As a conservative, pro-life Republican, I love the idea of regular cash payments to parents of children. In fact, I'd like to see more. Ideally, I would replace all forms of public assistance, i.e., Food Stamps, Section 8, TANF, unemployment insurance, and so on, with cash payments. You'd save a fortune on bureaucracy and remove barriers to people continuing to get assistance. No more trips to the welfare office every month or so to prove eligibility. No calling into unemployment offices that don't answer the phones.
Always glad to get your take Mickey. Certainly don't always agree with it and I am glad to get it. I wish you would write more in your pieces on what you would do differently than what you are opposing. I would also like to know more about who you are reading and who you are following that informs your thinking. For example, I learned about unherd.com as a result of you being involved with BloggingHeads.TV which has interesting takes mostly on the conservative side but not always.
While you're focusing on the importance of work, you may want to improve your own with a little spell check. I've never seen so many typographical and spelling errors in a supposedly professional article and it's not like you're a spring chicken at this, I've been regrettably happening across your content since I was a teenager in the early 2000s.
That aside, it's interesting to me that so many people who claim to be pro-family are not so interested in families being headed by single or divorced parents, or concerned about their children going without basic necessities, etc.
What exactly is the problem with a single mother who stays home with her children moving to greying, dying small town communities in Mississippi and Texas and breathing new life into them with their children? I have a feeling you're using the phrase "single mother" as a dog whistle to indicate to white southerners that this will bring black and brown people to their neighborhoods. I suppose I should be comforted that with Trump out of office people like you feel the need to return to dog whistles instead of outright saying what you mean.
I don't know - "towns with poor-but-stay-at-home single moms" sounds better than "towns with poor-and-absent-moms and lots of latchkey kids running around unsupervised and uncontrolled. If local institutions - community voluntary groups, churches, sports leagues, etc. - were very strong and well-supported they *might* be able to pick up the slack. But the store of 21st Century America so far is the complete annihilation of the prestige and reach of such groups as the internet feeds the latest and greatest from NYC, LA, DC, and wherever else you could want to be straight into everyone's pocket. The only local institutions which aren't leveled by this outside cultural force (because able to draw on the public fisc) - public schools - are obviously not able to stand in true loco parentis for kids (we've been trying it for decades with little success other than turning inner city schools into borderline fortresses). It may suck, but helping parents to try and raise their own kids instead of slaving away making widgets or flipping burgers or checking in dialysis patients is basically the one thing we haven't tried recently.
Imagine asking "Where's Donald Trump?", still wanting him around, after he gifted the Democrats the Senate by depressing Republican votes in Georgia, the very reason Biden is able to push through this garbage along party lines in the first place. Where is he? Attacking the GOP. That's where he is.
You know who doesn’t work is the capital class. They just earn income from investments. Weirdly you aren’t to concerned about massive subsidies they get
What does "working" mean? Does it need to be a certain number of hours/week? Is there a compromise here? Seems like ideally you would want to allow part time work to satisfy a work requirement so as to allow flexibility in how people balance work and parenting. But it also seems like it would not be too hard to satisfy a minimal part time work requirement for even new single parents. Does that match up with either current policy or any proposals?
You seem much more concerned with parents not working or working less than children avoiding poverty. Who cares if single mothers don’t work. Such an ignorant post. Do you have any idea how many children go hungry each day and you want punish them because of their parents.
As a conservative, pro-life Republican, I love the idea of regular cash payments to parents of children. In fact, I'd like to see more. Ideally, I would replace all forms of public assistance, i.e., Food Stamps, Section 8, TANF, unemployment insurance, and so on, with cash payments. You'd save a fortune on bureaucracy and remove barriers to people continuing to get assistance. No more trips to the welfare office every month or so to prove eligibility. No calling into unemployment offices that don't answer the phones.
Always glad to get your take Mickey. Certainly don't always agree with it and I am glad to get it. I wish you would write more in your pieces on what you would do differently than what you are opposing. I would also like to know more about who you are reading and who you are following that informs your thinking. For example, I learned about unherd.com as a result of you being involved with BloggingHeads.TV which has interesting takes mostly on the conservative side but not always.
While you're focusing on the importance of work, you may want to improve your own with a little spell check. I've never seen so many typographical and spelling errors in a supposedly professional article and it's not like you're a spring chicken at this, I've been regrettably happening across your content since I was a teenager in the early 2000s.
That aside, it's interesting to me that so many people who claim to be pro-family are not so interested in families being headed by single or divorced parents, or concerned about their children going without basic necessities, etc.
What exactly is the problem with a single mother who stays home with her children moving to greying, dying small town communities in Mississippi and Texas and breathing new life into them with their children? I have a feeling you're using the phrase "single mother" as a dog whistle to indicate to white southerners that this will bring black and brown people to their neighborhoods. I suppose I should be comforted that with Trump out of office people like you feel the need to return to dog whistles instead of outright saying what you mean.
I don't know - "towns with poor-but-stay-at-home single moms" sounds better than "towns with poor-and-absent-moms and lots of latchkey kids running around unsupervised and uncontrolled. If local institutions - community voluntary groups, churches, sports leagues, etc. - were very strong and well-supported they *might* be able to pick up the slack. But the store of 21st Century America so far is the complete annihilation of the prestige and reach of such groups as the internet feeds the latest and greatest from NYC, LA, DC, and wherever else you could want to be straight into everyone's pocket. The only local institutions which aren't leveled by this outside cultural force (because able to draw on the public fisc) - public schools - are obviously not able to stand in true loco parentis for kids (we've been trying it for decades with little success other than turning inner city schools into borderline fortresses). It may suck, but helping parents to try and raise their own kids instead of slaving away making widgets or flipping burgers or checking in dialysis patients is basically the one thing we haven't tried recently.
Imagine asking "Where's Donald Trump?", still wanting him around, after he gifted the Democrats the Senate by depressing Republican votes in Georgia, the very reason Biden is able to push through this garbage along party lines in the first place. Where is he? Attacking the GOP. That's where he is.
You know who doesn’t work is the capital class. They just earn income from investments. Weirdly you aren’t to concerned about massive subsidies they get
What does "working" mean? Does it need to be a certain number of hours/week? Is there a compromise here? Seems like ideally you would want to allow part time work to satisfy a work requirement so as to allow flexibility in how people balance work and parenting. But it also seems like it would not be too hard to satisfy a minimal part time work requirement for even new single parents. Does that match up with either current policy or any proposals?
You seem much more concerned with parents not working or working less than children avoiding poverty. Who cares if single mothers don’t work. Such an ignorant post. Do you have any idea how many children go hungry each day and you want punish them because of their parents.