Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom Confessions Mom Confessions

PA debaters. A new wording of an old question.

Posted by Anonymous   + Show Post
Would you rather your PA tax money go toward helping a family eat or paying for day care?

Let us speculate only on 2 working moms.

Abby works full time but needs assistance with child care for her 2 childern aged 6 months and 3 years.

Susan works part time in the evening so her children (same ages) are always with a parent. They have enough money for bills but need pa for food.

If Abby cut her hours she wouldn't be able to pay their bills, and if Susan worked more hours they would need daycare as well. Which mom is more "worthy" of your tax money?
Posted by Anonymous on Jan. 22, 2013 at 12:53 AM
Replies (21-30):
Nicoleb9
by Emerald Member on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:20 AM
Even if her job only pays minimum wage and is a dead end, it's still recent work history, experience in something and a good reference if she's a good employee.


Quoting Anonymous:

If Susan can get help for food, then yes bills would come first. If she had to choose between rent OR feeding her kids you would be correct.



Also I never said what job Abby is doing. She could also be working min wage with no future, just more hours.




Quoting ElitestJen:

Abby.  She has a future with payraises, promotions, and skill-building opportunities.

Oh...and unless you live in La-La Land "bills" are lower on the hierarchy of needs than food. 



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Anonymous
by Anonymous on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:21 AM
1 mom liked this
The income guidelines are much lower for food benefits so I'm lead to believe Susan is worse off financially. If their household income is low enough to qualify for such benefits they are likely receiving other benefits as well...Medicaid, WIC, EITC. Perhaps if she worked more or found a better paying job she wouldn't need so much help, even if it did mean receiving child care assistance.
Anonymous
by Anonymous - Original Poster on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:22 AM
All jobs, even part time evening jobs. So your point is moot I guess.


Ok so now Susan is off food assistance. But needs housing assistance.



Quoting ElitestJen:

All jobs have a future. That's an excuse.



And food should always come before bills. One can live without electricity or heat. Food is required for survival.




Quoting Anonymous:

If Susan can get help for food, then yes bills would come first. If she had to choose between rent OR feeding her kids you would be correct.





Also I never said what job Abby is doing. She could also be working min wage with no future, just more hours.






Quoting ElitestJen:

Abby.  She has a future with payraises, promotions, and skill-building opportunities.

Oh...and unless you live in La-La Land "bills" are lower on the hierarchy of needs than food. 




Anonymous
by Anonymous on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:23 AM
Not the person you quoted and I would have no issue with funding those. Way cheaper.

Quoting Anonymous:

So you want your tax money going toward free BC or abortions for all couples?




Quoting Anonymous:

they both need to stop having kids they can't afford!!


Nicoleb9
by Emerald Member on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:24 AM
1 mom liked this
A daycare voucher would allow Susan to work full time. Her children "always being with a parent" is a personal preference, not something the tax payers should be subsidizing. And yes, I'd be fine with shelling out a little more for the daycare vouchers vs the food assistance. There's an end goal in mind there.


Quoting Anonymous:

Both women in the example are working. Both would have to show proof of household income to receive either assistance.




Quoting Nicoleb9:

I would prefer daycare vouchers over just handing over a food stamp card with no expectation of them working just because they have a baby.


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
teal.blaze
by Silver Member on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:24 AM
1 mom liked this

Either way, they are both receiving assistance. I would rather see full time work getting assistance, but I can definitely see not wanting someone else "raising"your kids. I feel for both families, as they are both clearly trying. But there is also no reason Susan couldn't work a full 40 hours. There are 24 hours in a day. That's enough for both of them to work almost 12 hours a day and still not need daycare.

Anonymous
by Anonymous - Original Poster on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:24 AM
No other assistance. Just food. They have insurance and such through husbands job. Both mothers are only getting what I said.


Quoting Anonymous:

The income guidelines are much lower for food benefits so I'm lead to believe Susan is worse off financially. If their household income is low enough to qualify for such benefits they are likely receiving other benefits as well...Medicaid, WIC, EITC. Perhaps if she worked more or found a better paying job she wouldn't need so much help, even if it did mean receiving child care assistance.

ElitestJen
by on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:25 AM
1 mom liked this
Employers don't promote part time workers with limited availability. The full ttime worker will get the promotion.

Susan is a whiner with no drive to be self-sufficient. And if she needs housing assistance and not food....then she's stupid, too.


Quoting Anonymous:

All jobs, even part time evening jobs. So your point is moot I guess.





Ok so now Susan is off food assistance. But needs housing assistance.






Quoting ElitestJen:

All jobs have a future. That's an excuse.





And food should always come before bills. One can live without electricity or heat. Food is required for survival.






Quoting Anonymous:

If Susan can get help for food, then yes bills would come first. If she had to choose between rent OR feeding her kids you would be correct.







Also I never said what job Abby is doing. She could also be working min wage with no future, just more hours.








Quoting ElitestJen:

Abby.  She has a future with payraises, promotions, and skill-building opportunities.

Oh...and unless you live in La-La Land "bills" are lower on the hierarchy of needs than food. 





Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Anonymous
by Anonymous on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:26 AM
For foods stamps!! Also I never understood why people make it Seem like its so way to go find "another job" or get more hours.
tossed
by Platinum Member on Jan. 22, 2013 at 1:28 AM

Food

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)