The most striking proposals were for the elimination of medical debt for millions of Americans; the “first-ever” ban on price gouging for groceries and food; a cap on prescription drug costs; a $25,000 subsidy for first-time home buyers; and a child tax credit that would provide $6,000 per child to families for the first year of a baby’s life.

  • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    Making things cheaper doesn’t help people in extreme poverty who have no money.

    They have no money, because everything they need to live, is expensive!!!

      • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        Extreme poverty

        People who have no job and no income at all, shouldn’t make children they can’t support - this is a horrible pathology 6k USD can’t possibly solve

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but you squandered it.

          A ton of kids in poverty were not born into poverty, but their parents lost jobs or had health emergencies or parents who died. A lot of parents didn’t choose to become pregnant, because birth control isn’t perfect. Some kids are in extreme poverty because the parent without the job leaft due to domestic violence.

          And sometimes kids end up in poverty because a natural disaster made the family homeless and they lost their job becsuse the business was also halted due to the disaster.

          Blaming the parents casts a huge net and carches a lot of people who had shit come up in the 18 years between birth and adulthood.

          • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            A ton of kids in poverty were not born into poverty

            The topic is about 6k for newborns. I was giving you benefit of the doubt, but you seem to fail to process relevant information.

            parents lost jobs or had health emergencies or parents who died

            These are separate cases, that should be treated accordingly. The entire discussion is about subsidizing parents of newborns. My stance is simple: Parents who can’t afford child shouldn’t have a child, it’s basic 101 of parenthood planning. The lowering of cost of living could increase affordability of having child considerably.

            The only good argument you’ve made here, is about imperfect birth control - this exists, but it’s a rare case. There are many cases when this is a result of negligence, rather than actual failure of anti conception measures.

            they lost their job becsuse the business was also halted due to the disaster.

            Losing a job isn’t something uncommon. The proper solution is to find a new job. This is ugly, and some support during the hard transition may be justified, but again single 6k benefit changes absolutely nothing

            Blaming the parents casts a huge net and carches a lot of people who had shit come up in the 18 years between birth and adulthood.

            I don’t understand what you’ve said here

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          It wasn’t the child’s choice to be born into poverty, however that came about. That money is to give the child a fighting chance to become a contributing member of society, regardless of its circumstances.