• Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re not my children, why should I as a taxpayer have to pay for them?

      Because they are your fellow citizens.

    • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago
      1. You have to pay for them either way. Only 1 way is multiple orders of magnitude less expensive.

      2. Because children shouldn’t be disadvantaged or suffer because of the poor decisions of their parents.

      3. Because they’re fucking people, bro. Have some compassion. Everyone makes mistakes.

    • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You already know the answer to that but you asked the question anyway because it serves as self-entitled neoliberal/libertarian propaganda.

      And of course if there was an actual city out there modelled after your libertarian paradise, there’s not a chance you’d move there, let alone be happier there.

      But boy would I love to see it.

      Because no matter how much of your personality you devote to being a miser, your actual, actual wealth is a piss puddle next to an ocean.

      You’d be a functional slave with every dollar you earned being immediately extracted from you as you’re charged by the foot for the roads you use, living off post-FDA Starbucks that you don’t know has baby-killing levels of formaldehyde in it (again) because the one media company left was paid to not report it.

      But hey, at least you wouldn’t be paying 1c a year for someone else’s birth control.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are paying for them. You live in a society and anyone languishing in that society makes your life that much worse off.