The assault on women in this country...

1st: Thread = derailed
2nd: It should never be up to a government to pick and choose what businesses fail or which ones should be propped up. That is a huge over reach of power that should never be given.

 

You are right, both sides do give welfare in different forms, but I think both the Dem's and Repubes shared in the corporate welfare shit. The only real difference is the industry's.

Corporate welfare by far exceeds welfare to the people. (Assumption)

 

Oh I thought you were jus a trouble maka.

 

Never say never. This country was faced with a set of circumstances not seen before, precipitated by the events of 9/11. I don't know if TARP was the single correct move to make but clearly something was needed to prevent an epic depression which would have had an economic impact on more than financial institutions and automakers. Doing nothing or borrowing more foreign $$ were not options IMO.

 

Yes I imagine that purposely single mothers are in that number but neither group as you said are likely on welfare. I'm talking about the terminally poverty stricken group. The women who make a choice of welfare over an economically undesirable baby daddy.

There's a lot going on with birth rates. First of all, look at what happened to abortion numbers just prior to Carter. In 1969 there were 25,918. In 1970, 193,491, then up to 485,816, then 898,600 in 1974. From 1977-1981 under Carter, they rose to over 1.5 million. Clearly the impact of Roe v Wade was sending abortion rates ever higher which is likely to have an effect on birth rates. Under Clinton, the access to sex ed and birth control was easier so obviously the birth rate is going to be impacted. Conversely under Reagan the abortion numbers held steady.

But there is a much simpler explanation than all that. Economics. Birth rates historically decline in an economic downturn. In the 70's the birth rate declined by 18%, in the 90's it was down 15%, and during the Depression it was down 17%. People will postpone child bearing when they know they can't afford it.....unless they are on welfare. And that's the point. Welfare is an economic war on women that keeps those in poverty dependent on the government with little to no incentive to ever get off of it.

 

That too.

 

so it is ok to save companies, but not people making 8.25 an hour, gotcha.

 

who do you think you are saving when you save a company?

 

What private option was on the table?

Why was there mass deregulation?