"families have to take on debt just so they can take care of their kid for the first year of their life." is a rubbish argument; if you work in a job where you are not going to be able to support a kid for a year, don't have a god damn kid.

1. Think you misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying take a year off not support your kid through work. you don't have much of a choice as to whether as a parent on what you have to do. One of the bread-earners takes time off, you can't leave a kid alone.

2. Now, if you meant that they should be able to take a year off without running into debt, and if they don't have that kind of job then don't a kid, then only 10% of the US would be eligible to have a kid.

3. If neither of those, clarify, because I misunderstand

because young people use the internet and old people go to the polls
check the results from Florida for the ultimate proof

lol sorry if the question is repeated, but how exactly is trump attracting old people or people in general? 😂😂

“I will build a great wall – and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me – and I’ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”
-trump is a meme

Nanny's are an option in which neither parent needs to stay home from work. Regardless however, kids aren't something you need to have, if you dont have the time/money you shouldn't have them. Don't get whats not clear about that.

Fear mongering and how anti-establishment he is. Pretty much the same reasons Bern attracts so many young people. They are both crazy radicals that get people excited.

Because you are here..?

but but but who's going to have the future minimum wage workers of America? Who's going to do Juan and Tyrone's jobs? Skyler? :D:shock:



I don't think parents should get a year of paid maternity leave, but 1-2 months is good. That should be enough time to bond with a new born.

I don't know about other states, but CA provides a program for paid family leave. Could be used not only for bonding with a newborn, but also if you need to take care of an ill family member.

Please excuse me if I'm blowing this way outta proportion but are you implying that only the wealthy have the appropriate means to procreate?

How dare these peasants think about having kids? :D




Worse than the homeless in SF having the nerve to live on the streets. What is this world coming too. :D

http://justink.svbtle.com/open-lette...r-police-chief

damn idiots man. Why find a solution when you can just be a douche about it :D get yo sh1t together psymon
lol jk

IDK man, he said it pretty clearly. If you do not have the resources available to support a child, then it's not responsible of you to have that child. That seems pretty reasonable...
I don't think you need to be wealthy to have time and the finances available to feed, cloth, and take care of a child.

Well I personally think it goes beyond having the necessary resources to support a child.

Biologically speaking, our main purpose is to procreate and pass on our genes so basically saying that people who don't have time nor money shouldn't carry out their basic human instincts.

But then again, could be taking things out of context so don't go by me.

Well, I'm not even sure if it's a human instinct to reproduce.
We are an advanced enough species to make a conscious decision on if we should or shouldn't reproduce. For it to be our instinct would mean that we have some compulsive nature to do it. If someone told me it was their instinct to have a child when they have no job, no time, no future, no way to provide, or anything like that, I'd just see them as irresponsible.

1. Goat is probably right that a year would be a bit extreme.

2. Nanny's aren't really an option for the first couple months, though after 5 months or so(not a parent, wouldn't know) you'd probably be fine.

3. Most people have kids in their twenties, when they don't really have a super stable job or solid means of decent income(or a large savings account). Having kids in your forties or thirties can be unappealing to some people(besides the fact that fertility starts to decline at age around 30.)

So, why should we force young people who want to have kids when they are young and capable to take on debt? Not saying that it should be a year, but even two months would help.

Plus, that doesn't go by the fact that usually people in their twenties have other loans(car, house, student) that they will also be paying.

I still think you are missing the point. No one is forcing you to take on debt for having kids, you're doing that to yourself by having kids.

That's like saying that you are being forced to take on debt when you by a house because your job doesn't pay you enough for you to afford a house. If you don't have the funds to do something don't do it; rather than doing it then blaming the system when you go into a lifetime of debt because of your own crappy decision.

3. To be honest, if I was a business owner (the person paying your maternal leave) I don't give a **** if you want to have kids in your twenties. Thats money that'd be coming out of the business I am trying to run because you "need" to have kids now, instead of waiting 10 years when you are financially stable.

1. Why should I, a business owner, have to sacrifice my recourses because you are too impatient to have a kid in 10 years when you can actually afford it?
2. Does just the general idea of having a kid when you are 20 years old, financially instable, and most likely mentally immature honestly sound like a good idea to you? Is that the kind of person we want to be parents, people who can't wait to have kids so they do it anyway when they *should* know they can't afford it?
3. Are you actually sure most people want to have kids in their twenties, because I have never heard of that, I know this is anecdotal but everyone I have met wants kids in their twenties, you know, when they are out of college and have a career lined up.

Not at all, while I can see where you would get that idea that is not what I am saying. For one I don't think you need to be upper class to have the recourses to support a child, I think as long as you are around the 60,000/year range you should have enough money to support a kid in most places in the United States (Metropolis like LA, SF, NYC probably not so much). That would put you right in the center of the middle class.

Also a lot of what it comes down to is how financially adept you are, you can be earning a lot less than 60,000, and end up having more left over at the end of the month than someone earning say, 100,000. And people like that who are good with money, even though they don't earn a lot of it are probably going to end up being more fit to be a parent than those who aren't.

I'm not against poor people having kids, I'm against unstable people having kids.

I didn't miss the point of your previous post, I was more saying that while it is entirely voluntary, the time you actually can do it is limited.

And no, I haven't done any research on when people want to have their kids. More just off personal experience.

Right or wrong, you've given me some food for thought. Thanks for sharing your perspective, not much left for us to debate at this point

You don't need to make crappy decisions to go into a lifetime of debt. Ask college students in debt. The fact that the US doesn't have any federal mandate on some paid maternity leave is clearly a flaw on the system. FYI the US has many flaws in the system, so it is okay to blame the system in certain cases.





I'm not an expert here, but I would assume that a majority of low income families ask for government support anyways, so regardless if they have paid maternity leave they will still receive assistance.


FYI being poor would make you unstable financially anyways lol

Trump has had his own comedy central roast and he shaved Vince McMahon's head. He has my vote!

Another Juan and Tyrone.

Also trump btfo south carolina. Took all the delegates.

LIGHTS OFF

So trump is leading in 10/14 upcoming primary state polls.

Honestly I'm not surprised, America has been pretty racist and terrible in the past with stuff like the trail of tears and the Japanese interment camps, so it shouldn't be surprising to see that we haven't gotten away from those roots quite yet despite all the progress that seemingly has been made since.

I'm honestly not worried about trump, I'm worried about the morally regressive nature that his fan base represents, they talk about strength and high energy but the policies they support are based on fear and anger, the exact opposite of what makes this country great. We shouldn't be temporarily banning Muslims from entering the US or attempting to build a massive multi billion dollar wall to keep the Mexicans out (looked how that worked out with China and the Mongolians, lol) that goes against all the progress and lessons we have learned as a country. And don't get me started on the whole anti political correctness thing or people who hate "SJWs". It's basically an attempt to ruin all the equality progress that has been done since MLK. It's just depressing to see all these trump supporters, since they represent all the negatives about this country in a single political movement.

Like Obama said, I truly believe he won't be elected as I feel like we have made enough progress as a country and there are enough kind hearted people (which trump supporters would call weak or low energy) that these racists and bigots won't be able to take it away. This "movement" is the last dying scream of the dark, bigoted past in Americas history to me as the United States gets more and more liberal and progressive, enjoy it while it lasts I guess.

Trump declared that he is going to change the law giving the right to sue media and make it to you can sue the media if they have been false reporting and you can prove it. The absolute madman. Mark my words, trump will be assassinated by the shadow government now

Trump is just a lil kid with blonde hair and a meme face. A clown is more suited for presidency.:smile:

TFW nobody actually cares.

You're more than welcome to go out and create opinions without going to the media.

In fact, the media has pretty much made an example of this election is going to be the most autistic thing in the history of the U.S. so there's that.

I don't live in usa, but majority of the campaigns/debate is all revolved around trump from a UK stance, do you guys think he'll actually become president? or just another media drummed thing that there always seems to be one person that gets the headlines but then when it comes to it most who wanted never vote or don't even vote for them in the end.

lol this michael bloomberg guy, he's 9 times wealthier than the donald trump and he's also running for the presidential election. but how come i never heard about him till now?

I disagree, this may just be because I don't lean too far either way, but I hate the way the federal government is working, and I sympathize greatly with issues that both the GOP and Democrats have. If the election ends up Trump vs. Sanders, it is the best possible scenario imo. I want a president that stands out from the other candidates, Trump and Sanders do that very well. This would be the first election I would have trouble deciding which way to throw my support because I appreciate both candidates, last election it was a contest of who is the lesser evil.

At the moment it's looking possible. The republican primary is hard to tell because near the end much of the delegates are in winner take all states so it could shift. Hillary is almost certainly the nominee for the Democratic side.

That said, a lot of how the media conveys Trump is incredibly twisted. Looking up platforms alone instead of reading social media or other news about him is the best way to get insight into his policies. I'm not voting for him in the primary, but people blow him way out of proportion a lot. The usual argument against him is "He's crazy" without any actual substance.

Crazy and full of sh1t are 2 different things. Don't make me unleash Bill Maher

What I mean is that nobody ever even glances at policies, they just say "he's crazy" or "he's full of ****" without knowing what his actual stances are.

I don't even think that the majority of his supporters know his stance on issues.

People need a reason to dislike him and it comes from his stance/comments on issues such as immigration/refugees. I said it before I just can't support some ****** that makes it okay to be hateful. I think pimpsy summed up my feelings with his post.

Clinton benefits where Trump doesn't, the people who know jack **** about her stances always have the "it's a woman and that's different and I like change" thing to lean on

Just sit back and watch the show, folks. ****'s about to get lively.

Rip bernie sanders. Down 500 delegates.

That was the same problem with Obama. Idc who people vote for just be educated on the canidates and their stances before making a decision.

I dunno, "crazy" seems pretty substantial to me.

Well obviously he isn't actually crazy. People just spout that and get a response from others. Pretty silly.

Crazy? Maybe.

Delusional? Yes.

Egotistical? Yes.

Around half of Hillary's are super delegates, js.

Nah bernie is down i think around 100 delegates. Add in the super dels to the mix you got over 500. Dunno havent turned eyes over to dem because trump hype

Going to a trump rally on the 9th

If you protest it im going down to north carolina and whooping your ass personally

Make sure you bring your dungeon puppet, so he knows you mean business. :D

What makes you think I would protest it?

What makes you think you can whoop my ass?

Bernie wins Michigan, does he have a chance?

Probably not.

How the hell are you even supposed to know what his stances are.

I assume anyone saying this just wants to bash him and has no real interest to know his stance on anything; he makes it very clear when he talks. It's not like his policy's are top secret ****.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FI4HagtgTPQ

Don't take this as a joke and actually watch the whole thing or you will take it as a joke.

Yeah he has made it clear in some cases, but he seems to change his opinion on a lot of subjects often, or is rather vague in some areas.

Another thing I want to point out is people who say **** like this. This is not at all what Bernie wants. He wants to make it cheaper for middle/lower class.

I'm also waiting for someone to tell me what Donald Trump's stances are. Because I genuinely don't know what to believe that comes out of his mouth anymore.

I am the OlWest server and I speak for my entire community when I say "#Trump4President".

No Trump in Chicago tonight.

Oh well.