Should house wives receive money from the government?

Will their performance be regulated?
I'd better get blown regularly, and no spitting.
Spitters are quitters.

Attached: GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.gif (633x600, 193K)

Blowjobs are sodomy.

Actually pretty based, I'm onboard with this. Deincentivise divorce, incentivise home-make making waifus.

These people are often fucking useless but raising the next generation of our philosophers and engineers and soliders and leaders. No job is more important than that. That is also why teachers need to be paid better -- if you pay more, you will get more compeition for the job, which means better qualified people at the top end, and the bottom end of blue haired milennial disney worshipping feminist drunks gets pushed out, while more masculine and wisened role models begin to fill roles.

Let's invest in our children if we want to invest in the future of our people.

No, but a couple should be able to afford to raise kids with just one of the two having a full time job.

I'll sodomize my wife all the live long day, thank you very much.

Attached: 25hkavt.gif (584x527, 176K)

No, whores who get blacked should have no compensation from the government.

If you want a daily allowance, to take care of children, then reproduce with a man that can actually provide for children.

Stupid fucking whore.

Attached: aussie2.jpg (400x400, 35K)

I assume married couples would be exempt, placing the burden on childless men and women to pay (really just single men, as women are net tax consumers) . It's the only way his suggestion makes any sort of sense.

Limp.

This we already do this welfare moms get like 3 k for shitting out six niglet babies while other women think it's more respectable to have kids in their 40s lmao

yeah sure the government should pay housewives.
but I demand abolishment of alimony in that case. since the woman is paid by the state the woman doesn't need half of her husbands money.

Nice entitlement. Get a real job poorfag.

Might not be a bad idea if welfare for single mothers is abolished.

In that way, the genetic propensity to domesticity is subsidized, whores starve, and independent women "work" their way out of the gene pool.

Nah. Stop asking for free money. The living stardard has inflated so much and people became degenerate. If you're agood Christian, you'd work hard for peanuts and have a big family.

Do you know what median salary is?
Don't complain about america getting blacked later, because white not having kids is the cause of it.

>not wanting to support married couples with a stay-at-home mom
Literally more anti-white than open borders

through theft?

no.

>my country will become a giant favela but at least I won't get taxed
Nice.

Instead of more welfare, how about we get women out of the workforce so men's pay can once again support a family on just his income? Female empowerment is one of the core problems plaguing society.

That would be ideal but it will never happen. Of course neither would incentivizing traditional families over single moms so I guess it doesn't matter either way

How do you do that though?
You can't just wave a magic wand and unfuck things.
You have to incentivize women to stay at home, I can't think of anything but free money to do that.

Wages are determined by more than just how large the workforce is. There's no reason to expect billionaire businessmen competing with Chinese insects will just raise men's wages if we wipe out half the workforce*

*I know women work stupid jobs, but that's not really a point in your favor. Essentially, you're saying fewer nurses will coincide with men being paid more for construction work. It's dumb.

I don't support working women btw. I'm just being realistic.

don't call it a tax if you are literally stealing it.

Married couples should receive a loan of 100,000 Reichsmarks, erm, I mean pounds to buy a house.
25% of that loan should be forgiven for every child the couple has.

I would give all white families a stipend per child, but only if the child is all white, not a mutt.

Jews would come in and sue the government for "racism" over it, of course...but if any other race were seeing a loss of population, and the government did the same for them, the Jews would be all for it.

REAL holocaust, when?

Attached: Levitts.jpg (606x432, 58K)

>I would give all white families a stipend per child, but only if the child is all white, not a mutt.
Good luck passing that through congress.

I shouldnt think we need to give women money for doing their job

>Jow Forums complains there are not enough housewives
>defends the fact that you now need two incomes to have a family

in the ussr you got a medal for having over a certain number of children

How is cuckolding for the government different from women marrying the government?

In fascist Italy too.

And what are you going to do once the childless become such a minority that they simply can't support the system? There will be a massive boom of ill raised children & an economic collapse.

In the USSR you also had to work no matter your sex, and no the medals were given only during a certain time period and in highly populated cities.
Mother gives birth, hands over the child to the state school system and goes back to work. Mothers = birthers & providers in the SU. Nothing else.

Of course it would never get through congress, congress is full of paid-off traitors.
when the revolution comes, they'll decorate lampposts all along Pennsylvania Avenue.

Attached: AGoodCongressman.jpg (1000x1280, 157K)

>In the USSR you also had to work no matter your sex
indeed, it was great. Instead of being a jobless NEET right now i could just walk down to the police station and say 'i need some work' and they would give me something to do, and i could continue enjoying the same high quality of life everyone else got.
A true paradise.

I would clean the streets. Roads are a mark of civilization. In ancient rome the people who maintained the roads were highly respected, high ranking romans would compete to be the guy in charge of road administration.

>i could just walk down to the police station and say 'i need some work
No, the police would COME FOR YOU, and throw you in prison for being unemployed.
>I would clean the streets
Get to it then, why are you still posting here?

They should receive money from their husbands. People shouldn't depend on the government for every single thing in their lives.

Guys, I have a better idea. Instead of paying women to be housewives, how about taxing them if they choose to be single? Basically, impose a thot tax. Becoming a mother is very expensive for a woman, she has to leave the workforce for an extended period and it can impair their career. Also, staying with the children and their father leads to many lost opportunities, they could be whoring it up across the world, swinging from one sugar daddy to the next, instead they have to devote themselves to the raising of their children, significant personal sacrifice. Let's impose a single woman tax so that single women contribute their fair share to society compared with married women.

Further to that, if a man takes a woman out to dinner or buys her a gift, how come the woman doesn't pay any tax on that? Women should have to declare these things as income.

Let's face it guys, "love" and "respect", these are just lies invented by women in order to blue-pill men. Men are given instructions by women, and then the women twist it around so that the men believe that in complying with these instructions they are embodying certain noble qualities such as "caring". In actual fact, women should do these things for themselves, just as men have to do everything for themselves. If I go to a shop and grab some shit and try and walk out the door without paying and the security guard grabs me, do you think asking him "But don't you love me?" is going to soften his resolve in any way? No -- but women take from men and use the same ploy, the problem is men believe their generosity is worthy, manly behaviour. Women encourage these views but in truth they despise men and only want to persist in their degenerate ways without having to do things for themselves. Even so, governments should see through this sham and require that women pay tax on the contributions men make to their lives. Because, as it is currently, sponging off men is tax free, but paying your own way is taxed.

whats a dependant exemption on your taxes?
wife and 2 kids gets you a 10k saving/year.

damn you shills, sage

>Instead of being a jobless NEET right now i could just walk down to the police station and say 'i need some work' and they would give me something to do,

Prices do that much more efficiently. The police would just create more joblessness with a monumental bureacracy.

>high ranking romans would compete to be the guy in charge of road administration.

Taxes and prices already serve this function.

Please checkout Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell.The audiobook is on Youtube.

I had a friend who visited the USSR back when it still existed (his family was from Russia).
They met a street food vendor, who was drunk as a skunk, and they struck up a conversation with him. Nice guy, he invited them up to his apartment for more drinks.
They asked him if he would get in trouble for leaving his vending cart unattended for so long, and the guy laughed and said no, he couldn't be fired, he had a right to a job.

As it turns out, everyone has a right to a job, and even if you're a drunken fuck-up, they just keep shuffling you to less and less important jobs, until you hit rock-bottom, in this case, a street vendor. It was pretty much welfare, and he really didn't have to do his job, because there was nowhere else to put him.
So he would remain a slowly-dying alcoholic, and produce nothing for his society, and his society would allow him to do that.

Now, in the U.S., we have welfare, which is basically the same thing. It's to keep from having to clean the starved bodies of the fuck-ups off the street every night.
But it's just as destructive to individuals and neighborhoods, it allows people to be lazy, irresponsible, and stupid, without consequences.

All this shit needs to be done away with, it doesn't help anyone in the long run. If nothing else, people should be forced to work for their government checks, and I mean with the threat of losing those checks if they refuse to do at least a minimally acceptable job.

Attached: KFC.jpg (648x648, 60K)

>No, the police would COME FOR YOU, and throw you in prison for being unemployed
This is false, sure if you were inventionally trying to avoid work, but you could also just go there first.
They would then give you aptitude test and you would be put to work
I know this, for i have heard it straight from someone who lived in the USSR for 25 years.

you might be interested to note, that this person all in all is against communism. The idea was fear of oppressive regime around every corner. But they fully admit it was very nice to have absolute security and assurance that as long as you did your job you would be ok.

Unfortunately they lived in post stalin era where revisionists were fucking with things. Im sure that oppressive regime would have been nonexistant with out the need for constant vigilance against imperialist infiltration and subversion.

no.
jesus christ you're a fucking cuck.

The U.S. used to have CCC camps, the "Civilian Conservation Corps."

They were given public works jobs, building structures and recreational facilities for our parks.
It was hard work, but it allowed people a chance to get back into the workforce (if there was any), and to send some money back to their families.

And society benefited from this. To this day, you can find the structures they built, still in service, serving the public.

We could do the same, eliminate welfare and start public works projects for those who need a job and can't find one.
Maybe jobs like building a wall along our southern border.

BASIC ECONOMICS, 5th Edition audiobook
by Thomas Sowell

youtube.com/watch?v=dQiBD-crrvA

Attached: Basic Economics 5th Edition.jpg (225x225, 8K)

Probably not, OP.

Attached: Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell.jpg (300x167, 8K)