DesireeNevermind said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

I cannot debate that. I agree with it.

Can I just tell you that I owe welfare $920.00 right now. Ya, they made a mistake and paid me too much in food stamps when I was recieving them. Now how the hell is that MY fault. Now I gotta pay them back!!! Lame.

I am sick of all the unemployment extensions though. Don't tell me you can't get a job at McDonalds, or something. You can collect for 6 months without an extension and they pay for you to take courses if you'd like. I think if your enrolled in school then if you need an extension it should be available. Or if you can prove you've been applying to jobs. But not if your sittin on your ass watchin Lifetime all day.

And I also hate these bumper stckers everyone has that says Drug Test for Welfare Recipients. Maybe the ones who have been on welfare for 92 years. I'm not like an advocate for crack heads or anything, but they are sick. Their children need to eat!

It's awful. A handfull of folks on welfare get caught under the influence and now everyone on welfare is a potential drug addict. Nonsense. Just another excuse some are using to get rid of welfare altogether. I've no problems with limits on how long one can receive benefits but there certainly is no reason to degrade them and lump them in with common druggies.

Shorty said:

DesireeNevermind said:

It's awful. A handfull of folks on welfare get caught under the influence and now everyone on welfare is a potential drug addict. Nonsense. Just another excuse some are using to get rid of welfare altogether. I've no problems with limits on how long one can receive benefits but there certainly is no reason to degrade them and lump them in with common druggies.

yeah...I have NO problem with drug testing welfare recepients. If you want a hand out then you need to pass the test. a handful? I have a hunch it's more than a handful.

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to recieve benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

TotalANXiousNESS said:

Shorty said:

yeah...I have NO problem with drug testing welfare recepients. If you want a hand out then you need to pass the test. a handful? I have a hunch it's more than a handful.

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to receive benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

is that all welfare recipients get? food stamps? I really don't know but I thought some get a check. so they get to keep the food stamps and not the cash..I dunno but if they know their kids won't eat if they fail and they still fail...they obviously don't care so why should I? (even though I do..LOL) maybe the kids will be put in foster care...I don't like that either but, I can tell you that IF I ever have to be on welfare and there's a drug test...you can bet your ass I will be clean as a whistle every time. hey maybe even alcohol should be off limits...it's all luxuries, no cigs, no alcohol, no drugs....sorry.

[Edited 9/22/10 12:51pm]

Shorty said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to receive benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

is that all welfare recipients get? food stamps? I really don't know but I thought some get a check. so they get to keep the food stamps and not the cash..I dunno but if they know their kids won't eat if they fail and they still fail...they obviously don't care so why should I? (even though I do..LOL) maybe the kids will be put in foster care...I don't like that either but, I can tell you that IF I ever have to be on welfare and there's a drug test...you can bet your ass I will be clean as a whistle every time. hey maybe even alcohol should be off limits...it's all luxuries, no cigs, no alcohol, no drugs....sorry.

[Edited 9/22/10 12:51pm]

I dunno how it is in every state, just here, and all's I know about here is what I was eligable for.

When Jer and I first split, there was no child support order, and I didn't have a job, and had the 2 kids with me. I got 500 a month in food stamps, and health insurance. They told me I could have recieved cash assistance if I worked 20 hours a week, or went to school for something, which they would pay for.

At the time I had no interest I didn't even have a place to live, so I didn't go for the cash assistance.

Once I started getting child support the foodstamps went down to 200 a month.

Then when I got a job 76 a month.

Now all of a sudden they miscalculated and I get nothing (no biggie) but I also have to pay them back.

Ps. I am not on drugs, and had to get tested a cpl times when my X and I were in and out of court, and it didn't bother me. BUT the stickers bother me. Theyre judgemental.

If you want a friendly debate, stay out of P&R!

But if you just want to debate for the heck of it, check out P&R, I think sometimes, someone starts a debate for the heck of it.

wildgoldenhoney said:

If you want a friendly debate, stay out of P&R!

But if you just want to debate for the heck of it, check out P&R, I think sometimes, someone starts a debate for the heck of it.

I wanted a friendly topic, which I started in GD and was moved to die in P&R

I don't know anyone in there and they don't joke around like here

ZombieKitten said:

wildgoldenhoney said:

If you want a friendly debate, stay out of P&R!

But if you just want to debate for the heck of it, check out P&R, I think sometimes, someone starts a debate for the heck of it.

I wanted a friendly topic, which I started in GD and was moved to die in P&R

I don't know anyone in there and they don't joke around like here

Nope, they sure don't.

What topic did you raise? Maybe TotalAnxiousness will debate you on that.

I don't have an opinion as far as the bumper stickers, but I damn sure believe more needs to be done to make sure those collecting benefits are actually seeking employment (barring some sort of disability that prevents that from being possible).

And I am sure this might be frowned upon by some, but I would be all for child support going into its own account with a debit card or whatever attached to it that both parties were allowed to see the transactions of. And if there's a history of spending child support on items that are obviously not for the kids, let's say cigarettes, alcohol, shopping at Victoria's Secret, etc. then show the transactions in court and get the support amount lowered. Obviously too much is being paid if you can't figure out what to do with the money other than buy yourself luxury items with your kids' money.

Holy Shit I used the wrong its at first. That could of been bad.

[Edited 9/22/10 21:36pm]

wildgoldenhoney said:

ZombieKitten said:

I wanted a friendly topic, which I started in GD and was moved to die in P&R

I don't know anyone in there and they don't joke around like here

Nope, they sure don't.

What topic did you raise? Maybe TotalAnxiousness will debate you on that.

http://prince.org/msg/105/344255

FauxReal said:

I don't have an opinion as far as the bumper stickers, but I damn sure believe more needs to be done to make sure those collecting benefits are actually seeking employment (barring some sort of disability that prevents that from being possible).

And I am sure this might be frowned upon by some, but I would be all for child support going into its own account with a debit card or whatever attached to it that both parties were allowed to see the transactions of. And if there's a history of spending child support on items that are obviously not for the kids, let's say cigarettes, alcohol, shopping at Victoria's Secret, etc. then show the transactions in court and get the support amount lowered. Obviously too much is being paid if you can't figure out what to do with the money other than buy yourself luxury items with your kids' money.

Holy Shit I used the wrong its at first. That could of been bad.

[Edited 9/22/10 21:36pm]

Are you fucking kidding me?

Regardless of where the 'Victoria Secret' money comes from, kids still cost money and they're being paid for somehow, wether it's out of the child support account or the primary custodians paycheck.

My child support goes into my bank account, and that is the only money in that account. I don't use that money on my kids, I pay my bills with it, and CASH my PAYCHECKS, and that is what buys my kids food, school clothes, pays 75 bucks for t-ball/boyscouts, school pictures, medicine, My rent.

I don't go, Okay kids, we got 160 bucks in child support this week, so Noah I'm gonna spend 80- bucks on you this week, and Daisy 80 bucks on you.

Please.

And oh how I miss the days when my support was 375 a week.

I haven't been in court for quite a while. I think it's time.

TotalANXiousNESS said:

FauxReal said:

I don't have an opinion as far as the bumper stickers, but I damn sure believe more needs to be done to make sure those collecting benefits are actually seeking employment (barring some sort of disability that prevents that from being possible).

And I am sure this might be frowned upon by some, but I would be all for child support going into its own account with a debit card or whatever attached to it that both parties were allowed to see the transactions of. And if there's a history of spending child support on items that are obviously not for the kids, let's say cigarettes, alcohol, shopping at Victoria's Secret, etc. then show the transactions in court and get the support amount lowered. Obviously too much is being paid if you can't figure out what to do with the money other than buy yourself luxury items with your kids' money.

Holy Shit I used the wrong its at first. That could of been bad.

[Edited 9/22/10 21:36pm]

Are you fucking kidding me?

Regardless of where the 'Victoria Secret' money comes from, kids still cost money and they're being paid for somehow, wether it's out of the child support account or the primary custodians paycheck.

My child support goes into my bank account, and that is the only money in that account. I don't use that money on my kids, I pay my bills with it, and CASH my PAYCHECKS, and that is what buys my kids food, school clothes, pays 75 bucks for t-ball/boyscouts, school pictures, medicine, My rent.

I don't go, Okay kids, we got 160 bucks in child support this week, so Noah I'm gonna spend 80- bucks on you this week, and Daisy 80 bucks on you.

Please.

I wasn't talking about you specifically.

And no I am not fucking kidding you.

TotalANXiousNESS said:

Shorty said:

yeah...I have NO problem with drug testing welfare recepients. If you want a hand out then you need to pass the test. a handful? I have a hunch it's more than a handful.

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to recieve benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

So really, what would be the difference? If I take a drug test and fail it, I loose my job... Kids cant eat, or if I take it for a potential job, and flunk it, kids cant eat... So why should people who are on welfare not even trying to get a job be able to get a free handout all while they are shootin up or smoking shit? Does that seem even remotely fair to you?

And im not saying everyone on welfare is a loser sitting at home smoking it up... If your clean, you (not you specifically!) shouldnt have a problem taking the test just like everyone else in order to recieve a paycheck...

tinaz said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to recieve benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

So really, what would be the difference? If I take a drug test and fail it, I loose my job... Kids cant eat, or if I take it for a potential job, and flunk it, kids cant eat... So why should people who are on welfare not even trying to get a job be able to get a free handout all while they are shootin up or smoking shit? Does that seem even remotely fair to you?

And im not saying everyone on welfare is a loser sitting at home smoking it up... If your clean, you (not you specifically!) shouldnt have a problem taking the test just like everyone else in order to recieve a paycheck...

I don't think the system is perfect by any means. And I don't think welfare is designed to allow drug addicts to sit home and get high and not try to better themselves.

Maybe if they do drug test welfare recipients and their test comes up positive they can make benefits available only if they seek some sort of rehab. (Which ofcourse welfare is going to have to pay for. So then people who are fired from their jobs for hitting the pipe, can go get benefits, and help for their addiction as well.

FauxReal said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

Are you fucking kidding me?

Regardless of where the 'Victoria Secret' money comes from, kids still cost money and they're being paid for somehow, wether it's out of the child support account or the primary custodians paycheck.

My child support goes into my bank account, and that is the only money in that account. I don't use that money on my kids, I pay my bills with it, and CASH my PAYCHECKS, and that is what buys my kids food, school clothes, pays 75 bucks for t-ball/boyscouts, school pictures, medicine, My rent.

I don't go, Okay kids, we got 160 bucks in child support this week, so Noah I'm gonna spend 80- bucks on you this week, and Daisy 80 bucks on you.

Please.

I wasn't talking about you specifically.

And no I am not fucking kidding you.

I realize you didn't mean me specifically. But if they change it for one, they change it for all.

If a Parent is concerned with where their court ordered child support money is going, then they need to act on it, by maybe filing for joint custody and then getting their support lowered. Then instead of paying as much money to the Primary Custodian, they can start sharing some of the responsibility that goes along with raising children. Such as driving them all over creation for activities, cooking their meals, helping with homework, bathing them, buying clothing, helping with fundraisers for school, buying medicine, paying daycare, driving them to daycare, making sure they get to school, cutting their nails, wiping their noses, etc. Instead of buying them a Happy Meal once a week and then putting the rest of the responsibility on the PC.

I have no patience for Fathers or MOTHERS, for that matter, who want to see their kids for a few hours a week or every other weekend, whenever it is convenient for them, but then also want to bitch about paying child support.

tinaz said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to recieve benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

So really, what would be the difference? If I take a drug test and fail it, I loose my job... Kids cant eat, or if I take it for a potential job, and flunk it, kids cant eat... So why should people who are on welfare not even trying to get a job be able to get a free handout all while they are shootin up or smoking shit? Does that seem even remotely fair to you?

And im not saying everyone on welfare is a loser sitting at home smoking it up... If your clean, you (not you specifically!) shouldnt have a problem taking the test just like everyone else in order to recieve a paycheck...

Shorty said:

tinaz said:

So really, what would be the difference? If I take a drug test and fail it, I loose my job... Kids cant eat, or if I take it for a potential job, and flunk it, kids cant eat... So why should people who are on welfare not even trying to get a job be able to get a free handout all while they are shootin up or smoking shit? Does that seem even remotely fair to you?

And im not saying everyone on welfare is a loser sitting at home smoking it up... If your clean, you (not you specifically!) shouldnt have a problem taking the test just like everyone else in order to recieve a paycheck...

Huh?

What's better -- a Slinky or a Weeble Wobble?

Shorty said:

DesireeNevermind said:

It's awful. A handfull of folks on welfare get caught under the influence and now everyone on welfare is a potential drug addict. Nonsense. Just another excuse some are using to get rid of welfare altogether. I've no problems with limits on how long one can receive benefits but there certainly is no reason to degrade them and lump them in with common druggies.

yeah...I have NO problem with drug testing welfare recepients. If you want a hand out then you need to pass the test. a handful? I have a hunch it's more than a handful.

I'm not including the problem bunch in the entire group of welfare recipients when I say in all sincerity, welfare is not a hand out for all people. It's put in place for people who've legitimately gone through hard times, and although I've been blessed to have seen 2 businesses rise and collapse personally in my 40 year old lifetime, I daresay with all the taxes I've paid out for the past 22 years to the point of persecution, if things ever got so dire that there would be food stamps making the difference between keeping a roof over my head and being in the cold, then I would take food stamps wholeheartedly. I've been working and paying taxes since I was 16 years old. If anything ever happens to me, and I would need to reach back into the system that I gave into freely for the last 23 years, I would do so, and I would dare for anyone to assert that it was a handout.

[Edited 9/24/10 23:37pm]

tinaz said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

And then what? If they test postitive no food stamps? Then their kids can't eat.

And okay, even if they DO make you pass a drug test to recieve benefits fine.

Bit the bumper stickers are awful. The people who have them are just b itter cuz they hate their job, or cuz they had a random piss test at work and got the can.

So really, what would be the difference? If I take a drug test and fail it, I loose my job... Kids cant eat, or if I take it for a potential job, and flunk it, kids cant eat... So why should people who are on welfare not even trying to get a job be able to get a free handout all while they are shootin up or smoking shit? Does that seem even remotely fair to you?

And im not saying everyone on welfare is a loser sitting at home smoking it up... If your clean, you (not you specifically!) shouldnt have a problem taking the test just like everyone else in order to recieve a paycheck...

Fair enough.

TotalANXiousNESS said:

FauxReal said:

I wasn't talking about you specifically.

And no I am not fucking kidding you.

I realize you didn't mean me specifically. But if they change it for one, they change it for all.

If a Parent is concerned with where their court ordered child support money is going, then they need to act on it, by maybe filing for joint custody and then getting their support lowered. Then instead of paying as much money to the Primary Custodian, they can start sharing some of the responsibility that goes along with raising children. Such as driving them all over creation for activities, cooking their meals, helping with homework, bathing them, buying clothing, helping with fundraisers for school, buying medicine, paying daycare, driving them to daycare, making sure they get to school, cutting their nails, wiping their noses, etc. Instead of buying them a Happy Meal once a week and then putting the rest of the responsibility on the PC.

I get this response a lot, as if it's that simple. As if joint custody and lower payments are just sitting there waiting for all non-custodial parents willing to ask. That's probably not the case most of the time. There is no guaranteeing that filing for joint custody will get the non-custodial parent lower child support or joint custody, especially if distance is an issue.

As for the bolded issues, isn't that sort of the purpose of child support? I know that not everyone receives enough to pay all those bills. But shouldn't some portion of the money (even if only in theory) go towards those things?

I do agree that non-custodial parents should step up and do more with the rearing of the children if possible. And in most cases it probably is.

I have no patience for Fathers or MOTHERS, for that matter, who want to see their kids for a few hours a week or every other weekend, whenever it is convenient for them, but then also want to bitch about paying child support.

Lucky for me I'm not one of those. I want to see my child everyday. It's not possible though. But I imagine this wasn't geared at me specifically.

Getting back to the point I raised, ultimately, the courts do what they deem best for the child. I don't see how an account specifically for child support where both parties could see it would run counter to that. It doesn't lower the amount. It's no less usable. What is the argument against it? How does it hurt anything? All it would do, IMO, is provide some degree of financial accountability for both parties.

No, it was not geared towards you, since I have no idea what your situatoin is.

I'm sure the system is different in different states, and even different counties for that matter. I know people who have joint custody, and they make it work, and I know some who don't and they would probably not be able to co-exist, co-parent no matter how hard they try.

As far as the system, the courts here, will give any father (I'm just gonna say father, but it goes for mothers as well) they will grant the father as much time with the child as he would like. The judges here sy as long as they are loving and showing that they are trying to be a Father that is what matters. I kow Fathers that IMO should NOT have joint custody, but they do and their support did get lowered.

I know it's not that easy in every case, but parents who bitch about it but don't try irritate me. I know it is impossible for some to see their kids during the week. But yanno, its just as hard for the primary custodian to make things work, with timing, work and school, pick ups and drops offs, but yet they do whatever need be to make it work. Hence the child support. I know support is there to go towards the childrens clothing, food, daycare. whatever, but if I need to pay my phone bill woth it one month and thats the only money there, guess what? I'm payin my phone bill with it.

Yanno, like say for instance the school calls the Primary custodian at work cuz they;re sick and need to be picked up.....whose missing work that day, and not getting paid for it, all the while getting dirty looks from your boss? It's just stuff like that, that the primary caregiver needs to be helped out with via child support, and honestly I think the other parent should be willing to pay it without having an attitude about it.

I'm sure theres people in the world who spend their support on all sorts of things, and that their children are not being taken care of at all. This is sad, and if thats the case I would hope the other parent step in and take it to the courts, cuz that child needs to be living elsewhere.

Like I said none of this is aimed at you. And I ofcourse am biased because I have huge ex husband support issues, so if I come across bitter and bitchy that is why, and I apologize, it is in no way directed towards you.

And I need to fix that sentence where I said some parents can't co-exist/co-parent no matter how hard they try.

What I should have said is one or both of them are too selfish to do it, and refuse to try because they are always putting themselves or someone else before their children.

well you got your debate!!!!

TotalANXiousNESS said:

No, it was not geared towards you, since I have no idea what your situatoin is.

I'm sure the system is different in different states, and even different counties for that matter. I know people who have joint custody, and they make it work, and I know some who don't and they would probably not be able to co-exist, co-parent no matter how hard they try.

As far as the system, the courts here, will give any father (I'm just gonna say father, but it goes for mothers as well) they will grant the father as much time with the child as he would like. The judges here sy as long as they are loving and showing that they are trying to be a Father that is what matters. I kow Fathers that IMO should NOT have joint custody, but they do and their support did get lowered.

I know it's not that easy in every case, but parents who bitch about it but don't try irritate me. I know it is impossible for some to see their kids during the week. But yanno, its just as hard for the primary custodian to make things work, with timing, work and school, pick ups and drops offs, but yet they do whatever need be to make it work. Hence the child support. I know support is there to go towards the childrens clothing, food, daycare. whatever, but if I need to pay my phone bill woth it one month and thats the only money there, guess what? I'm payin my phone bill with it.

Yanno, like say for instance the school calls the Primary custodian at work cuz they;re sick and need to be picked up.....whose missing work that day, and not getting paid for it, all the while getting dirty looks from your boss? It's just stuff like that, that the primary caregiver needs to be helped out with via child support, and honestly I think the other parent should be willing to pay it without having an attitude about it.

I'm sure theres people in the world who spend their support on all sorts of things, and that their children are not being taken care of at all. This is sad, and if thats the case I would hope the other parent step in and take it to the courts, cuz that child needs to be living elsewhere.

Like I said none of this is aimed at you. And I ofcourse am biased because I have huge ex husband support issues, so if I come across bitter and bitchy that is why, and I apologize, it is in no way directed towards you.

It's cool, I'm probably biased for my own reasons as well. In fact, it's my bias that even made me think of the idea. So if I come across like an asshole, I apologize for that.

To randomly address one point you made, I wouldn't see a problem with child support money going toward a phone bill, rent, utilities, car maintenance, etc. I see a phone as a necessity. If the child gets hurt, school needs to call/be called, doctor's appointments need to be made, that phone line needs to be there to care for the child. Not to mention as a means of the child talking with the other parent. I know it was just one example, but I don't see any problem with child support going toward that.

FauxReal said:

TotalANXiousNESS said:

No, it was not geared towards you, since I have no idea what your situatoin is.

I'm sure the system is different in different states, and even different counties for that matter. I know people who have joint custody, and they make it work, and I know some who don't and they would probably not be able to co-exist, co-parent no matter how hard they try.

As far as the system, the courts here, will give any father (I'm just gonna say father, but it goes for mothers as well) they will grant the father as much time with the child as he would like. The judges here sy as long as they are loving and showing that they are trying to be a Father that is what matters. I kow Fathers that IMO should NOT have joint custody, but they do and their support did get lowered.

I know it's not that easy in every case, but parents who bitch about it but don't try irritate me. I know it is impossible for some to see their kids during the week. But yanno, its just as hard for the primary custodian to make things work, with timing, work and school, pick ups and drops offs, but yet they do whatever need be to make it work. Hence the child support. I know support is there to go towards the childrens clothing, food, daycare. whatever, but if I need to pay my phone bill woth it one month and thats the only money there, guess what? I'm payin my phone bill with it.

Yanno, like say for instance the school calls the Primary custodian at work cuz they;re sick and need to be picked up.....whose missing work that day, and not getting paid for it, all the while getting dirty looks from your boss? It's just stuff like that, that the primary caregiver needs to be helped out with via child support, and honestly I think the other parent should be willing to pay it without having an attitude about it.

I'm sure theres people in the world who spend their support on all sorts of things, and that their children are not being taken care of at all. This is sad, and if thats the case I would hope the other parent step in and take it to the courts, cuz that child needs to be living elsewhere.

Like I said none of this is aimed at you. And I ofcourse am biased because I have huge ex husband support issues, so if I come across bitter and bitchy that is why, and I apologize, it is in no way directed towards you.

It's cool, I'm probably biased for my own reasons as well. In fact, it's my bias that even made me think of the idea. So if I come across like an asshole, I apologize for that.

To randomly address one point you made, I wouldn't see a problem with child support money going toward a phone bill, rent, utilities, car maintenance, etc. I see a phone as a necessity. If the child gets hurt, school needs to call/be called, doctor's appointments need to be made, that phone line needs to be there to care for the child. Not to mention as a means of the child talking with the other parent. I know it was just one example, but I don't see any problem with child support going toward that.

I agree. My ex husband got pissed when I finally settled into a decent place, and got in my face that his child support should not be going towards my rent. Which is absurd. Kids need a roof over their head.

Well great.

Now what are we gonna argue about?

TotalANXiousNESS said:

FauxReal said:

It's cool, I'm probably biased for my own reasons as well. In fact, it's my bias that even made me think of the idea. So if I come across like an asshole, I apologize for that.

To randomly address one point you made, I wouldn't see a problem with child support money going toward a phone bill, rent, utilities, car maintenance, etc. I see a phone as a necessity. If the child gets hurt, school needs to call/be called, doctor's appointments need to be made, that phone line needs to be there to care for the child. Not to mention as a means of the child talking with the other parent. I know it was just one example, but I don't see any problem with child support going toward that.

I agree. My ex husband got pissed when I finally settled into a decent place, and got in my face that his child support should not be going towards my rent. Which is absurd. Kids need a roof over their head.

Well great.

Now what are we gonna argue about?

I got it.

You ever notice how when you go somewhere to eat, they'll give pregnant women larger servings for the same price? I say it's discrimination. I mean, I've got at least the appetite and perhaps the nutritional needs of a grown woman plus a fetus. Why can't I get the serving and a half of Lo Mein and some extra General Tso's Chicken? Why is my money apparently less valuable?

Discuss.