Yeah, true. But I've said this before, almost everyone here agrees on those points. So let's talk about the other things we have to do besides reduce cash handouts

but they're going to invent ways to make it more expensive.

We have to fix society before we cut these funds

that's a smidge utopian 😉

The best thing we can do is to tie welfare benefits to children not parents of children, and then reward families for remaining intact in obvious and measurable ways.

TBH, I think the only real problem society has is the breakdown of the family.

everything else is a symptom.

That's exactly what I meant

We need to strengthen the family unit

Doing such will later reduce the needs for such benefits

But, don't listen to the ancaps that just want to cut funding without repairing the damage

There's something to be said though that welfare encourages you to be a single mom

I've litterally met people who will say that they can't get married because xyz benefit would end

Would something like "X benefits are only available to married couples" be a good idea then? Seems like it would encourage families to stay together, but I wonder about what sort of unforeseen consequences that might generate. Plus something something, patriarchy, forced monogamy, something.

yes. And if you think that the live in culture is healthy for women I've got some swamp land to sell you in florida.

I do not, but trying to think of what your opposition might say is always a good idea when forming arguments

programs like WIC aren't a real problem, but the way divorce and paternity laws work, is really fucked up.

honestly the best line of attack probably isn't along the lines of the way the state benefits women, but on the way they punish men for bad behavior.

or rather disproportionately punish men for bad behavior over women.

ending no-fault divorce would go a long way too.

No-fault divorce could be alright if both parties want to end the marriage

ehhhhh maybe. Think about it like this: most couples who consider divorce but don't follow through with it report that they're happier than couples who do, and often are happier than they were before the hard times.

that IS self reporting, but divorces over money, 'incompatability', and 'irreconcileable differences' are usually not good decisions.

most people will eventually make more money.

'incompatibility' is a different way of saying 'one or both of us are children and can't grow up'.

and 'irreconcilable differences' usually means 'one of us wants a pony, and the other one won't give it to me'.

I think a bigger deal would be if no-fault divorces result in no paternity, split custody, and no alimony.

Divorce for reasons other than adultery and physical abuse are out of selfishness.

People who do that should be judged and shamed

https://twitter.com/getongab/status/1104626192835960832

>dissent option on individual tweets and youtube videos right next to the normal buttons

and ability to rate urls

out now

There’s also the amount of marriages that were rushed into without proper consideration from both parties. That’s got to contribute to divorce rates a fair bit,

Yeah. Too bad. Stay together. Make it work

That's not always realistic Sal.
I have less of a problem with divorce (tho i don't like it at all), if people don't have kids.

But it's always better to teach that as a rule, rather than always qualify it with an exception or way out. That's how weak men flourish

I'm all for a standard, which is why i said i don't like divorces at all.
But you don't just ruin humans who don't live up to the standard or don't want to.

You can tell people What they should be because it works best (for most people, not everyone), you don't get to Make people be that.

Just because people do crappy or unwise things with freedom, doesn't make the freedom to do things less important.

^ Low resolution view at Freedom and it's consequences. imho