I had a number of thoughts while reading Mr. Grubb's “Subsidizing irresponsible behavior.” My first thought was that, since he is so hostile about subsidizing child care and angry with people who have children they cannot afford, he must be an avid supporter of birth control and abortion. Good for him! However, when he compared children to cars, he lost me. I’ve neither heard of a used child lot nor have I heard of people haggling over the price of a child.
I have heard of people worrying about the cost of raising children and giving them the kinds of lives they would like them to have. Most countries in the world, even China, provide free early childhood care for children because children are seen as the future of the society.
In addition, workers’ time is valued and child care helps people focus on their jobs without worrying about the health and safety of their children. Is Mr. Grubb not interested in America’s future?
Does Mr. Grubb not value American labor? Does he really believe that only the wealthy should have children? How very strange.
(1) comment
Thanks for your strange letter, Ms. Lowenthal. You say you’ve never heard of a used child lot nor heard of people haggling over the price of a child. Yet everyone knows about child trafficking, exacerbated by Biden’s opening of the border allowing millions of invaders into our country. How many kids were “lost” under treasonous Biden? A million? More? You ask if Mr. Grubb believes that only the wealthy should have children. Apparently, you skipped over the last part of Mr. Grubb’s letter which stated,
“We all must live within our means, including where we live, the cars we buy, the clothes we wear, and the number of children we have. Having children is not a right; it is a conscious decision. If people cannot afford to stay home and take care of their own children they chose to have, or pay for child care, they should not have those children. They must not expect others to take on the financial burden of providing for them.
It is called personal responsibility; let’s encourage it instead of Speier’s opposite approach.”
To follow your train of thought, do you really believe we should not have personal responsibility? And if you’re such a believer in subsidizing what you consider “responsible behavior” how much are you or adherents sharing your train of thought contributing out of pocket to this cause? If nothing, how very strange.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.