Explain how it’s not fundamentally unequivocally immoral to have children if you rely on government assistance without saying the word “spook”.
You can argue about the value of unborn life, and you can argue about society’s level of responsibility to those in need, but you cannot argue it isn’t inherently criminal to create more people to whom society is now financially burdened with. This is no less controversially a universal crime than stealing or murder.
Other urls found in this thread:
What a stupid image you attached.
Single mothers should be shamed, mocked, discriminated and ridiculed by society until single motherhood vanishes from this world. Biggest tragedy in human history.
Should be the scarlet letter just for trying that roastie shit
There shouldn't be government assistance.
Then there'll be two generations of women who can't stop whoring it up and getting knocked up before they're prepared for a child.
Then the idiots of our society will learn through pain that tradcons were fairly right all along.
>fundamentally unequivocally immoral
How haunted are you?
There was a solution to this, but hippies tore it apart
en.wikipedia.org
>if you can't raise your kid, you can move to your local workhouse
>you get food and shelter, but you have to work
>children have food, education, and a stable peer group
>child is partly raised by the community, instead of only an incompetent single mother for support
>conditions in the workhouse are worse than gainful employment, so nobody with any alternatives stays there
>all you need to do is pay for gruel and give them menial labor to do
You can't tell me that this isn't the GOAT solution to single mothers and homelessness
Obviously it wasn't if they don't exist anymore. Things don't go away because their efficient.
>he fell for the "progress" meme
It's redpanels, what did you expect
Why are Amerimutt political cartoons so unfunny and poorly drawn? This applies to both left-wing and right-wing ones.
I think it's just that all political cartoons, because all the creator has to do is support people's existing biases.
Pretty much all pop culture relating to politics is cancer.
redterrorpanels edit when
Also, almost no one raises kids without public assistance, do you have any idea how much public school costs? Birthrates would fall off a cliff if we took your idiocy seriously.
economically it is good public policy to consider the long term. if it is likely these children will on average contribute more in taxes over their lifetimes than the state spent supporting them until 18 then it was a good investment overall.
economically the problem with these kinds of programs is that they victimise legitimate businesses who now have to compete with the state's unfair advantage of free labor. This is the same reason we minimise the work prisoners are forced to do.
If done right rather than financially burdensome it would be beneficial since you have a larger workforce in the future.
That's why most first world countries is being autistic about population decline (especially Japan). Morally better to get your own shit together so as too raise equally stable children but doing your instinctual duty of getting children for its own sake is not completely amoral.
It is. Which is why abortion should always be a readily available option.
more like redditpanels
Don't act like European ones are any better
>inherently criminal to create more people to whom society is now financially burdened with.
>don't say spook
>shits out a bunch of spooks
You could try selling the labor to the highest bidder, so that the market gets some use of out it.
because morality is one of those things max stirner was always talking about
fuck those business
just raise wages and hire better quality workers fight quantity with quality
Oh boy, don’t even start with me son. There are plenty of cringeworthy shit comics from Europe.
Jesus its like polandball for tumblr
I would rather those businesses die than have to pay for all this welfare.
Where is joke Son Dob
WHERE IS
It's made by a 60 IQ obese Danish dyke.
It's a Hetalia fancomic started by some fujo who really liked Scandinavia and didn't feel like it was getting enough shipper attention. Fittingly, it's right up alongside Hetalia as being criticized for being too focused on shiny yaoi fodder and for glossing over actual interesting history.
LOL
It’s got the Amerimutt meme and everything
I pay taxes for the rendering of services. If the service can be rendered in part due to my payment therefore, I will, without moral or ethical qualm, make use of said service.
As an equivalent example, you do realize what you're asking is for someone to justify using the plumber they paid for when the pipes fuck up, yes?
Funny how single-motherhood can only happen if the man abandons the child...
Or if the woman makes no attempt to contact him but surely there has to be a law against that
>economically it is good public policy to consider the long term.
In what world do you live in? Children on welfare are usually born from low IQ parents and end up being criminals.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>Explain how it’s not fundamentally unequivocally immoral to have children if you rely on government assistance without saying the word “spook”.
Let he who has never in his entire life made any use of a government service cast the first stone.
Political comics value being preachy over artistic skill
Scandinavia and the world is hardly political.
If it's not going to make political and historical jokes, it shouldn't have its characters wrapped in national flags.
Your retarded.
We have a biological imperative to propagate the species. People aren't genetically predisposed to poverty (inb4 /pol/), because poor people might still have kids who deserve to pass on their genes. By saying it's immoral for poor people to have children, we're potentially limiting our advancement as a species.
European political cartoons are sexier though
the weekly political cartoon in the Economist is almost always better than anything I see in American papers
Everything the Economist ever published was shit.
I dont get it
Latuff is Brazillian.
And he's batshit.
>surely there has to be a law against that
Yeah and who's gonna tell on the bitch? The father doesn't know and she sure as shit ain't gonna turn herself in.
cancer
You definitely don't live in the US, because there are no laws in place dictating that a woman has to try maintain a relationship. She can leave the man for any reason, or no reason at all and still be entitled to alimony, child support, public assistance etc.
Extremely prone to massive abuse
Dats a slave auction
Why is Caesar working as a make up artist for some dragon?
Apparently socialists don't pay taxes
This will just create a lot of idiot criminals, since the idiot children aren’t educated and thus are very suspectible to the attraction of wealth.
spooks
The banana represents cock right? And the six pointed star in last panel is intentional? Then it makes sense.
>Explain how it’s not fundamentally unequivocally immoral to have children if you rely on government assistance without saying the word “spook”.
If the government is hell bent on taxing your work to give your hard earned money to gibsmigrants then maybe it is better YOU take the governments cash and spend it your children instead of you working hard staying childless and and giving your money so that government can use it to wreck further destruction upon your nation?
The artist really has no idea what he's talking about. He made another comic portraying anyone who mentions the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" phrase as a wannabe Soviet-type central planner. Typical red baiting garbage.
What's stupid about it?
>he fell for the good ol' days meme
>what are taxes
The government doesn't magically get these resources for free
.... you're the reason why we can't have nice things
>cheap quasi slave labour floods market
>puts small business out of work
>increases amount of single mothers who have no job
>cycle repeats ad infintum
>i wish to raise my wife's son!
>he didn't fall for the "it's mostly a clusterfuck" meme
...
The best argument I could see is that some of the children who have to endure a poverty ridden childhood move on to do amazing things; adversity breeds strength.
I'm not sure statiscslly what the odds of this happening is, but I have a lot of anecdotal evidence from my own life.
Because it's absolutely impossible to tell if a child will be a "financial burden" for a society. It might be in it's early years, but eventually it is very likely to be a net positive when it becomes a working adult.