Several years ago, we caused a kerfluffle with a series of posts explaining why IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) should not be covered by insurance. At the time, it never occured to us that we should have added "or by the taxpayer."
"A big share of the financial burden of raising Nadya Suleman’s 14 children could fall on the shoulders of California’s taxpayers."
Turns out, the young "lady" (who had already spawned 6 children) has been receiving gummint subsidies, at least in part because she is unemployed. For some reason, this rocket surgeon decided that having a slew of additional mouths to feed would be appropriate, and that it would also be appropriate for thee and me to pay for their care.
Perhaps the hardworking taxpayers of the Golden State (or should that be "Goldbrick" State?) had other plans for those dollars; alas, those tireless workers weren't consulted, only forced to pay up.
But wait, it gets better!
"(T)he hospital where the octuplets are expected to spend seven to 12 weeks has requested reimbursement from Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program, for care of the premature babies, according to the Los Angeles Times. The cost has not been disclosed." [emphasis added]
Oh, great: a blank check!
The good news is that Ms Suleman "doesn’t consider the public assistance she receives to be welfare." Well good on her! After all, it's only important to consider what one calls it, not that one is expected to pay for it.
Surprisingly, "bloggers rained insults on Suleman." Gee, I wonder why?