Planned Parenthood--- What It Does

[road kill]

Don't start having trophies to your own greatness engraved quite yet....

"Lil' X" has been used long before you think you invented it. RK was LittleGib, I was "littleYardley" long before you have a neuronal spark.

Given your self-congratulatory nature, I have a better name in mind for you....


Lil' AlGore regards.....

Now that you mention it, I did indeed implement the concept with "Lil' Yardley."

Often imitated, never duplicated.....settin' da standard......


RK

[Ken Bora]

then wouldn't it be just as easy arrange a doctor visit for women applying for welfare (or other assistance programs) if they are of child-bearing age. Establish the best method of birth control and proceed accordingly to provide it. Is there health risk associated with many birth control methods? Yes. Is there also health risk associated with pregnancy? Absolutely.

Again, if presuming the original assumption is correct, I would guess that if a limit were placed on the stipends (no more children than you start with on welfare), the incentive would be heightened to prevent unwanted pregnancies. You could even provide a little annual "bonus" for remaining non-pregnant each year Would be a whole lot cheaper than adding all those new children to the assistance programs.

that is a great idea, when are you running I wanna vote for you!!



.

[Gerry Clinchy]

that is a great idea,

Step 2: All enrolled for these assistance programs, if they don't have a HS diploma, must proceed to acquire a GED. 1/2 the group take classes Mon & Wed; other 1/2 Tues & Thurs. Child care provided ... staffed by the 1/2 that have classes on the other two days.

Step 3: After acquiring GED, at least 2 days/wk, all enrollees must be in job training. Such job training can include child or elder day care training. Participants can choose job training they'd prefer combined with their skill levels as assessed through the performance in GED classes. At least 1 more day/wk (if not participating in job internships), must be given to community service ... which could mean anything from collecting litter in parks to child care for non-profits or govt-run facilities. I'd suggest that there be an hourly stipend for time spent on this community service, in addition to the regular assistance stipend.

Step 4: Random drug testing required. No set schedule.

The devil would be in the details of implementing such requirements.

I would also not be totally opposed to subsidizing wages for those who are successful in getting a regular job (no matter what it is). Less than full assistance, but enough to incentivize working rather than not working.

I guess this sounds a lot like "work-fare", and I think that assistance should be directed that way ... getting people into the groove of earning, not living totally on handouts forever. I think that builds self-esteem for the individual.

But what do I know?

[mjh345]

Step 2: All enrolled for these assistance programs, if they don't have a HS diploma, must proceed to acquire a GED. 1/2 the group take classes Mon & Wed; other 1/2 Tues & Thurs. Child care provided ... staffed by the 1/2 that have classes on the other two days.

Step 3: After acquiring GED, at least 2 days/wk, all enrollees must be in job training. Such job training can include child or elder day care training. Participants can choose job training they'd prefer combined with their skill levels as assessed through the performance in GED classes. At least 1 more day/wk (if not participating in job internships), must be given to community service ... which could mean anything from collecting litter in parks to child care for non-profits or govt-run facilities. I'd suggest that there be an hourly stipend for time spent on this community service, in addition to the regular assistance stipend.

Step 4: Random drug testing required. No set schedule.

The devil would be in the details of implementing such requirements.

I would also not be totally opposed to subsidizing wages for those who are successful in getting a regular job (no matter what it is). Less than full assistance, but enough to incentivize working rather than not working.

I guess this sounds a lot like "work-fare", and I think that assistance should be directed that way ... getting people into the groove of earning, not living totally on handouts forever. I think that builds self-esteem for the individual.

But what do I know?

Way too much common sense in your proposal for it ever to be considered

[dnf777]

Step 2: All enrolled for these assistance programs, if they don't have a HS diploma, must proceed to acquire a GED. 1/2 the group take classes Mon & Wed; other 1/2 Tues & Thurs. Child care provided ... staffed by the 1/2 that have classes on the other two days.

Step 3: After acquiring GED, at least 2 days/wk, all enrollees must be in job training. Such job training can include child or elder day care training. Participants can choose job training they'd prefer combined with their skill levels as assessed through the performance in GED classes. At least 1 more day/wk (if not participating in job internships), must be given to community service ... which could mean anything from collecting litter in parks to child care for non-profits or govt-run facilities. I'd suggest that there be an hourly stipend for time spent on this community service, in addition to the regular assistance stipend.

Step 4: Random drug testing required. No set schedule.

The devil would be in the details of implementing such requirements.

I would also not be totally opposed to subsidizing wages for those who are successful in getting a regular job (no matter what it is). Less than full assistance, but enough to incentivize working rather than not working.

I guess this sounds a lot like "work-fare", and I think that assistance should be directed that way ... getting people into the groove of earning, not living totally on handouts forever. I think that builds self-esteem for the individual.

But what do I know?

Norplant or depo-provera after one child on public assistance.
Totally reversible if someone turns it around. Otherwise, we won't be taxed to pay for more kids. My wife and I chose not to have anymore, so why should we have to pay for more?

[huntinman]

Way too much common sense in your proposal for it ever to be considered

It would be considered racist at the core. Not by me, I think it sounds good. Just imagine Jesse, Al and the gang reacting to such a proposal...