It's not so much about the number of jobs, but about the hours you're working. A single parent working 80+ hours a week can't raise 3 children without paid help. Even if there are two parents, they need to allocate time to mentor their children through life.

If you don't have enough time to raise your children properly, that's 100% on you. Having children is a choice, and the costs of that choice should not be imposed on society at large.

> and the costs of that choice should not be imposed on society at large.

Why not? Why do you accept that as truth? What's the alternative? There's no point in arguing what she should have done because we can't change the past, she's here with three kids, so what do we do now? Just let them rot or help them out? I mean I suppose we could just murder all poor people and be done with it, but that's not really a society I want to be a part of.

When you see someone trip and fall, do you get down and tell them they should have watched where they were walking then kick them in the ribs before you walk off?

> There's no point in arguing what she should have done because we can't change the past

There is, so we can prevent the next person from making the same mistake.

But what about the previous person who made the mistake? They're still around and real, they're not some hypothetical.

I never said you shouldn't help them, why are you erecting this strawman? I'm just saying that while you help them, don't forget that you can prevent people from ending up in that situation.

You can't save a sinking ship with a bucket alone. You have to plug the leak.

Choice is a pretty loaded term the way you're using it. If I chose to have sex with whats regarded as very good protection and birth control, and I still get pregnant, did I opt in to having them or are they an unlikely product of a different but related choice? Is it just 100% on me if the support structure I rely on to raise the kids I did opt in to having crumbles for some reason? With a charitable outlook, it doesn't take much to see how a mother of 3 with 3 jobs is doing the best they can, and to get down on them seems petty. I'm part of society, impose some of those costs on me. That's what society is for, at least the small "l" liberal kind of society I'd prefer to live in.

That's of course not to say that there aren't genuinely awful people and parents out there, but often they're not spending every waking hour working to support their kids, with little to nothing remaining after bills are paid.

> If I chose to have sex with whats regarded as very good protection and birth control, and I still get pregnant

Are you saying that's the most likely case here?

> Having children is a choice, and the costs of that choice should not be imposed on society at large.

So you’re opposed to parents who take whatever work they can get in order to support their families. By your previous statement, you’re probably also against welfare, as that also externalises the costs. It sounds like you’re against the idea that people should be allowed to procreate unless they’re rich?

I never said I was against welfare, nice slander though! I actually support a UBI. I just also think you shouldn't make decisions that you can't financially support, at any time.