If you're married to the state, then you vote for more of the state. It's one of the many examples where liberty has been eroded in recent decades, but few talk about it because it's a sensitive topic.
Also claiming that tax reduction is a form of welfare if very disingenuous since basically that would mean the State would be entitled to take all of your profit by default... meaning any amount of profit allowed would be welfare.
And if you'll remember the 1990s, the entire plan to cut welfare benefits was premised on the Earned Income Tax Credit taking up the slack. Which actually worked in some ways though, if anything, it makes it easier for single mothers to provide for a family by working a low wage job. Which has distorted the "marriage market" though in different ways from the welfare benefit.
It doesn't really matter how much welfare costs (obviously it should kept under control like military, health and education) and that's why I didn't mention that aspect. All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent.
Huh? Marriage itself is a legal construct by the state, no different than a corporation. Is a corporation a "basic building block for society" too? Should it be? What makes you think marriage is such a great thing that society should be dependent upon it? Statistics show that it's a massive gamble, and you're more likely to lose with it than you are to benefit. On top of that, the risks are enormous: child support, alimony, and in many cases, bankruptcy.
>All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent.
That's funny, coming from someone who obviously supports marriage, which is absolutely an example of the state nannying people and becoming involved in an individual's life. Try going through a contested divorce and tell me the state wasn't involved.
The simple fact is that your "standard familes" are a complete and utter failure. Society needs an all-new paradigm, because clinging to this archaic institution clearly isn't working.
This is the first I'm hearing of this. I know the right is against "leeches," but I've yet to see them single out single mothers.
Unless you're referring to undertones in their (Republicans') way of conduct. If so, then I wouldn't expect single mothers to be able to recognize the subtlety.
That kind of language, in various forms, has been a dogwhistle of the right since Reagan started saying it at campaign rallies.
Though, I am surprised that the term is hovering around 25%.