I am still angry about the ridiculous mom of 14 children (my how I miss writing about the Steelers). My boss and others do not understand why I care or am so mad about it. When he was laughing at me/about it, at that moment, I wanted to quit my job and start trying to have more kids; perhaps three or four. Why not sponge off the government? So many others are doing it.
Despite what some of you may think, I am not against government assistance programs. Some people need help because of circumstances beyond their control. Shouldn't we help the family whose head of household lost his or her job? And by help, I also mean charitable donations. I know I am better off than a lot, and I try to share some of this, now more than ever.
But why should taxpayers help those who take little to no responsibility for themselves and their actions? A single woman who is not working yet living on disability should not have herself implanted with six embryos. That she had six kids already makes it more maddening. I have been pregnant before; it takes a toll on your body. If you cannot work because you are disabled, why are you enduring a pregnancy of multiples?! If I lived in California, I would seriously consider moving; that is how strongly I feel about this woman getting money. Yet, how will her children survive without help?
I live beneath my means. Have for years. When Brian announced on Monday that everyone in his company had to take a pay cut, sure I was disappointed. But not worried. Heck, compared to the whopper of a cut we had to take at work almost six years ago, this was nothing.
I don't need extra help because of this. But if I lost my job, I would absolutely go on unemployment; how many people can live that far beneath their means? Yet with the way things are now, it would certainly be smart to cut more things out, live on less. Suze Orman now says you should have eight months of expenses in savings (remember when it was three to six months?). I am thinking 12 is better. If you have that in liquid savings, good for you; you are my hero.
Despite what some of you may think, I am not against government assistance programs. Some people need help because of circumstances beyond their control. Shouldn't we help the family whose head of household lost his or her job? And by help, I also mean charitable donations. I know I am better off than a lot, and I try to share some of this, now more than ever.
But why should taxpayers help those who take little to no responsibility for themselves and their actions? A single woman who is not working yet living on disability should not have herself implanted with six embryos. That she had six kids already makes it more maddening. I have been pregnant before; it takes a toll on your body. If you cannot work because you are disabled, why are you enduring a pregnancy of multiples?! If I lived in California, I would seriously consider moving; that is how strongly I feel about this woman getting money. Yet, how will her children survive without help?
I live beneath my means. Have for years. When Brian announced on Monday that everyone in his company had to take a pay cut, sure I was disappointed. But not worried. Heck, compared to the whopper of a cut we had to take at work almost six years ago, this was nothing.
I don't need extra help because of this. But if I lost my job, I would absolutely go on unemployment; how many people can live that far beneath their means? Yet with the way things are now, it would certainly be smart to cut more things out, live on less. Suze Orman now says you should have eight months of expenses in savings (remember when it was three to six months?). I am thinking 12 is better. If you have that in liquid savings, good for you; you are my hero.
Comments
It's a good thing I'm not bitter, isn't it? : )
I'm really not. My hub and I'll continue to do what I've been doing my whole life. But now, I'll be certain that while we do that, we are the minority. Increasingly. It was a lovely, hardworking run in the U.S. while it lasted, wasn't it?
1. Obama said in a clip, "This is the beginning of the end." I have no idea what context that was in, but he said, and I am pretty sure he is right.
2. O'Reilly said that the stimulus bill has been passed, so there is not much we can do about it. Or something like that. Yep. But unless people start taking responsibility for their actions and are held accountable, I fear.