![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Pictures worth that thousand -
Seriously.
Check the pictures of the house. Don't notice all the PHOTOGRAPHERS camped out, of course.
The envy is just OUT there. I mean - if she'd won 8 million dollars, that would be one thing. There are socially acceptable ways to go wow, you got some - when it's money.
When it's children? Dude. Gloves come OFF.
*shakes head* When we restrict assistance to children, and only those people who have children - and then do not extend the same assistance (perceived value) to the same people who pay taxes and do NOT have children - what can you expect. The simple perception is that you're stealing, and the brains stop there and spin.
I wonder how much louder people would scream if she decided that some of the kids needed to be placed for adoption.
For my mind, it's not an issue for me - it's very clear there's a lot of people watching (whether they should be or not is another topic for another day) and if anything goes toes up, we'll ALL know (and sell some more advertising dollars).
Everyone I've ever known to have higher order multiples, has had volunteer support. If people are willing to do that? I'm fine with it - everyone has their own take on it, and that one is at least supportive and useful, neh?
But people taking time out of their days to do drive-by bitchslaps? *sigh* Get a better hobby, jeez. That sort of thing only darkens your soul.
(And puts book to that family's assertion that their children would be better off dead without them - and justifies their killing them, and then themselves. How DARE they have kids and not support them? FAILURE. FAILURE. BLAM.)
Find a way through. Only way out, after all.
Check the pictures of the house. Don't notice all the PHOTOGRAPHERS camped out, of course.
The envy is just OUT there. I mean - if she'd won 8 million dollars, that would be one thing. There are socially acceptable ways to go wow, you got some - when it's money.
When it's children? Dude. Gloves come OFF.
*shakes head* When we restrict assistance to children, and only those people who have children - and then do not extend the same assistance (perceived value) to the same people who pay taxes and do NOT have children - what can you expect. The simple perception is that you're stealing, and the brains stop there and spin.
I wonder how much louder people would scream if she decided that some of the kids needed to be placed for adoption.
For my mind, it's not an issue for me - it's very clear there's a lot of people watching (whether they should be or not is another topic for another day) and if anything goes toes up, we'll ALL know (and sell some more advertising dollars).
Everyone I've ever known to have higher order multiples, has had volunteer support. If people are willing to do that? I'm fine with it - everyone has their own take on it, and that one is at least supportive and useful, neh?
But people taking time out of their days to do drive-by bitchslaps? *sigh* Get a better hobby, jeez. That sort of thing only darkens your soul.
(And puts book to that family's assertion that their children would be better off dead without them - and justifies their killing them, and then themselves. How DARE they have kids and not support them? FAILURE. FAILURE. BLAM.)
Find a way through. Only way out, after all.
no subject
I am against anyone who goes and gets pregnaunt without being prepared and able to support the kid. She already had 6 kids and still went and Choose to have more. It wasn't an accidental pregnancy ontop of the kids she already had. She planned to have yet another kid. I would be outraged if she ended up with only 1 more, it's just worse that she end up with even more.
NOW, she is using the kids as someone else said 'as her meal ticket'. She couldn't support the kids she has, has more and now is abusing the kids to make money to support the kids she shouldn't have had in the first place.
The smart thing to do at this point is put them up for adoption. The foster care system is another option but that just falls again on the tax payers more.
no subject
Her parents? They had a choice and they made it. Adults in their majority, etc. We may not like the choices they made, but that's about all it's worth. Opinions and assholes, everyone has one and sooner or later, they all stink. Next?
You know, she'd be STUPID not to try to manage the interest. And with a PR firm working for her? You KNOW they're going to make money for her - because that's how they get paid. Next?
And foster care today IS adoption - concurrent planning being what it is. If there is no possible way to get the kids back in the home, that's what it amounts to. Tada.
In the end, nobody else has to like it - and nobody else is responsible for it. But it's REALLY helpful how so many people are keeping the soap-sellers in business and making money for the PR firm. SO helpful of them!
no subject
Her parents tried to help out because they knew no one else would.
You also don't account that she CHOOSE to have another kid after already having 6 and a lack of income to support those kids.
The problem is that we the tax payers in the end are going to be financially responsiable for her one way or another. That we will have to deal with her kids in our school systems, and hospitals, etc... Because I don't know a single parent that is unemployeed who could take care of/support 6 kids, much less 14 without either state support or charity support. And guess what, charitable donations are tax deductable, and thus again money that could have gone into the state. So yes, we get to be responsiable for her stupid choice.
no subject
She and the kids will get by just like the Duggars do, trading off the publicity and letting the older ones help with the younger. As an aside -- why is it perfectly okay when it's done in the name of religion and the goal is outbreeding the heathens, but not okay when she just wants the kids for themselves? I think if people really wanted to be helpful, they would put this woman through treatment so that whatever is at the bottom of this for her gets resolved, and then at the very least leave her and her children to live their lives. They'll do better together than apart; nobody has indicated in any way that she's an abusive or neglectful parent, and all the griping has been along the lines of "money out of our pockets" which says more about the people griping than it does about anything else. Like anything else involving any particular uterus, just because one wouldn't make the same choice doesn't give one the right to dictate what the uterus' owner can and can't do with it.
no subject
This really, is the crux of the issue. It's not that the taxpayer issue isn't a valid point. It's just currently irrelevant.
no subject
You haven't tried to get welfare since Clinton, have you? *laughs*
And beecause you don't know anyone who's done well with this many kids, doesn't mean there isn't a way and you've just not interacted with it. Consider your POV - the only time you'd know is when something went wrong, neh? I've known families that had MORE children than this woman, everyone was 'self-employed' and that was that. The kids acquired a good work ethic early only - because that was the only way you got anything for yourself - went to school on scholarships and by and large, do pretty damn well.
(I just find it amusing that the Duggars are QUICK to tell anyone who asks that they are self-supporting. Because you know, they'd HAVE to be - just as a comparison. And then within 10 words on their website, tell you they're ALWAYS open to hearing from people who want a closer relationship with God. Riiiight.)
Considering also this is in California, it's pretty clear that NOBODY is going to get any services soon (go go gadget budget crisis) - so saying these guys are on the gravy train is pretty much a misnomer. They're going to get what they paid taxes for (like all of us), what they can provide for themselves (ditto) and what other people are willing to assist them with (natch).
If we get to be responsible for stupid choices, I can tell you about some drivers who needed to go to dipshit driver heaven for not knowing how to make lane changes and ended up messing up some cars and traffic and using up LOTS of taxpayers bucks for repairs to infrastructure, not to mention permanent disability support to some warm bodies. Is getting worked up over that going to help or make sense? Come on! (No, turning someone into a paraplegic isn't a one time gig, either.)
No, this is just an easy target for envy, frustration and blame. Nothing more, nothing less. And socially acceptable in the bargain!
(I just find it amazing that people who are screaming about how much this is costing 'them' are POURING money into other people's pockets with their interest, keeping the wheels turning on the advertising money machine. Just. Oblivious.)
no subject
no subject