Boohoo...state cuts mean no more free daycare for "poor" breeders

I'm sure sob stories like this are playing out all over the country. :Violin

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/apr/21/day-care-feels-pinch-of-states-cuts/

Karen Holmes is losing sleep these days. She’s the director of the North East Youth Center in Hillyard, so there’s plenty to worry about in terms of taking care of 70 children before and after school, but lately there’s one specific issue that keeps her up at night.

“Just in the last three months we have lost about 20 percent of our children, compared to this time last year, because of cuts in state child care subsidies,” said Holmes. “The notifications arrive from the state every day that such-and-such family will no longer receive a child care subsidy.”

It's about damn time!

It’s especially hard on the one-on-one kids,” said Holmes. These are kids who need a teacher with them at all times because they have severe behavioral issues.

"Teacher?" Please. Kids like that need the pediatric psych ward, not some minimum-wage babysitter.

Cuts to Working Connections Child Care, primarily, are affecting Hillyard kids. In an effort to balance its budget, the state of Washington recently changed the income requirements for parents seeking WCCC subsidies from 200 percent to 175 percent of the federal poverty level, which for a family of four is an annual income of $22,350. A family of four loses the subsidy if the household income is more than $39,112 a year, including child support. Before- and after-school care at NEYC costs $106 a week for a 5-year-old – or $5,512 for 52 weeks.

And I'd bet my own good money that at least some of these famblees are spending their FREE $5500 on flat-screen TVs, iPhones, tattoos, smokes, booze, pot, manicures, etc. etc. Also, why don't these famblees put the enormous income tax windfalls you KNOW they are getting towards their precious daycare? Because they feel ENTITLED to free babysitting, natch!

WCCC covers the entire fee for eligible families.

What's wrong with making them at least pay part? Why is it an all or nothing deal? Heaven forbid these losers realize that they should pay for what they use.

“When they lose the subsidy they sometimes quit their jobs and go on welfare,” said Holmes. “That means the state pays for them anyhow. Or a federal program picks up the tab.”

I'm sick of hearing this condescending "argument" that I'm just paying for it anyway. Fuck you, lady, and all these loser breeders. If you can't feed 'em, don't fucking breed 'em!!! fuck

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shauna's like a gluten-free Jim Jones for dumb, lifeless middle-aged women. I swear, this bitch could set fire to a orphanage and they would applaud her for bringing them light. ~ Miss Hannigan

I can see both sides of this one, actually. On one hand, what's cheaper? Subsidized daycare, or all- inclusive welfare? Provided the gov't. is sending the money to the daycare directly, instead of the moo, then it may work on a limited basis. By that I mean that moo has to show that she is indeed at work during the time that the kid is at daycare.

The gov't will never abandon breeders. For every social program they cut, another, more expensive one is put in place to compensate them for breeding.

I still say that after the first shitsack, the gubmit should NOT pay one fucking cent to these whores. Period. Daycare? Should have thought of that before you spread your legs, ho.

I guess I'm disgruntled because I go to school and also work with broodwhores who ALL have food-cards, WIC, and other "freebies" compliments of our stupid gubmint (and us taxpayers.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm so glad that I have no goddamned kids - it gives me more time to spend with my pets, who will always love me unconditionally.