Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Which Is More Deserving of Public Funds? The Octuplets or Halliburton?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:19 PM
Original message
Which Is More Deserving of Public Funds? The Octuplets or Halliburton?
Edited on Wed Feb-11-09 10:20 PM by McCamy Taylor
Nadya Suleman may need public assistance to raise her babies. This is no big surprise. 13 million American children---18% of our young people---live in poverty.

http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html

Everyday, unwed mothers all across this country require federal and state aid to make ends meet. Unlike most moms, Ms. Suleman has been getting death threats and comments like:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/2009/02/nadya-sulemans.html

You make me sick! My tax dollars goes for you and your ugly babies. I know some will die, hopefully it will be you, so you can't do this again!

Michele



Dick Cheney saddled Halliburton with a shitload of asbestos debt through his inept management. Brown&Root needed a war ASAP. He crafted the mother of all quagmires in Iraq.

http://www.businesspundit.com/the-25-most-vicious-iraq-war-profiteers/

The first name that comes to everyone’s mind here is Halliburton. According to MSN Money, Halliburton’s KBR, Inc. division bilked government agencies to the tune of $17.2 billion in Iraq war-related revenue from 2003-2006 alone. This is estimated to comprise a whopping one-fifth of KBR’s total revenue for the 2006 fiscal year. The massive payoff is said to have financed the construction and maintenance of military bases, oil field repairs, and various infrastructure rebuilding projects across the war-torn nation.


I wonder what Michele thinks about KBR? Does she spend a lot of time wishing that Dick Cheney would die?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AZBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Neither.
Let me rephrase that - the mother of the octuplets doesn't deserve public funds. Then again, I think her children should be taken away from her - she's mentally unfit and can not take care of them properly. If those children need public funding however of course they should receive it - in their new homes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaysunb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. Humanity vs death , destruction & pillage ?
I'll need to think about that and get back to you. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is this a joke? Neither.
Unfortunately there are hateful people out there like "Michele" who write crap; doesn't mean Suleman deserves taxpayer money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. Two giraffes taking harmonica lessons
Let's get surreal here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. Note the KBG and Halliburton ads attached to this post by Google.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarukaTheTrophyWife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. She's not a normal single mom
Whomever her doctor was needs to lose his license stat.

The octokids deserve the money, but not her mother. Personally, I think the kids should be taken away from her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Take the children away from her, and shut down Haliburton with lawsuits nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
8. Does a mentally disturbed woman deserve help
Hmmmm. Normally DU would say yes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
9. I say public funding for the development of an organic womb the size of a swimming pool...
able to birth 1,000's of children at a time; then some could go to Halliburton, some could go to Nadya, and some could vote their conscience
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
10. It'll be hard for her to be above the poverty threshold
or guideline.

By my calculation, she'll need a gross income of $60,800 to be above the poverty guideline (with the usual poverty threshold being a bit higher than that). For a single mother, that's pretty good wages.

Of course, she needed public assistance for the first 6. It helps that 1/2 of the first batch were disabled in some way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
11. You raise some interesting questions for our consideration.
I've been quite surprised at the attitudes of some here on DU concerning the birth of these babies. Without a doubt, Ms. Suleman took a risk for herself and her babies and I question her motives, the wisdom of her decision and the ethics of her physician. I believe some poor choices were made, but, in the end it all boils down to a matter of choice. We defend a woman's right to choose when she desires to limit the size of her family, but we apparently feel it's acceptable to vilify women who choose to have large families.

As far as taxpayer dollars go, I would imagine that since the birth of these babies, hundreds, if not thousands, of babies have been born that will be dependent on those same dollars but I haven't heard anyone condemning their mothers or calling for their children to be taken away and put up for adoption. If there are any reports of abuse or neglect of Ms. Suleman's older children that would warrant this action, I haven't seen them and I'm sure there was any evidence of it, we would have seen it by now.

So, what would some of you like to see done to prevent another situation like this in the future? Shall we have means testing for parenthood that allows only those who have a certain level of income to have children? Should there be some legislation to limit the number of fetuses a woman can carry and force selective reduction of the rest, regardless the method of conception? Should we set limits on family size and sterilize people once they have reached a certain number of offspring?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Withywindle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-11-09 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
12. Neither.
Halliburton - well, that's obvious.

The Octopussy - well, she's just a hoarder. If she'd collected that same number of cats, with as little ability to care for them properly, the Humane Society would intervene and we'd all applaud it. Do babies deserve less protection, that they can be left to the "mercies" of an irresponsible caretaker with less consequences? Meh, I'm a misanthrope who doesn't really like kids much so it's no skin off my nose either way.

I made MY small donation this cycle to help care for Australian wildlife suffering because of human sadism (arson) - That I do consider worthwhile.: http://www.wildlifevictoria.org.au/cms/index.php?option=com_wrapper&view=wrapper&Itemid=43
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-12-09 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. I like the cat analogy
It's useful to describe what I feel about Octopussy to people who just don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Withywindle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-12-09 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Thanks. Cats are a LOT more self-sufficient than human infants
and yet we've all known of someone who was more into the thrill of new acquisition and the self-image as "rescuer" than, y'know, meeting their longterm daily needs. And we're rightfully appalled at it when animals--living in squalid, cramped conditions with no chance of sufficient individual attention--are involved.

I've known a few women obsessed with pregnancy and babies who lose interest in their older kids once they're not so cute and helpless anymore. It's the creepiest fucking thing on earth. This is an extreme case. I definitely think her children should be helped--but they also shouldn't be allowed to stay in the same state as her. They should be put up for adoption just like the theoretical cats would be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kickin_Donkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-12-09 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
15. The Octuplets ...
Notice I said the Octuplets -- not the mother -- which is what your question asked.

The children didn't ask to be put in this situation. They're the victims. They deserve the support they need to lead decent lives -- as do ALL children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmg257 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-12-09 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
16. Another one for "neither". nt
Edited on Thu Feb-12-09 08:14 AM by jmg257
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-12-09 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
17. Deserving ?- Absolutely Neither - there are plenty of deserving things but neither of these
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC