Jackson Jambalaya

If the state would quit rewarding these people for having babies they can't afford .. it would slow down the numbers. I for one am so tired of all the welfare fraud and food stamp fraud .. there is no end to it as I see .. UNTIL WE THE TAXPAYERS START QUESTIONING THESE SYSTEM.. WE ARE SCREWED

We can the the number to single digit with one stroke. Cut off ALL aid to illegitimate birth and childcare effective 9 months from today. Cover the children in-utero.

Sound harsh? Nope, for all history we haven't financed bastard children. Now we are financing irresponsible behavior and the results are disasterous.

Cut the checks and you will cut the irresponsible behavior.

Typical conservative silliness. You really think these women are making cost-benefit-analysis decisions about whether to have more kids? How much money do you think they get?

News flash: lots of people make bad decisions.

Particularly about sex. Bad decisions about love and sex are kind of a staple of Western literature; perhaps you've seen a movie or read some Cliff's Notes sometime that conveyed the theme.

When you're poor, badly brought up, and badly educated, you are not only more likely to make bad decisions, but you don't have the safety net (family, the state) that would cushion the effects of your bad decisions.

And after 30 years of opposition to birth control and abortion, it's a marvel the rate has only doubled.

You think this increase is all welfare mothers? You REALLY think that?

That's right, blame it on the poor people Anderson. I see a bunch of women who are middle and upper class having kids out of wedlock too.

Kingfish...your head is in the sand. Stupid question: "You think this increase is all welfare mothers? You REALLY think that?"

Of course not. But 90% or more are.

The problem is not with the one that "made mistakes." The problem is with the ones who suffer no economic disadvantages because they made the decision to hop into bed every chance they get.

I do know of one case where the girl got herself pregnant for the sole reason of having enough money to buy a new dress.

The way to stop it is to have financial incentives to NOT have the babies.

You people sitting in your ivory towers have no idea the tragedy and heartache and pain the goes on as a result of government financing unwed mothers. You think you are being so nice and helpful and sweet with the programs.

Devastating.

This is not a surprise to those of us who faced the fact long ago that teenagers are to quote Twain, "hormones on legs".

Some of us knew that " just say no" was ridiculously silly. Some of us knew that encouraging teenage mothers to keep their babies and celebrating the new arrival rather than being alarmed as to that baby's future would not bode well.

Some of us knew that we didn't learn about sex so much from family and church as we did from our peers and " trial and error". We knew that parents and the church wouldn't step up with specific information to prevent pregnancy. And, we knew it wasn't parents and church that made a difference in our generation, when this wasn't so much a problem.

The consequences were really bad once upon a time. You got kicked out of school, you were socially ostracized unless the boy married you. The girls who were unwed mothers and the boy didn't marry them have not fared well. The girls who had the paternal as well as maternal support system and paternal involvement, the child fared better. The families of the boy are off the hook completely these days and the boy isn't expected to financially contribute when he has no income, no job.

Some of us wanted sex education in schools and we wanted those youngsters to understand about STDs and how to have access to birth control even when their parents had their heads in the sand.

I assure you a large number of the parents of those girls didn't believe " their angel" was having sex and NONE of those girls knew WHEN they were at highest risk to get pregnant. And, most were surprised they got pregnant.

One has only to work with teen mothers for a little while to know that it's the naive and idealistic girls that get pregnant. The girls with lots of information know how to avoid pregnancy.

So decide conservatives...do you want to be " right" and continue to pretend lecturing abstinence and going to church works do you want to solve this problem?

If you want to continue on with impractical notions, fine. The least you can do is make sure the resulting child is well cared for by society but here's a warning, that will be FAR more costly!

PS a welfare mother gets $90 a month for each additional child. If you think you can clothe and feed a child for $90 bucks, you aren't in touch with reality!

I know for a fact that a good many of these mothers certainly do make a cost benefit analysis of having these children; the mothers (and their mothers) just want the check. No doubt many many of the others don't bother with any kind of analysis_ no analysis is necessary because they know I (and you) will pay for the kid. What do you expect when our government pays 13 year olds to have babies? It's insane!

"That's right, blame it on the poor people Anderson. I see a bunch of women who are middle and upper class having kids out of wedlock too."

I may be jumping to conclusions, you're right about that. But I suspect the increase is driven more by the poorer folks; I'd welcome some stats to resolve the question.

Middle- and upper-class people are more likely to use birth control, have better access to abortion if they want it, and have better resources to deal with raising a child.

"I do know of one case where the girl got herself pregnant for the sole reason of having enough money to buy a new dress."

10:31, anyone *that* stupid would get pregnant anyway.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-occur-outside-marriage.html?pagewanted=all

"the share of children born to unmarried women has crossed a threshold: more than half of births to American women under 30 occur outside marriage."

"The fastest growth in the last two decades has occurred among white women in their 20s who have some college education but no four-year degree, according to Child Trends, a Washington research group that analyzed government data."

I see that pre-welfare reform politics are alive and well in our little postage stamp of the world. I know a bunch of middle class white people who got their daughters on medicaid so their babies would be paid for. Regardless, the solution is serious sex education and access to health care for sexually active teens. We've been trying to get lucky long enough, and we ain't been getting lucky.

Sex education is only a very small part of the solution, albeit an important portion. The primary problem is twofold: (a) 95% of this statistical category feel NO personal responsibility for their actions, because they've been told by the Left for so long that their positions in life are someone else's fault, thus (b) there is no feeling of shame for ANYTHING they may do! You let the government cut off welfare funding that provides INCENTIVES for women to procreate (and YES, that's exactly what many of the programs do), and watch the numbers fall....precipitously!

We can't legislate morality, so we can't do anything about the lack of shame issue; however, we absolutely can control the money.......we just have a political party that won't do anything unless it keeps a vast portion of their constituency beholden to them for everything they need. Without keeping their feet on the necks of the very people to which we're referring here, "that party" couldn't survive!

Can you legistlate morals?

All these ass clowns stating percentages and saying things about "a good many" unwed mothers without sources gives me a headache. Cite it like this, kids.
"A good many do," (My Ass, 2012).
"95% of them do." (Ibid.)

If you can't do better than that, then STFU.

Regardless, the solution is serious sex education and access to health care for sexually active teens.

Sexually active teens already have access to health care.

Cite the welfare benefits all you want, but the major change has been one of attitude. There used to be a stigma placed on a woman who had babies while unwed. Laugh it up as the dark ages or backwards or unenlightened but that stigma worked. Who wanted to be the social outcast? Where is our shame?

Ask yourselves this: Why are we falling all over ourselves about the absence of fathers in these households if it's such a wonderful (enlightened, free, forward thinking) thing to be a single mother?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/03/morals

"The primary problem is twofold: (a) 95% of this statistical category ...."

What "statistical category" is that?

There is a well-known fact that some are ignoring. Young school-age people, mostly middle to upper class, are having sex. They participate regularly in oral sex because they do not want children at age 16. They want to graduate high school and college before settling into marital bliss and starting a family. This common practice has been ongoing in particular "safe outdoor locations" for years. Concerned parents have gathered for meetings to discuss the issue and to seek a solution. So, yes, young Mississippians do have sex at an early age, some just know how to prevent an unwanted pregnancy and are determined not to let an unwanted child alter their life's goals. Furthermore, when graduates marry they have an average of

Haley Barbour, the ex-governor whom many of us attended his inaugural ball but have recently come to resent and disrespect, proudly boasted in his CPAC address in Dallas, TX in February, 2011 that under his leadership, Mississippi had become "the safest state in America for an unborn child."

BS to the claim that unwed mothers only receive $90 per month to feed and clothe a child. Gov't benefits for all welfare programs increase with the number in the household acording to the household's income.

Every year in the US, according to www.americanpregnancy.org,'s website, there are 60 million women in their 15-44 childbearing years; 70% are sexually active, 64% use contraceptives, 6 million are infertile, while 3 million women every year use NO contraceptive, accounting for 47% of unwanted pregnancies.


Clearly, contraceptives are the best preventative unless young people only engage in oral sex because the natural family planning method is one that many young people don't understand.

Anderson sez "...badly educated." WTF does that mean.

Is Mississippi an island. Are we the only state harboring teenagers with hormones? Are we the only state where children are having sex and babies? Are we the only state where the mothers of these teenagers don't give a twit?

SOME of these children actually DO see multiple baby-daddy and youngans as a way of life if not a replacement for an occupation. They have no hope of having a real job - The stamp-life is the next best thing. It's worked for others in their family and their circular community.

The predominance of multiple daddies is an oddity unto itself. Is it perhaps a way to feel loved, wanted, desirable? If only for the evening? Who knows.

One thing is for sure. It is not going to get any 'better'. If the phenomenon gets no positive attention from Benny, Al and Jesse, it damned sure won't get it anywhere else.

Anderson sez "...badly educated." WTF does that mean.

Really?

Excuse me, but morality is one of the few things that can be legislated.
Try laws on rape, pedophilia, murder, bank robbery, blackmail, ect.

Well, we could try the easy way - evening and weekend hours when the local health department is open.

You can lose a low-wage job by taking time off - and you'll definitely lose pay for the hours you miss. And, if you're not working, you have to wait until someone who has a car to get off work and take you where you need to go.

8:21, we're you high when you made that post? Certainly, the CRIMES you listed were immoral; however, the important characteristic you failed to grasp is that they are also ILLEGAL.......... No, the morals people have mentioned as being impossible to legislate are those pesky LEGAL ones, like fornication, lying, etc.

See if you can figure out a way to get the legislature to prevent two unmarried people from having sex, then come back and post again. THAT would be legislating morality.

Anonymous 10:37am, you don't know any such thing as a " fact".

There is NO cost benefit analysis that would result in it being cost effective to have more children while on welfare.

Are some so stupid and unable to do math so as to imagine they will be better off because they get more money? Probably, but actually doing a " cost benefit analysis" ? That is hysterically funny!

The amount given in a check for extra children is ( on average in the US) $90 a month. More benefits are added with food stamps and Medicare neither of which add an advantage to having another child. The amount of welfare does vary from State to State so I went with the average.

Please people, try to get facts instead of relying on what someone told you.

Ummm, I doubt Jesse take up this cause, remember he is a "baby daddy" too...

"One thing is for sure. It is not going to get any 'better'. If the phenomenon gets no positive attention from Benny, Al and Jesse, it damned sure won't get it anywhere else"

What is it about the increase in teen pregnancy in the WHITE community that those of you throwing about Jesse Jackson and Al to conjure up racial strife don't get?

And,just for fun...how many of you moaning about welfare mommas are opposed to abortion and for the Parenthood amendment? Love those babies in the womb but hate having to support them after they pop out,hmm?

What do you say we all put on "hoodies" and then run around the capitol screaming "W.A.R." against all males while postering "hate" criminals have rights too?

This place has gone to hell in a handbasket and it's wearing milk bone undergarments while surrounded by a pack of wolves.

And to make it all better, let all the men over 50 decide to leave their wives for those fine young cannibals known as 20 something hotties.

Then let's outlaw abortion, rubbers, and sex altogether in an effort to solve the high divorce rate amongst the 50 plus crowd.

Finally, lets set up a house, known only to a few and label it the love shackin' cougar town.

Only then, will we all sit back and stop playing games with the reality of the situation that younger children (under 30) are convinced that the gub'ment will take care of them and their brood to riches.

"A curse is on the land, " says Faulkner, " because of the sin of slavery."This absolute crime of having children out of wedlock with no father to protect them and usually no funds to raise them is the one huge aspect of that curse I believe, along with men who are too "sorry"to work or take any responsibility often. If people but knew the horror these little children grow up in and live through ,we would all weep to be sure. There is only one thing to stop this kind of behavior and that is the strong teaching of right and wrong - Sunday school, Catholic schools, Christian parents and grandparents teaching the hundreds of wise tenets that children must be carefully taught .Only Jesus can break curses and He will if asked. Oddly this problem affects us all because we feel the guilt for the poor children no matter how removed we are from them. It weighs on the heart of our state and depresses us all that this sort of thing could be going on. Could we think about seriously mentoring young people? We are all in this together somehow as Mr. Faulkner writes. A curse is on our land for sure.

Whatever, the fact is that an unwed black woman gets 600 bucks a month to take care of her kid. So if she has 4 babies, she makes a check of 2400 dollars a month. Add in HUD housing and utility leveling, not to mention a free cell phone and you get someone who ain't working (except in the crotch) who makes a close to 80,000 dollars a year after taxes. These people aren't stupid like the stereotype implies, they are smart and have learned to work the system. Until we tie free government shit to mandatory birth control or adopt draconian policies like China regarding population control, we are going to see this demographic continue to explode. The democrats and liberals aren't gonna to shit to stop it because they have an ever-growing and expanding base of new voters.

I see the confiscatory money spent by the government to produce a solution crowd has arrived.

#1: teenagers are hormonal. But...Mississippi teenagers are not anymore hormonal than those in others states or other countrries. So, this IS a Mississippi & deep south phenom. Read into to that what you want.

#2: teenagers today known EXACTLY what causes pregnancy and how to avoid it IF THEY WISH. So STOP with the "poor, uneducated" mantra. That doesn't fly in this day & age. Teenagers who get pregnant today do so because (a) they think they are in love & think baby-daddy is, too. Or, they simply have no sense of responsibility for anything and know they aren't going to be help accountable for their actions, even if a baby results. And here's a newsflash: $90 may not sound like a lot of money to YOU but to someone who has no other source of income, it is a FORTUNE. Furthermore, that money is not used to feed or cloth the child. There are a multitude of hand-out programs that will provide food and clothing for BOTH the child & the mother...plus free medical, etc. So get your liberal head out of your backside, get into the trenches with these folks and see how it really works. You just might learn something.

"an unwed black woman gets 600 bucks a month to take care of her kid. So if she has 4 babies, she makes a check of 2400 dollars a month"

Cite, please.

6:52 am where on earth do you come up with those figures? What are your sources?

$2400 ( actually a bit less but I won't quibble) is the average for a family of 4 for a YEAR not a MONTH in PAYMENTS. So perhaps you read carelessly.

You do know The Welfare Reform Act dropped the number of people getting welfare by 60%, right?

You do know that the average number of children per welfare family has actually been declining for several decades?

As someone who investigated child abuse and neglect , I actually dealt with the income figures and resources of those on welfare. I actually had to learn the payment system and the resources available to those mothers who wanted to get their children back.

There is also something called SSI, which was a raid on SS . THAT is something far more egregious than welfare and a far greater burden on taxpayers.

Those who are disabled ( at any age) and the " aged" who never worked or worked too few hours to be eligible for SS receive payments. Those payments come out of the Social Security Fund when prior to 1972 they came from welfare funds. Those people became eligible for Medicaid as well which before had been limited to children. Those payments are much larger than aid to families with dependent children.

Mississippi receives 2/3 of the money for such payments from the federal government. So we benefit more than any other state from this revenue stream. Indeed, rather alot of our people are wealthy from HUD and providing low income housing. Quite a few of the wealthy in our state receive subsidies and government contracts. If you think we are poor now, just get your wish for " entitlements" to disappear and you'll get to see what poverty looks like.

You really ought to know something about how the system works and how it varies from state to state before commenting. And, there is no monolithic " welfare" system. There are many different kinds of aid payments.

It's OK with me to do away with every form of government payment other than Social Security to those who paid into the system and have worked enough to be eligible. When SS worked that way, the fund was so " flush" our politicians didn't think it'd ever go broke and that's why they found ways to raid it. It worked.

So, do your homework please. Use reliable,unbiased sources of information. Read enough to know what you don't know.

So, do your homework please. Use reliable,unbiased sources of information. Read enough to know what you don't know.

Blah, blah, blah, blah ... and you didn't link to even one source. The invasion of the anonymous preachy assholes continues.

This is a great source of information.

http://www.mdhs.state.ms.us/ea_tanf.html

A single mother with 3 kids would get $194 per month MAX.

How much will the TANF payment be?

The amount of the TANF payment is based on the family's income. When the income does not meet the TANF Program Need Standard, the family may be approved for a money payment up to the State maximum for that household size. Monthly payments in Mississippi are limited to no more than:
•$110 for the first person
•$36 for the second person
•$24 for each additional person

8:33 am If I didn't do the homework of those I had a crush on in high school, I sure as hell am not going to do yours!

10:07 AM is LOTS nicer than I am!

I expect you don't even know HOW to do research.

The solution to this problem is in the mirror. Be a mentor at your neighborhood public school.

This is not a complete picture. The only way to see the truth is to compare the 1980 birth rate to the population. Get a ratio, and then do the same comparison to the current rates. You will probably see little change. It is just common sense that when the population increases so will specific instances. I would be more interested in a complete story.

The fun part? Someone actually linked TANF. The T stands for Temporary. Allegedly. But, someone has to pay for their beer and cigarettes, you know?

Yes, there are people in Mississippi raking in more than 100k in government assistance a year. As a matter of fact, people gaming the welfare system have passed the working family disposable income threshold. Believe it or not.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/entitlement-america-head-household-making-minimum-wage-has-more-disposable-income-family-mak