In Hungary, as in all Europe as well, I think it is mandatory to put lightning rods on the roof. Why are they missing in America?
In my experience, some guys would rather go out and be a hustler (drugs, crime, etc.) rather than to ask for help and do things the honest way. Plus women don't have to have babies to get help, I'm living proof. Women still have to take care of those babies afterwards, which isn't babysitting. I think if these guys would at least try (if they aren't doing so) to ask for help and try to get on their feet, things would be okay.
Interesting how you equate men's welfare with imprisonment. You might want to consider that most people who are jailed put themselves there. Secondly, I've known plenty of men who have received government funding (who aren't incarcerated). Thirdly, a major chunk of local government funding is going toward unemployment insurance, and unemployment is claiming victims of both genders equally. Lastly, I think you should probably be more concerned with corporate welfare over personal welfarecorporate bailouts play a big hand in creating our country's economic crisis. Personal welfare isn't even a trickle in the bucket in comparison. All women have to do is have babies. Huh? Men have to impregnate them first. If they don't pay child support for those babies, then yes, those women are likely to seek government support. I do agree with you that this new baby boom we're experiencing is a problem, but again, it's small grapes compared to what your tax dollars are really paying forcorporate welfare and subsidizing two wars. But I don't think your concerns are financial in nature. Your 'question' has more to do with finding another avenue to bash women. It's misguided and frought with faulty logic. If you're really that pissed, shouldn't your anger be directed at the government rather than making a broad, sweeping victim cry for men? (who, by your model, are practically forced to commit crimes to obtain social financial support) I'm ashamed I even took the bait in this argument :-( ************************************** FACTS, you say? Are you in the 8th grade? Read the two posts below me to get the facts, son.
So, following your logic (and I use that term loosely), women would have committed FAR MORE crime than they do now BEFORE welfare existed, and the crime rate for women would have dropped significantly once welfare became policy. Yet that is not the case at all, now is it? You didn't really think this through very well at all, did you? Not only that, men can and DO receive welfare. You seem to believe that no man has ever received government assistance. Are you really this clueless or are you just trying to be facetious? edit You present facts? I don't think you know what that word means. Your only evidence of these facts you to claim to present are that you don't know any men on welfare. THOSE are your facts? That you don't personally know any men on welfare and so, in your (illogical) mind, it logically follows that NO men are on welfare? You do see how logically flawed, and downright idiotic that is, don't you? And yet you try to claim that women have faulty logic? You are appear completely incapable of logical thoughtyet, you're a man. Gee, that's interesting.
Does it buzz randomly. Last year in class my school was fairly old and had a fire alarm that would buzz from who knows what. I wouldn't worry though.
