your strategy, why not just bomb the ghettos? Because of advances in responsiveness and medicine, a lot more vets go home missing arms and legs, and suffer from untreated PTSD. Your poorly thoughout strategy would do little to slow the tide of welfare dependence.

explain yoself wrote:

vivalarepublica wrote:

Yes, I support. In terms of economics, the government probably spends more than $5000 each year for a welfare goblin with a few kids after adding up food stamps, tax credits, Section 8, any other program I might be forgetting. Offer the program for men as well.

Considering that most people that have a gaggle of kids and are dirt poor probably do not understand the long-term cost of children, they will take the $5000 and run.

But the religious right would put up a huge fight, so it would never work in this country.

Religious right? Are you nuts? This would have the bleeding heart liberals all up in arms.

No, I am not nuts, but thank you for asking. Glad to know that somebody cares for my mental health.

I figure the religious right with the sanctity of life stuff would be up in arms. They would be angry with the government attempting to restrain our freedom by controlling the population.

I figure the bleeding hearts would be all about another government welfare program that gives women the freedom to choose.

vivalarepublica wrote:

If that's your strategy, why not just bomb the ghettos? Because of advances in responsiveness and medicine, a lot more vets go home missing arms and legs, and suffer from untreated PTSD. Your poorly thoughout strategy would do little to slow the tide of welfare dependence.

But it would break the cycle of poverty. Those that weren't killed could stay in the military and have a job. Also they'd be shipped all over the world, so they wouldn't be stuck in their circumstance, be it ghetto, Appalachia whatever.

But yeah, you could just bomb the poor areas too. I'd have no problem with that either.

WarWhatIsItGood4 wrote:

Two things:

1) Re-institute the draft. Clean out the housing projects,barrios, trailer parks, and Appalacian mountain dwellers.

2) Start a good, long, ground war.

For every kid out of the ghetto or trailer park that gets killed, that's at least 2 kids not fathered. Draft women and the number goes up even farther.

Another idiot. For every kid that gets killed there will be zero impact on the number of new babies. Unless, of course, the kid getting killed is female in which case it would have the effect that you describe.

Oh, and you are a psychopath.

An idea right out of Nazi Germany and Zi*nist Israel

Just checking in to weigh in and say that those proposing sterilizing the men instead of the women are both winning the argument and are correct.

The incorrect will not understand this and call me an idiot and the cycle will continue.

That is all.

Aside from the fact that this entire thread is incredibly sexist, why wouldn't you just provide incentive to put them on birth control? Most women don't want to get pregnant, but getting proper birth control can be difficult and expensive. My old insurance company didn't cover the pill I needed, and it used to cost me $300 for a 3 month prescription. On my new insurance it's free!