How little our society cares about child rearing

[Hawkeye2j]

ASK ANY working mother about her maternity leave and you’re likely to get a tale — of the logistics of cobbling together vacation days and comp time, the drama of negotiations with a rigid boss. This week, a group of single Latina mothers, gathered through a support network called SoLatina.com, shared their stories with me: of a Texas gas station that refused to hold open a job; a Boston hospital that declined to tell a woman of her rights under the Family Medical Leave Act; a Texas consulting firm that was helpful and understanding.


Tweet 8 people Tweeted this
Yahoo! BuzzShareThis
As critical as maternity leave is to babies’ and mothers’ health, it’s something that’s left up to luck: the size of your company, the generosity of your boss, the salary (or existence) of your spouse. And if it’s a financial burden? Serves you right for having a kid.

That has been the overarching, infuriating theme of this week’s debate over maternity leave, sparked by the Supreme Judicial Court decision that codified Massachusetts’ guarantee of eight weeks, unpaid. Amid the talk about how much time new mothers need and how much businesses should be burdened, one particularly coarse argument has bubbled up repeatedly: If you can’t afford to stay home with your baby, you shouldn’t bother to procreate.

That view largely summarizes the American attitude, the rugged individualism that can turn so quickly into social Darwinism. It’s common knowledge that every other developed country, and most undeveloped ones, offer some form of paid maternity leave. Here, we get only unpaid leaves that many families aren’t eligible for or can’t afford to fully use.

It’s a sign of how little our society values childrearing, says Joan Williams, a law professor at the University of California Hastings and author of “Reshaping the Work-Family Debate: Why Men and Class Matter.’’

“The attitude,’’ she said, “is that having a baby is a private frolic of one’s own, and why should you impose your tastes on other people?’’

In fact, as Williams points out, the next generation is a public good, and not just because of that whole perpetuation-of-the-species thing. These are the people who will someday support us in our old age — as doctors, nurses, workers whose taxes will fund our social security. We spend vast sums to subsidize the elderly; no one suggests that if you can’t afford to get old, you might as well die. But children are seen as awful inconveniences, standing in the way of American enterprise.

There’s no question, Williams says, that a maternity leave can put a strain on a small business. But those burdens can be overstated. And we need to start accepting that nearly everyone will need a leave from work at some point, whether for health matters, the care of sick relatives, or those critical months with a new baby.

What we need are some national standards for affordable leave. What we’re more likely to get are state-by-state efforts. The Obama administration recommended $50 million in this year’s budget — the Senate since reduced it to $10 million — as seed money for state-run paid leave programs. One possible model is Canada, which offers paid leave as a form of unemployment insurance. California and New Jersey offer paid leave though their temporary disability insurance programs, funded through payroll taxes.

These state programs are hardly European-style social welfare. They are measured in weeks and partial pay, just enough to ensure that parents can take some time off without losing their homes. They are an acknowledgment of the realities of family life today, says Portia Wu, vice president of the National Partnership for Women & Families: Four in ten mothers are primary breadwinners, and two-thirds of mothers bring in more than a quarter of the family income.

Those statistics ought to be enough to quash those boring Mommy Wars, which view working motherhood as a luxurious option for the upper-middle class. In truth, working moms are a fact of life. Children are a biological reality. And the more we acknowledge that with policies that are humane, the more likely that “family values’’ will be a term with actual meaning.

Joanna Weiss can be reached at weiss@globe.com.

© Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/08/15/family_values/

[Moby]

There's a reason why our children act the way they do in school and why America children are falling so far behind other countries that have more programs for raising children.

[Dale escondido]

More socialization will cure bad parenting and poor schools?
GOVERNMENT TO THE RESCUE
aLWAYS THE SAME ANSWER NO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY

[2T]

parenting in America is a luxury item, like healthcare, and God help you if your baby is born disabled

[kres24GT]

There's a reason why our children act the way they do in school and why America children are falling so far behind other countries that have more programs for raising children.


Yep. Welfare and Big Government dependence.


If you don't have the resources, time, or money to have a child, don't have one. Simple as that.


The idea everyone should be able to have all the kids they want subsidized on the taxpayer dime is insane.

[Hawkeye2j]

Yep. Welfare and Big Government dependence.


If you don't have the resources, time, or money to have a child, don't have one. Simple as that.


The idea everyone should be able to have all the kids they want subsidized on the taxpayer dime is insane.
I think we should pay more attention to the writings of Thomas Jefferson. He felt that the education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong, vibrant economy. Society has a vested interest in making sure children have all the tools necessary to reach the height of their talents.

[kres24GT]

I think we should pay more attention to the writings of Thomas Jefferson. He felt that the education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong, vibrant economy. Society has a vested interest in making sure children have all the tools necessary to reach the height of their talents.


Right now welfare is destroying that ability. The welfare culture cranks out kids to get more handouts, they don't give a shit about their kids.


Are you going to force parents to care about their kids? Have a screening process for parents, and abort if they don't pass?


It's great to just sit there and say "more government and more spending will make it all better" but in reality we have to apply logic and common sense to these things.

The welfare culture and the dependence on government is causing what you are talking about.

Our grandparents grew up with minimal education, grew up during tough times, and many of them turned out fine. They did so by practicing fiscal responsibility and working hard.

We live in a country where we are told "spend spend spend". No one saves anything and everyone expects government to care for them.

I have told this story before. Once coming back from Vegas I was taking the MARTA home the airport. At one stop 3 little girls got on, not older than 13. One of them had a cellphone that she dropped down by my seat. It was stuck between the plastic seats and I helped her fish it out.

She told me "thank you" and I told her "stay in school" because that is something I always tell kids, half jokingly, half serious. She told me she didn't need school, she was going to get pregnant and go on welfare while her boyfriend sold drugs. 12 or 13 year old girl.

System is broken at this point. We need to educate this girl but we can't with a welfare system that encourages her to get pregnant and drop out.


Until we end welfare educating people properly is not going to happen. Take the millions wasted in welfare and use it to educate people to have job skills and be fiscally responsible. Now you are talking.

[Hawkeye2j]

Right now welfare is destroying that ability. The welfare culture cranks out kids to get more handouts, they don't give a shit about their kids.


Are you going to force parents to care about their kids? Have a screening process for parents, and abort if they don't pass?


It's great to just sit there and say "more government and more spending will make it all better" but in reality we have to apply logic and common sense to these things.

The welfare culture and the dependence on government is causing what you are talking about.

Our grandparents grew up with minimal education, grew up during tough times, and many of them turned out fine. They did so by practicing fiscal responsibility and working hard.

We live in a country where we are told "spend spend spend". No one saves anything and everyone expects government to care for them.

I have told this story before. Once coming back from Vegas I was taking the MARTA home the airport. At one stop 3 little girls got on, not older than 13. One of them had a cellphone that she dropped down by my seat. It was stuck between the plastic seats and I helped her fish it out.

She told me "thank you" and I told her "stay in school" because that is something I always tell kids, half jokingly, half serious. She told me she didn't need school, she was going to get pregnant and go on welfare while her boyfriend sold drugs. 12 or 13 year old girl.

System is broken at this point. We need to educate this girl but we can't with a welfare system that encourages her to get pregnant and drop out.


Until we end welfare educating people properly is not going to happen. Take the millions wasted in welfare and use it to educate people to have job skills and be fiscally responsible. Now you are talking.
Boloney. The welfare roles have decreased since Clinton. You are the typical Right who want to exploit stereotypes to advance your agenda. It has no basis in reality.

[kres24GT]

Boloney. The welfare roles have decreased since Clinton. You are the typical Right who want to exploit stereotypes to advance your agenda. It has no basis in reality.

I am not a member of "the right" so not sure what you are talking about.

Governmetn dependency has increased, welfare programs are more numerous and spending more than ever.


Yes, the days of Clinton were good times, its why he is the best president of my life time. Those days are long gone. Government dependency is the new slavery.

Part of the education that is so desperately needed is personal responsibility. This can't be taught in today's welfare state.

[Citizen]

Care/compassion is incomprehensible to big government.

[BlueSpoon]

I think we should pay more attention to the writings of Thomas Jefferson. He felt that the education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong, vibrant economy. Society has a vested interest in making sure children have all the tools necessary to reach the height of their talents.
Education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong vibrant society.

It's not society as a whole that is responsible for raising children. It's the parents responsibility.

Parents need to stop leaving the proper raising of their children to everyone else. That is part of the problem.

[Hawkeye2j]

Education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong vibrant society.

It's not society as a whole that is responsible for raising children. It's the parents responsibility.

Parents need to stop leaving the proper raising of their children to everyone else. That is part of the problem.
It is the responsibility of society to see that the parents have the tools to do so.
You can't raise a child properly if your neighborhood is rampant with crime or if the schools suck.

[Independent Harry]

Education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong vibrant society.

It's not society as a whole that is responsible for raising children. It's the parents responsibility.

Parents need to stop leaving the proper raising of their children to everyone else. That is part of the problem.


Really because for thousands of years and throughout many cultures it was seen as a job of the village or community to raise kids together...

[Citizen]

It is the responsibility of society to see that the parents have the tools to do so.
You can't raise a child properly if your neighborhood is rampant with crime or if the schools suck.

So lets cut everyone's taxes so that perhaps one of the parents can stay at home and raise their children properly. Sounds good to me.

[BlueSpoon]

It is the responsibility of society to see that the parents have the tools to do so.
You can't raise a child properly if your neighborhood is rampant with crime or if the schools suck.
You can move and you can homeschool.

There are always alternatives. ;)

[BlueSpoon]

So lets cut everyone's taxes so that perhaps one of the parents can stay at home and raise their children properly. Sounds good to me.
Works for me! :D

[nondual]

More socialization will cure bad parenting and poor schools?
GOVERNMENT TO THE RESCUE
aLWAYS THE SAME ANSWER NO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Israel provides free baby sitting and healthcare for each and every mother, and they are doing very well.

[nondual]

Yep. Welfare and Big Government dependence.


If you don't have the resources, time, or money to have a child, don't have one. Simple as that.


The idea everyone should be able to have all the kids they want subsidized on the taxpayer dime is insane.
I thought conservatives were the ones saying we needed to have more babies?

[nondual]

I think we should pay more attention to the writings of Thomas Jefferson. He felt that the education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong, vibrant economy. Society has a vested interest in making sure children have all the tools necessary to reach the height of their talents.
Then they expect us to be able to compete with the rest of the industrialized world. :dunno:

[nondual]

I am not a member of "the right" so not sure what you are talking about.

Governmetn dependency has increased, welfare programs are more numerous and spending more than ever.


Yes, the days of Clinton were good times, its why he is the best president of my life time. Those days are long gone. Government dependency is the new slavery.

Part of the education that is so desperately needed is personal responsibility. This can't be taught in today's welfare state.
You shouldn't have kept wages down while everything else was going up.

Sorry now? :lmao2:

[nondual]

Education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong vibrant society.

It's not society as a whole that is responsible for raising children. It's the parents responsibility.

Parents need to stop leaving the proper raising of their children to everyone else. That is part of the problem.
In the mean time, let's cut the education budget, right? :crazzy:

[Citizen]

I think we should pay more attention to the writings of Thomas Jefferson. He felt that the education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong, vibrant economy. Society has a vested interest in making sure children have all the tools necessary to reach the height of their talents.

I'm just wondering if any liberals can explain why private education is always.... ALWAYS valued more than public education.

[nondual]

It is the responsibility of society to see that the parents have the tools to do so.
You can't raise a child properly if your neighborhood is rampant with crime or if the schools suck.
Exactly! :thumbsup:

[nondual]

You can move and you can homeschool.

There are always alternatives. ;)
Move!? Homeschool!?

What planet are you at?

[kres24GT]

I thought conservatives were the ones saying we needed to have more babies?


I am not a conservative, so I don't care what they say.

[2T]

I'm just wondering if any liberals can explain why private education is always.... ALWAYS valued more than public education.

really? prove it :lmao2:

[MintJulep]

Education and proper raising of children is the only way to a strong vibrant society.

It's not society as a whole that is responsible for raising children. It's the parents responsibility.

Parents need to stop leaving the proper raising of their children to everyone else. That is part of the problem.:thumbsup:

Hear, hear.

[Citizen]

really? prove it :lmao2:

Fine. Look up the lifetime salary differentials between a PUBLIC high school grads and PRIVATE college grads.

[Hawkeye2j]

I'm just wondering if any liberals can explain why private education is always.... ALWAYS valued more than public education.
That is a blatantly false statement.

[Citizen]

That is a blatantly false statement.

No, its a true statement.

[Hawkeye2j]

No, its a true statement.
Back it up Citizen.

[Citizen]

Back it up Citizen.

I did. You back your statement up.

[nondual]

Fine. Look up the lifetime salary differentials between a PUBLIC high school grads and PRIVATE college grads.
So, what's your point? Everyone knows that private education is better than public eduction. Same thing with health care insurance, but that doesn't justify eliminating it. :dunno:

[AK Gandy]

I did. You back your statement up.

No you didn't. :rolleyes:

You made a dumb apples-to-oranges comparison.
Fine. Look up the lifetime salary differentials between a PUBLIC high school grads and PRIVATE college grads.

I hate to be the one to break the news to you but, comparing salary differentials between high school grads and college grads.............. is consistent regardless of whether they received a public or private education. :doh:

.

[Hawkeye2j]

I did. You back your statement up.
You didn't back it up. You threw out a statement that private education is always superior yet you give nothing to show the accuracy of that statement. You don't just throw out statements and tell others to prove it isn't true. You are going to make a statement, back it up.

[Hawkeye2j]

No you didn't. :rolleyes:

You made a dumb apples-to-oranges comparison.


I hate to be the one to break the news to you but, comparing salary differentials between high school grads and college grads.............. is consistent regardless of whether they received a public or private education. :doh:

.
Why would you compare public HIGH SCHOOL graduates to private COLLEGE graduates?

[Citizen]

I thought we were discussing private vs public but I guess not.

[Hawkeye2j]

I thought we were discussing private vs public but I guess not.
How is life in outer space Citizen?

[Citizen]

How is life in outer space Citizen?

So life is just grand under a public education system. Every parent has more of a say in their child's education.

[Hawkeye2j]

So life is just grand under a public education system. Every parent has more of a say in their child's education.
Study: Public Schools Just As Good as Private Schools
By LiveScience Staff
posted: 27 May 2008 ET
Buzz up!
Comments (23) | Recommend (1)
Students in public schools have math scores that are just as good if not better than those of students in private schools, according to a new national study.

The research focused across several years on 9,791 kindergarten through fifth-grade students.

"These data provide strong, longitudinal evidence that public schools are at least as effective as private schools in boosting student achievement," said researcher Christopher Lubienski of the University of Illinois.

Ads by Google K12 Home SchoolNow Enrolling Students for Fall '10 Give Your Kids an Academic Edge. www.K12.com Don't pay for schoolGet A Scholarship For Free. Millions Available Each Year. ProgramAdvisor.com/Scholarships M.S. in Sport Management100% Online. Accredited. Full or Part Time. No GRE or GMAT required lasell.edu/SportManagement
Combined with other, yet-unpublished studies of the same data, which produced similar findings, "we think this effectively ends the debate about whether private schools are more effective than publics," said Lubienski, whose research has dealt with all aspects of alternative education.

This is important, he said, because many current reforms, such as No Child Left Behind, charter schools and vouchers for private schools, are based on the assumption that private schools offer better education than public schools.

The new study, detailed in May issue of the education journal Phi Delta Kappan, also involved doctoral student Corinna Crane and education professor Sarah Theule Lubienski, both of the University of Illinois.

Unlike literacy, math is viewed as being less dependent on a student's home environment and more an indication of a school's effectiveness, Sarah Lubienski said.

A previous study by the Lubienskis heated up controversy over the quality of private school education. It showed that students' math scores are better at public schools than at private schools, when controlling for socioeconomic status, but some critics said that study failed to show the possible effect over time of different types of schooling.

The data for the new study addresses the criticism with data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (or ECLS-K), administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), part of the U.S. Department of Education.

The ECLS-K database includes student achievement and background information drawn from a nationally representative sample of more than 21,000 students, starting with their entry into kindergarten in the fall of 1998.

The most recent data available for the University of Illinois study was gathered in 2004, in the spring of the students' fifth-grade year. The sample used for the study included students in 1,531 schools (1,273 public, 140 Catholic and 118 other private schools).

After controlling for demographic differences among students and schools, the researchers found that public school students began kindergarten with math scores roughly equal to those of their Catholic school peers. By fifth grade, however, they had made significantly greater gains, equal to almost an extra half year of schooling, Sarah Lubienski said.

Part of the explanation, she said, might lie in the fact that Catholic schools have fewer certified teachers and employ fewer reform-oriented mathematics teaching practices.

Public school students also "rivaled the performance of students in other (non-Catholic) private schools," the researchers wrote. After adjusting for demographics and initial kindergarten scores, they found that achievement gains between kindergarten and fifth grade were roughly equal.

"School type alone doesn’t explain very much of why these scores vary ... in truth, whether the school is public or private doesn’t seem to make that much difference," Sarah Lubienski said.

The researchers go on to write that they "personally see private schools as an integral part of the American system of education" and "there are many valid reasons why parents choose private schools and why policymakers may push for school choice."

Academic achievement, however, may no longer be one of those reasons, they write. "Claims that simply switching students from one type of school to another will result in higher scores appear to be unfounded," they write.

http://www.livescience.com/health/080527-public-schools.html

[Citizen]

To understand how and why charter schools score better on tests than do public schools you first have to understand how charter schools work.

Charter schools come into existence when a state puts out a notice that it will be subsidizing a non-governmental type of school called a charter school; which will be owned and run by a non-governmental group of people who get together to open one. It’s as simple as that, but not of course, because states don’t just pay any group of people to open and run a school; there are requirements involved; and that’s why states choose to allow for the possibility of charter schools in the first place, because it’s easier to put stipulations on them.

Consider the city of New Orleans which chose to rebuild most of the schools that were destroyed with charter schools instead of regular public schools. This was done because though charter schools do get subsidies from the government, they also have to come up with some of the startup capital on their own. Thus, it was cheaper for the city from the get-go. Then, because they are not public schools, the city didn’t and still doesn’t have to deal with the hiring, firing or dealing with teachers; those people that open and own the charter schools have to deal with all that. All the city has to do is lay out the guidelines that the schools must follow in order to receive continued funding. In this situation, there is no bartering with unions for example, again because the teachers work for the charter schools, not a public school district, but also because charter schools are under no obligation to hire teachers that belong to a union or to not hire them if they do.

The idea behind a charter school is that a state can mandate what is taught without having to do the teaching itself; it can require a certain level of excellence without having to provide the expertise; and it can demand improvements in test scores without having to provide a means for doing so. All because it’s the state that holds the purse strings. If a charter school fails to live up to the stipulations in it’s contract, or charter as it’s called, then the state can simply withhold the funds that school needs to operate.

Thus, the charter schools are free to do whatever they wish with the students so long as they pass the tests; and this includes excluding students who don’t measure up; because unlike public schools, students have to be accepted to a charter school to attend, and if they fail to measure up to the schools standards, either academically or behaviorally, than they can be expelled.

And this is why most charter schools are able to do better on test scores than are public schools, because they can weed out those who don’t score well enough.

http://www.helium.com/items/1911473-why-charter-schools-do-better-on-tests

[nondual]

Study: Public Schools Just As Good as Private Schools
By LiveScience Staff
posted: 27 May 2008 ET
Buzz up!
Comments (23) | Recommend (1)
Students in public schools have math scores that are just as good if not better than those of students in private schools, according to a new national study.

The research focused across several years on 9,791 kindergarten through fifth-grade students.

"These data provide strong, longitudinal evidence that public schools are at least as effective as private schools in boosting student achievement," said researcher Christopher Lubienski of the University of Illinois.

Ads by Google K12 Home SchoolNow Enrolling Students for Fall '10 Give Your Kids an Academic Edge. www.K12.com Don't pay for schoolGet A Scholarship For Free. Millions Available Each Year. ProgramAdvisor.com/Scholarships M.S. in Sport Management100% Online. Accredited. Full or Part Time. No GRE or GMAT required lasell.edu/SportManagement
Combined with other, yet-unpublished studies of the same data, which produced similar findings, "we think this effectively ends the debate about whether private schools are more effective than publics," said Lubienski, whose research has dealt with all aspects of alternative education.

This is important, he said, because many current reforms, such as No Child Left Behind, charter schools and vouchers for private schools, are based on the assumption that private schools offer better education than public schools.

The new study, detailed in May issue of the education journal Phi Delta Kappan, also involved doctoral student Corinna Crane and education professor Sarah Theule Lubienski, both of the University of Illinois.

Unlike literacy, math is viewed as being less dependent on a student's home environment and more an indication of a school's effectiveness, Sarah Lubienski said.

A previous study by the Lubienskis heated up controversy over the quality of private school education. It showed that students' math scores are better at public schools than at private schools, when controlling for socioeconomic status, but some critics said that study failed to show the possible effect over time of different types of schooling.

The data for the new study addresses the criticism with data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (or ECLS-K), administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), part of the U.S. Department of Education.

The ECLS-K database includes student achievement and background information drawn from a nationally representative sample of more than 21,000 students, starting with their entry into kindergarten in the fall of 1998.

The most recent data available for the University of Illinois study was gathered in 2004, in the spring of the students' fifth-grade year. The sample used for the study included students in 1,531 schools (1,273 public, 140 Catholic and 118 other private schools).

After controlling for demographic differences among students and schools, the researchers found that public school students began kindergarten with math scores roughly equal to those of their Catholic school peers. By fifth grade, however, they had made significantly greater gains, equal to almost an extra half year of schooling, Sarah Lubienski said.

Part of the explanation, she said, might lie in the fact that Catholic schools have fewer certified teachers and employ fewer reform-oriented mathematics teaching practices.

Public school students also "rivaled the performance of students in other (non-Catholic) private schools," the researchers wrote. After adjusting for demographics and initial kindergarten scores, they found that achievement gains between kindergarten and fifth grade were roughly equal.

"School type alone doesn’t explain very much of why these scores vary ... in truth, whether the school is public or private doesn’t seem to make that much difference," Sarah Lubienski said.

The researchers go on to write that they "personally see private schools as an integral part of the American system of education" and "there are many valid reasons why parents choose private schools and why policymakers may push for school choice."

Academic achievement, however, may no longer be one of those reasons, they write. "Claims that simply switching students from one type of school to another will result in higher scores appear to be unfounded," they write.

http://www.livescience.com/health/080527-public-schools.html
Hmmm... interesting. I guess things have changed for the better since I was growing up. :)

[Moby]

More socialization will cure bad parenting and poor schools?
GOVERNMENT TO THE RESCUE
aLWAYS THE SAME ANSWER NO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Now, allowing parents more time to take care of children and teaching them some authority. It's worked well in other countries but maybe we should ignore that.

[kres24GT]

Now, allowing parents more time to take care of children and teaching them some authority. It's worked well in other countries but maybe we should ignore that.


Who is not allowed to spend a much time at home with their kids as they want to?

[FredK]

Who is not allowed to spend a much time at home with their kids as they want to?

Depends on who's dime is being used I guess.

Eight weeks of maternity isn't much but the kid's not going to learn much in that time. Eight weeks without a worker could be a big deal in a business.

So I'd be the first to say if you want kids figure out how you are going to take care of them not after. :banghead: :banghead:

[Dale escondido]

Now, allowing parents more time to take care of children and teaching them some authority. It's worked well in other countries but maybe we should ignore that.

What happened here?
Wasn't parenting considered a full time job at one time?
Being involved with pta and spending time not in front of tv with kids?
We say keep throwing money at it and eventually it will get better.
Since most women are in the workplace now maybe child rearing needs to be a serious consideration.
Funny how the least able among us tend to procreate the most.
Whats up with that?
Responsibility is now the lost moral.
Small communitys also were very good at caring for the needs of the people within its community.
Government is now creating a need that cannot be satisfied as they are so inept at running anything.

[Hawkeye2j]

What happened here?
Wasn't parenting considered a full time job at one time?
Being involved with pta and spending time not in front of tv with kids?
We say keep throwing money at it and eventually it will get better.
Since most women are in the workplace now maybe child rearing needs to be a serious consideration.
Funny how the least able among us tend to procreate the most.
Whats up with that?
Responsibility is now the lost moral.
Small communitys also were very good at caring for the needs of the people within its community.
Government is now creating a need that cannot be satisfied as they are so inept at running anything.
This is the point. In this country we once were able to support a family on one income. Not possible for the Middle Class anymore.

[kres24GT]

This is the point. In this country we once were able to support a family on one income. Not possible for the Middle Class anymore.

Sure it is. You may not have the best cell phone, the nicest TV, or the biggest cable TV package, but absolutely possible.

We have already decided that I will got to work and the wife will stay home with the kids.

What you just said is moronic.

[nondual]

Sure it is. You may not have the best cell phone, the nicest TV, or the biggest cable TV package, but absolutely possible.

We have already decided that I will got to work and the wife will stay home with the kids.

What you just said is moronic.
What he said is moronic? WTF? :lmao2:

[kres24GT]

What he said is moronic? WTF? :lmao2:


"In this country we once were able to support a family on one income. Not possible for the Middle Class anymore"

This is an idiotic, moronic, stupid, not to mention false, statement.

[nondual]

"In this country we once were able to support a family on one income. Not possible for the Middle Class anymore"

This is an idiotic, moronic, stupid, not to mention false, statement.
The cost of living is three times higher than it was 10 year ago, yet, wages remain relatively the same. It's called 'stagnant wages'. :) The gap between the poor and the rich has dramatically increased.

[kres24GT]

The cost of living is three times higher than it was 10 year ago, yet, wages remain relatively the same. It's called 'stagnant wages'. :) The gap between the poor and the rich has dramatically increased.


I agree, but this is what we voted for.

However it is irrelevant to the point that it is still very possible to raise a fairly on one income. Not to mention thanks to the internet its possible to earn extra income at your leisure at home. The wife is setting up a jewelry business where she makes hand crafted jewelry and sells it on a site called etsy. She currently has a primary job now. But she will be leaving it when we are ready to have children.

She also does designer cakes out of our home as well for Birthdays/weddings/etc.


Even without this income we'd still be able to make ends meet with one income, mine, which is modest, especially in a metro area where COL is higher.



Plenty of ways to make it happen instead of sitting around saying "why doesn't government do something!?!?!".

[nondual]

I agree, but this is what we voted for.

However it is irrelevant to the point that it is still very possible to raise a fairly on one income. Not to mention thanks to the internet its possible to earn extra income at your leisure at home. The wife is setting up a jewelry business where she makes hand crafted jewelry and sells it on a site called etsy. She currently has a primary job now. But she will be leaving it when we are ready to have children.

She also does designer cakes out of our home as well for Birthdays/weddings/etc.


Even without this income we'd still be able to make ends meet with one income, mine, which is modest, especially in a metro area where COL is higher.



Plenty of ways to make it happen instead of sitting around saying "why doesn't government do something!?!?!".
Your wife sounds like a real 'go getter', good for her! :thumbsup:

I thought you meant she could stay at home and watch soap operas all day. :D

[kres24GT]

Your wife sounds like a real 'go getter', good for her! :thumbsup:

I thought you meant she could stay at home and watch soap operas all day. :D


She could, and then we could bitch about how we need taxpayer money and governmetn mandates to help us raise our children properly. Plenty of poor people and middle class people are raising good kids, it can be done, it just takes effort.

[nondual]

She could, and then we could bitch about how we need taxpayer money and governmetn mandates to help us raise our children properly. Plenty of poor people and middle class people are raising good kids, it can be done, it just takes effort.
I can see nothing wrong with government helping citizens, especially if it expects them to be able to compete with the citizens of other industrialized countries.

[GetAClue]

It is the responsibility of society to see that the parents have the tools to do so.
You can't raise a child properly if your neighborhood is rampant with crime or if the schools suck.
And the great thing about this country is that you have the right to move to a better neighborhood. :thumbsup:

[kres24GT]

I can see nothing wrong with government helping citizens, especially if it expects them to be able to compete with the citizens of other industrialized countries.


I can, it creates a dependency on government and leads people to beleive they aren't responsible for themselves and their families. Why should we pass laws restricting freedom and spend tax payer money to force others to do what many parents are doing on their own?

People should help people, not government. When people help people we can choose who we help, we can say these people do need help and these don't. We can also give more because we don't have to pay for inefficiencies and red tape that are associated with government programs.


For those who truly want to help others. Government programs aren't the way. I mean what has 4 generations of welfare culture and ever expanding assistance programs gotten us? Well you said it yourself, an ever widening gap between rich and poor. If you really want to help others, give your own time, your own money, your own resources as you choose and of your own free will.


Are we going to start forcing parents to spend more time with their kids? Make it a crime to not spend x hours a week? I think a lot of people would have a problem with that.

Force employers to let parents have more time off than non parents? That is a great way to make sure parents don't get jobs and more jobs go overseas.

Spend more money on more programs that do nothing but keep poor people poor and make rich people richer? As I said, this hasn't done anything for us.


Government keeps getting bigger and bigger, spending keeps going up, but nothing ever gets better long term. The poor are still poor. The rich keep getting richer. And the middle class keeps shrinking. 13 trillion in debt and climbing to leave to our children, and for what? Killing a few towel heads, bailing out some CEOs whose companies should have gone under? It certainly wasn't to help out the poor and middle class who are struggling.


I mean, aren't we to the point where no one can say with a straight face that more government is a good idea?

[GetAClue]

I can, it creates a dependency on government and leads people to beleive they aren't responsible for themselves and their families. Why should we pass laws restricting freedom and spend tax payer money to force others to do what many parents are doing on their own?

People should help people, not government. When people help people we can choose who we help, we can say these people do need help and these don't. We can also give more because we don't have to pay for inefficiencies and red tape that are associated with government programs.


For those who truly want to help others. Government programs aren't the way. I mean what has 4 generations of welfare culture and ever expanding assistance programs gotten us? Well you said it yourself, an ever widening gap between rich and poor. If you really want to help others, give your own time, your own money, your own resources as you choose and of your own free will.


Are we going to start forcing parents to spend more time with their kids? Make it a crime to not spend x hours a week? I think a lot of people would have a problem with that.

Force employers to let parents have more time off than non parents? That is a great way to make sure parents don't get jobs and more jobs go overseas.

Spend more money on more programs that do nothing but keep poor people poor and make rich people richer? As I said, this hasn't done anything for us.


Government keeps getting bigger and bigger, spending keeps going up, but nothing ever gets better long term. The poor are still poor. The rich keep getting richer. And the middle class keeps shrinking. 13 trillion in debt and climbing to leave to our children, and for what? Killing a few towel heads, bailing out some CEOs whose companies should have gone under? It certainly wasn't to help out the poor and middle class who are struggling.


I mean, aren't we to the point where no one can say with a straight face that more government is a good idea?
Excellent post! I agree with every word of it. :thumbsup:

[Hawkeye2j]

Sure it is. You may not have the best cell phone, the nicest TV, or the biggest cable TV package, but absolutely possible.

We have already decided that I will got to work and the wife will stay home with the kids.

What you just said is moronic.
No Kres it is impossible.

[Hawkeye2j]

And the great thing about this country is that you have the right to move to a better neighborhood. :thumbsup:
But very often you don't have the means. Working people have to stay with their jobs.

[GetAClue]

But very often you don't have the means. Working people have to stay with their jobs.
Then don't have kids. It still comes back to personal responsibility. Until we see this increase, we will continue to see kids in poor situations.

[kres24GT]

No Kres it is impossible.


And yet American families do it every single day. Not sure how something that millions of Americans do every day is impossible.

[Hawkeye2j]

Then don't have kids. It still comes back to personal responsibility. Until we see this increase, we will continue to see kids in poor situations.
Many have no choice. They are Catholic.

[Hawkeye2j]

And yet American families do it every single day. Not sure how something that millions of Americans do every day is impossible.
I do not know a single one income family.

[GetAClue]

Many have no choice. They are Catholic.
That's your argument? Give me a break. Please get back to me when you have an intelligent argument. :banghead:

[Hawkeye2j]

That's your argument? Give me a break. Please get back to me when you have an intelligent argument. :banghead:
No, that was a fecetious remark. I was making fun of organized religion.

[GetAClue]

No, that was a fecetious remark. I was making fun of organized religion.
It was a poor attempt. And why would you choose to make fun of a Christian religion yet go to great lengths to defend radical Islamic’s intent upon destroying this country? You are really showing your stripes now.

[kres24GT]

I do not know a single one income family.


LMAO, good fucking God. You either do not know many people, are a liar, or maybe just a fucking idiot.

I know several. None of whom are wealthy.

[Hawkeye2j]

It was a poor attempt. And why would you choose to make fun of a Christian religion yet go to great lengths to defend radical Islamic’s intent upon destroying this country? You are really showing your stripes now.
I feel free to make fun of them because I was raised Catholic. Just like I would defend Catholics being able to build a community center or place of worship anywhere they prefer, I defend others. This despite the fact I have a problem with organized religion.