Do you think the government should put a "child limit" on people that recieve welfare?

Nope, I'd far rather see them restructure welfare to help people get off of it. The way it is structured now, it is almost impossible to get off of it once you get on it. If you try to work extra to save up money to get your own place and get out of section 8 housing, they cut your other moneys so you have to spend that money on food and you are right back where you started.

What they need to do is structure it so that they help you get off. They should give you extra benefits for being married, not less. They should have an escrow account in which you are allowed to save up to a certain amount without losing benefits, and as long as you are putting any extra into that account, you don't lose benefits, so that you can save up a deposit and first month's rent for your own place. They should allow you to keep food stamps and Medicaid until you reach a certain pay scale, to support you while you get on your feet, with a goal of getting you completely off social services and independent. The way it is now, when you try to get a start toward being independent, they cut your benefits and force you right back into the system.

If you are on welfare, the only way you can get more money is to have more kids. If you are on your own and paying for it yourself, you aren't going to be so anxious to feed that many mouths.

People should be able to have as many children as they wish, however they should only get welfare for 1. You should not get a raise everytime you have a child that you can not afford.

but birth control to stop the spread... (I KNOW THAT SOUNDS HORRIBLE) but really... there are people who live their lives like this. I have a friend who has 4 children and 15 nephews and nieces... OMG! Put a stop to that.... condoms.... forced sterilization.... sorry for those who are for letting people reproduce like rabbits for money... I think if you strat a family you should support it... get a job before kids... not after

i think there SHOULD be a limit.
if you can't feed the child/children you have, you shouldn't be having more.
i was poor as i child an we lived in the project where i saw first hand the governments stupidity.
every time a welfare leech had another kid, they'd get a raise, in the mean time, they virtually tossed the kids out in the morning and didn't let them come back until night fall, while they sat around all day selling their food stamps, drinking, smoking and getting knocked up again so they can get another raise.
result? ever increasing number of "hood rat punk" kids who do what ever they like, destroy property, attack people, steal and deal drugs.
they grow up with no rules, no limits, no raising or correction and they end up in juvy hall and then jail.
sure the government is making small (patch) changes to try to prevent this but it is to little way to late.
now you are looking at second, third and fourth generation welfare breeders and the behavior is a part of who they are.
welfare replaced food stamps with debit cards, now the cheats just hang around stores asking people to let them buy the groceries with their card and give them the cash.
welfare sent the recipients to work programs but it's still easier than a real job so there's still no drive to become self sustaining productive members of society.
what welfare needs to do is
A. require birth control implants to get money
b. require recipients to work 40 hours a week, every week for 3/4 minimum wage (watch how fast they find real employment)
and
C. more closely monitor the debit card spending to prevent shop for cash scams

That's a tough question. I am against limits and rules put out by our government, being the anarchist I am. Perhaps we should just stop supporting people who irresponsibly give themselves more than they can handle. Set an example. These people are a drag on us. At the same time, I am all for helping children, so I just could not refuse to help the children, but something should be done to discourage people from willingly taking more responsibility than they can handle. Once the child is here, we shouldn't stop supporting them, but the parents should be disgraced for not being able to support them.

Should be a limit on kids in my opinion anyway at the rate we going the world is going to beyond over crowded and if you think im lying just google the stats

Yes/No.

It sounds like a good idea on the surface. But Bureaucracies are notorious for expanding their reach. How long before the state decides it can dictate such to anyone?

Here's an even better solution to the whole welfare fiasco:

(I'm in the United States, so my answer is based on what happens in this country)

The government should limit welfare itself. Stop the hand-outs, and all of a sudden, the "recipient" pool will soon dry up. Since President Lyndon Johnson envisioned the "Great Society" experiment in the 1960s, the practice of offering free money has not stamped out poverty, it has instead created several generations of people assuming they're 'entitled' to something that they don't work for.

Before the liberals attack me, know that poverty existed and people survived it before welfare existed, welfare has not alleviated the situation, and continued welfare only continues welfare. Contray to popular liberal lies, children will NOT die in the streets if their teenaged mothers have no government hand-out to count on. If this system is so beneficial, why has it perpetuated itself without any end in sight?

Anyone who produces a child should provide for that child. If the government is not getting you pregnant, or getting pregnant by you, then the government should not be responsible for providing financial support for the child.

Stop giving away hard-earned taxpayer money to unproductive and undeserving elements of society, and the society as a whole will flourish.

There are exactly TWO groups of people who DESERVE welfare, because they cannot produce for themselves and they have (or may have) no one else on whom they can depend; the elderly and the handicapped.

Did you even notice how easy it becomes to transfer power, and therefore our own freedom, to bureaucrats in gov't? This is why it is so dangerous to allow gov't to 'give' us free stuff.

No. Don't get me wrong. I don't think people should indiscriminately breed on the public's tab. However, I certainly wouldn't cut the innocent children off from assistance. That's not fair to them. It isn't their fault.

I support family planning for all, especially those on public assistance.

Good question, and i believe, there should be a cap rather then a limit. It is a bit different over here in the UK as we have a lot more benefits then you do in the US. We have Child Benefit and Child Tax Credits, where the govt will give you money each month for each child you have. Some people are exploiting this, having massive families so that they don't have to work.
I would like to see us have a cap on say if you have more then 3 kids you don't get any extra funding, that way help is still available, but it doesn't encourage a milking of the system.

Only if you want to encourage abortion rates in the US
+3 for a great Q

Uhm, absolutely not.

The Government has no business regulating what any woman chooses to do with her own uterus.

yeah the limit should be zero

Of course.

No - why should the children suffer from the ignorance of the parents?

I don't think that this should just be about people on welfare. There are so many bad parents, and so many parents who have more children than they can afford. I'm all for personal rights, believe me, but I think that the rights of the children involved outweigh the rights of the parents/potential parents. Sure, people SHOULD be able to do whatever they want with their uterus'. People SHOULD be able to have as many or as few kids as they want. However, people are constantly abusing this right. They are having kids that they cannot afford, and will not look after.

I think that everyone should have some kind of contraceptive implant fitted at puberty, which can only be removed when the person passes a parenting test. This would include having sufficient funds to feed the child, so if you can't even feed yourself, you're out. It would be nice if people could deal with the responsibilities of having kids, but apparently they can't.

The government should do a lot things but they don't. They just keep costing us more money. +4

Well, I'm for "Forced Removal" of the child. Maybe with good upbringing, they'll make a worthwhile contribution to society and not be a scumbucket like their parents.

"Monkey see, Monkey do"

YES - Not only for the poor but also for people who can't afford them.

Isn't there enough abortions each year already?

No gov has enough control now. And trust me if you let something like this pass it will not be long before it will be applied to everyone. Especially if they pass the universal healthcare.

Difficult to implement, I think limiting the benefits to pay for 1 child only, would encourage people to make that choice themselves.

If you want to see change you need to give carrot, not stick. But if you give them too much carrot to start with, it would be hard to bring it in without outrage.

Most responsible and self sufficient people rarely get in the situation of many children, but it should be a choice they have if they can pay for it. Soon in the future, limitation will be necessary to maintain a good healthy lifestyle for all, either that or a bloody war will probably not be far behind.

No, rather I think that the government should put an end to Welfare.

There SHOULD be a limit ... but only if it could truly be enforced. Anyone who has lived "in the system" or around the system, knows that the children rarely see all the benefits of the welfare monies ... no matter how many there are, and no matter how much money is paid. The cheaters will almost always find a way to cheat ... and it won't be to the benefit of their ever increasing numbers of children. We fed many, many children (as I was growing up), who were in welfare "families", because the parent, or parents, spent all the money on booze, cigarettes, drugs, honky-tonks, etc.! We were dirt poor ourselves, but a hungry kid was never turned away. It's really weird to grow up "cussing" beans and cornbread for every meal, when I had friends that made sure they were at MY house (at suppertime), so they would be "lucky" enough to get beans and cornbread!
Sterilization may be the only way, and that is too drastic! But, if a good, enforceable way was found, then yeah, I'd probably agree.

Absolutely not.

Yes. It should be a crime to have kids while on welfare. lol they dont even have to pay for birth control because my tax money is buying it for them with their welfare checks.

yes, and also to get their welfare money each time they should have to pass a drug test...

And you will enforce this ... how??

Welfare mothers should be made to clean working-class taxpayer's homes as a condition of collecting their benefits.

And what to do with those who exceed their limit? Just imagine what material it would be for the community agitators if welfare "families" got forced to split up.

only put a child limit on welfare. There shouldn't be any laws to restrict max no of children some one can have.

Yes for people on welfare and try and take advantage of the system. I understand everyone might need a little help but so many people keep on taking and taking and feel like they have a right to have kids.

My first thought was...

they should limit how many kids a family can have altogether. Like no more than 12(I come from an Amish community, so I'm keeping them in mind and making it a large-ish number) kids....

I'm pro-choice...

but that'd just cause a shitload of abortions if they limited things like that. No one wants that.

Yes, and a limit on how much money given to everyone on welfare.

What would you do? Mandatory abortions, or taking the child from the mother at the hospital? Both seem incredibly cruel to me. Perhaps we should simply stop paying people to have kids they can't afford.

Maybe the benefit should not increase with the number of children one has, but perhaps that is punishing the children. It's a good question. +5

Nope, the government should kick there butt into shape in another ways like Australia does.

By 'the government' you mean you me, and everybody that pays taxes. You're right, we should have a say in how our tax dollars are spent...from welfare to outrageous politicians' salaries.

I do. Sometimes people have no control over their situation. Welfare should be there to HELP those in need, not as a means of support for generations. You want kids? Fine, just don't make the working people support them.

What good would it do?,people are going to have kids if they want them you can put all the government forced control out there and it won't matter so no I don't see the point.

i like kids and i like the planet.
look the govt should put a limit because the population is like crazy. were destrying the planet to build more homes and were eating all the animals. does any body care about polar bears. polution, people dont care. we should put a limit on 2 or 3. and if they have more give it to adopt. and if we set a limit it can help the world in the long-run.

No,we dont need the goevernment telling people how many kids too have.many women on welfare are single mothers.they need too go too school learn a trade,get a job get off welfare.my state (Pa) only allows you too be on welfare for two years then you must get job training and get a job.we have too many people who cheat the system .