A Proposal

[♦️ King of Diamonds ♦️]

How about you make it so that you can support a family on a single income first like back in the Boomer days?

 

[ITK]

How about you make it so that you can support a family on a single income first like back in the Boomer days?

You're gonna have to ban women from most jobs to do that.

3. Empower the CPS to allow them to take away children from actual abusers and lazy welfare negresses, and enact strict judicial punishments for horrific parents

CPS is the most demonic institution in the world. There is no right more sacred than the right of the parent to his child. This is the most basic and foundational relationship of all society, from which all other relationships issue forth. Taking a child away from his parents is unfortunately necessary in some depraved circumstances, but it should be treated with the same level of scrutiny as sentencing a man to death. In many ways death is a lighter sentence.

 

[♦️ King of Diamonds ♦️]

You're gonna have to ban women from most jobs to do that.

See the thing is I frankly don't buy that shit. 1/3rd of all women in the 1950's were employed so it's not like the goal of allowing a family to be sustained on one income was contingent on a 0% female employment rate.

The problem comes from the devaluation of the US dollar by means of abolishing the gold standard, major demographic displacement, extreme wealth inequality in a new "gilded age" that makes the gap between rich and poor in Latin America look tame, College Degree inflation and a predatory student loans system, and many other factors.

Until you make it so that the average citizen can reasonably support a family on a single income, or unless you plan to implement some 1930's German Reich-esque welfare systems for newborns and newlyweds- I suggest you STFU about abortion/contraception/whatever because people are going to get them anyways if they frankly can't afford kids. It's like trying to ban guns- it flat out doesn't work, just ask Communist Romania.

 

[ITK]

1/3rd of all women in the 1950's were employed so it's not like the goal of allowing a family to be sustained on one income was contingent on a 0% female employment rate.

Yes, but they were different kinds of jobs than the job a man would get. Generally they were lower paying and you had more freedom in your employment as it was expected that a woman wouldn't stay at the same job for life. That said, of course the other things you mentioned are all very important factors, I'm not denying that.

 

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

See the thing is I frankly don't buy that shit. 1/3rd of all women in the 1950's were employed so it's not like the goal of allowing a family to be sustained on one income was contingent on a 0% female employment rate.

The problem comes from the devaluation of the US dollar by means of abolishing the gold standard, major demographic displacement, extreme wealth inequality in a new "gilded age" that makes the gap between rich and poor in Latin America look tame, College Degree inflation and a predatory student loans system, and many other factors.

Until you make it so that the average citizen can reasonably support a family on a single income, or unless you plan to implement some 1930's German Reich-esque welfare systems for newborns and newlyweds- I suggest you STFU about abortion/contraception/whatever because people are going to get them anyways if they frankly can't afford kids. It's like trying to ban guns- it flat out doesn't work, just ask Communist Romania.

7. Welfare for paternal-breadwinner households (whites only) and DINKs will be tossed into a trash compactor