[Vision2020] Downturn Drags More Consumers Into Bankruptcy

[Donovan Arnold]

Hansen,
 
I think it is borderline criminal abuse of children to try and give birth to five children on $13.50 an hour. $13,50 an hour in Idaho for 2 or 3 people is barely manageable, but in Indiana , 7 people, it is suicidal. She has 5 children, and how many miscarriages?
This is her body saying she is a woman, not a baby manufacturing plant. 
 
There is such a thing as personal responsibility, and popping out endless babies to the point your body and home are broke is the perfect example of failing to take personal responsibility for yourself and actions. 
 
The taxpayer should not be forced to pay for the irresponsible behavior of adults, nor should her children. I say give this couple a loan to raise their children, provided they don't have any more children, then make them pay it back with interest to give money to the next set of adults that cannot figure out the proper operation of a birth control device. 
 
You have babies, you take of them, not me or other taxpayers, it is called taking personal responsibility for your actions. A concept lost on some, I see.  
 
Best Regards,
 
Donovan
 
 
 
 
 


--- On Mon, 11/17/08, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:

From: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Downturn Drags More Consumers Into Bankruptcy
To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com, "Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>, "Art Deco" <deco at moscow.com>
Date: Monday, November 17, 2008, 2:45 PM

Arnold stated:

"Geesh, 5 children? Obviously she and her husband had the wrong type of 
surgery. A person should be required to not have any more children after 
they go on government assistance."

This comment extends way beyond ignorance.  This statement is wrong on so 
many levels I do not know where to begin.  Nowhere in the article, Arnold, 
does it even imply that Ms. Marquis is collecting government assistance.  
Yet you automatically assume (without any evidence) that she is.  Probably 
because she is without health insurance and because of her "21 operations 
in the last nine years".  She and her husband are attempting to merely 
survive on his $13.85/hour job.  Maybe she is simply too proud to accept 
government assistance.  If Ms. Marquis is/was collecting government 
assistance, concern over the costs of her 21 operations, related 
to "emphysema and other respiratory diseases, and others related to
accidents and several miscarriages" would not be a major concern of hers 
as it obviously is.

And how about those that are wrongfully "addicted" to SSI?

Hansen
Moscow, Idaho




---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.com/


=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20081117/9b915d77/attachment-0001.html