Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Romney: welfare moms should have "dignity of work"
Interesting... he said this a few months ago. So, which is it, Mitt? There's no dignity in being a sahm? Staying home isn't work?
?I wanted to increase the work requirement,? said Romney in New Hampshire. ?I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, ?Well that?s heartless.? And I said, ?No, no, I?m willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It?ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.??
Just to be clear, I wish the whole debate wasn't happening. I'd rather we drop the topic all together. But, if you're going to throw stones, make sure you protect your glass house.
Re: Romney: welfare moms should have "dignity of work"
no dignity in being a poor sahm is what he means...
If you have a rich H [Mitt] to take care of you there is no greater dignity that being a sahm [Ann]
... but if you have no H or he is poor, then shame come to you for being a sahm boil on societies @ss.
I agree with you... but the way Anne spoke about SAHM the other day was as if every woman has that choice available to her. Most do not have SAHM as a choice. SAHMs are mostly very poor (can't afford childcare) or very wealthy.
Above Us Only Sky
This is rich.
I'm assuming it would end when the kid's are in school and no longer need a SAH parent.
as for people who don't have children, well, I don't think thats really relevant. If you don't have kids, you don't really need to SAH and there's no saving from not subsidizing day care.
do we really want to pay more for people to work, with tax dollars for childcare?
Adding: sure I'd love it, more jobs for me and my friends if there were more gov. childcare payments, we wouldn't have been laid off if the gov. childcare gravy train hadn't come to a screeching halt.
Most? really? i know a ton of women who make the choice to SAH b/c they wouldn't bring in enough money to pay for daycare and actually take anything home. I'm close to that myself- I mostly work just to have benefits.
I wouldn't say MOST SAHM's are "very poor"... maybe most very poor moms end up staying at home - because a job doesn't = the cost of daycare... but i wouldnt' say most SaHM's are very poor.
It's smart to keep people employed. Two or three years out of the job market and people have a really, really hard time getting back into it at all, especially people who have no other means of support aside from welfare and who thus likely didn't have high job skills to begin with, and daycare is the biggest hurdle to getting back in and staying in. Paying for daycare so that someone can work and earn a wage is keeping someone more current, up to date, employable in the future than someone who's had to eke out a welfare existence for five years off the labor market till their kid hits kindergarten; which then keeps them more employable for the next 13 plus years, even after day care is over once school starts. Seems a reasonable investment.
I stand by my statement. You may not feel wealthy but I would guess that you are in the top 10% of American households.
You work because you have a choice.
Above Us Only Sky
oh ffs, you all suck, for real. He says dumb shiit, people say dumb shiit in return and we all reinterpret it, despite knowing what those people all mean to say based solely on like or dislike of a candidate or the party he represents.
And I'm really sick of all of them, all of you, using the reality of lives you don't understand to make your damned point. Yes, I'm referring to Romney and to the majority of PCE.
Sounds like it's time for me to dial it back, yes but not before saying I wish the majority of you would stfu.
Click me, click me!
Zeus and Bubba
Well, yes, it's called being a civilised society. Everyone gets fed and clothed and a roof over their head. In exchange for that you make them jump through some hoops, do some community service work, and you *** about them. But you still feed them, because they're human beings.
At the end of the day it's worthwhile, because people keep their skills current, their kids grow up and they go back to work, and kids from families with at least one employed parent do better in life than kids who are third generation dole bludgers. So yes, you cover childcare to make it possible for them to work.
Me too - but I can't even think of anyone who was able to quit working when they had kids. My mom did for a while when I was a kid, but in my generation or younger, I can't think of one. Their husbands wouldn't have been able to pay all the household bills and buy groceries without that second paycheck. I often hear women complaining that they're working just to pay for the childcare and groceries.
Me too - but I can't even think of anyone who was able to quit working when they had kids. My mom did for a while when I was a kid, but in my generation or younger, I can't think of one. Their husbands wouldn't have been able to pay all the household bills and buy groceries without that second paycheck. I often hear women complaining that they're working just to pay for the childcare and groceries.
Just because someone thinks there is dignity in working doesnt mean the converse it automatically true. My lord, that's logic 101 people. If a then b doesn't or mean if not a then not b.
But this is a fun game we play...ignore the issues and debate semantics. There are certainly enough issues to debate that both sides suck at. We really can't talk about any of those instead of picking apart phrases?
Zeus and Bubba
Locally there is competition for low paying hourly wage jobs like McDonald's. If you have someone working even at McDonald's for 5+ years versus not working that is 5+ years of opportunities for raises, management promotions, and stable work experience and references that could transfer to other job opportunities.
But I don't think dignity is the right word here. I mean our society doesn't exactly treat poor burger flippers with much dignity.
I would really love to know what's considered wealthy to some of you. I'm a SAHM with lots of SAHM friends, and I know some of us are not even close to the "top 10%". Don't get me wrong, I certainly feel like having the choice to stay home is a luxury, but it's not like we're all rolling in the dough.
But back to what really matters here, I can't see how anyone can argue against women on welfare getting out in the workforce. I mean, how AWFUL. How awful to make it easier, not harder, for women on welfare to get OFF of welfare. Just another heartless, heartless Republican.
<a href="http://www.thenest.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Home D
Seems to address the issue with a lot of government programs, the cheapest option is not always the best. I think if someone wants to work and is trying to better their situation, I think we should be willing to spend more to subsidize daycare to make that possible. We can't have it both ways. I am not sure why this has anything to do with the whole sahm debate.
You're talking about respect or status. Romney is talking more about self esteem.
If you've ever been unemployed, you probably know there's definitely a sense of dignity and self worth that comes from being employed, no matter what the profession.
You're talking about respect or status. Romney is talking more about self esteem.
If you've ever been unemployed, you probably know there's definitely a sense of dignity and self worth that comes from being employed, no matter what the profession.
The point of all this is that on one hand, being a SAHM is work and if you dare suggest that it isn't, you re a woman hater who doesn't value the incredibly important work that a SAHM does. Just because she isn't getting a paycheck doesn't mean that her work isn't real or just as valuable and dignified as what a mom who is employed outside the home does.
on the other hand, being a SAHM is worthless and women who receive welfare checks while being at home all day taking care of their children are lazy and undignified and need to get a REAL job.