O - I think you're in danger of glossing over the behavioral aspect though.
Just because it isn't the *only* reason doesn't mean it shouldn't be tackled head on.
A corner store in my neighborhood lost their license to sell liquor and gambling products within weeks of one another.... they went out of business soon after.
The new big developments in my area are a gargantuan Applebees and a Costco.
There are healthier alternatives (though they're far fewer in number and less easily accessible than their downtown counterparts) but it doesn't mean people are gonna take advantage of them.
And cooking at home winds up being a lot cheaper than eating out - even fast food.
This really depends. It can be. But I've done the shopping for some of my wife's cooking and while it is certainly more healthy, and it will make a few extra servings, the sticker price on the meal itself is often substantial. And I'm certainly guilty of letting the last serving rot at the back of the fridge after I've eaten something 2-3 meals in a row, which can defeat the purpose.
And cooking at home winds up being a lot cheaper than eating out - even fast food.
This really depends. It can be. But I've done the shopping for some of my wife's cooking and while it is certainly more healthy, and it will make a few extra servings, the sticker price on the meal itself is often substantial. And I'm certainly guilty of letting the last serving rot at the back of the fridge after I've eaten something 2-3 meals in a row, which can defeat the purpose.
And cooking at home winds up being a lot cheaper than eating out - even fast food.
This really depends. It can be. But I've done the shopping for some of my wife's cooking and while it is certainly more healthy, and it will make a few extra servings, the sticker price on the meal itself is often substantial. And I'm certainly guilty of letting the last serving rot at the back of the fridge after I've eaten something 2-3 meals in a row, which can defeat the purpose.
Yeah, it depends, but not every meal is a steak either. A package of 96/4 burger patties and a package of whole wheat buns goes a lot further than the same amount of money spent at jack-in-the-box.
Also, that's what the freezer is for.
On a tangent- one thing that I learned from going to Taiwan is that chicken no longer tastes like chicken anymore. The chicken in Taiwan was from regular running around type chickens, and was very different from the factory chicken here. In fact I talked to one person who said they couldn't eat the chicken in taiwan because it was too different and tasted weird, even though they knew that it was because that's what chicken was actually supposed to taste like.
It's all about priorities.....My Dad worked 2 jobs and drove a POS so that my Mom could stay home and raise kids.
Rich: Let's just stop right here. This is a pretty huge before even getting into the question of "sacrificing luxuries".
1) Who wants to work 80 hours a week if that means punishing your mind and body AND not getting to spend as much time with your family? Many people do this because they *have to*. Out of economic *necessity*. But if you didn't have to do this, who the F*ck would want to? I don't know your father but I would guess that part of why he busted his ass so is that his kids wouldn't have to work 2 jobs when they grew up.
2) Not all women these days want to stay home and raise the kids. A lot of them want to work too because they have aspirations beyond being mothers and wives. However, that also means that family routines and lifestyles change as a consequence, especially with both parents working.
2a) And of course, many families HAVE to work two working parents if they want to be able to have the basics of a middle class lifestyle: owning your own home, good schools, safe neighborhoods. If you can show me how one can easily do this on a *single* income, let us all in on the secret.
None of this has to do with luxuries. These days, it's called "getting by."
My Dad managed to work 2 jobs, spend time with his kids on weekends, coached every team he could and took his family on some type of vacation every year. he lived his life for his family which I find admirable. I realize not everyone was raised this way, but it's certainly something to aspire to regardless of time or place.
Those women who don't want to stay home and raise kids should seriously think about whether or not they should be a parent, especially if by making some personal sacrifices they have the ability to stay home and raise them. Too many folks want their cake and eat it too and not everyone is cut out to be a parent.
Sure there are plenty of folks who work 2 jobs and scrape by, but spending time with your kids, cooking food(which is cheaper than fast food), getting involved with your kids school, etc. doesn't cost a damn thing.
Face the facts, the work ethic that drove my 103 year old great grandmother to wake up at 5:00AM, work on her farm and then cook breakfast by 8:00AM is a dying thing.
And make no mistake, I'm talking about the lions share of our population. Middle class folks who put a higher priority on "keeping up with the Joneses" than feeding their kids properly or spending quality time with said kids. "Here's $50, now go away and don't bother me". If you make $50K or more you have no excuse.
If you want to use a lowest common denominator to make you point go for it, but the reality is the values of our citizens has changed for the worse just as much as the negatives your building your argument on.
Rich - I don't know what the divorce rate is these days but for my generation, it's rare to meet people who have both their parents still together (if at all). Let alone one who stays home to raise the kids. This whole world view you're espousing is antiquated from my perspective. I can admire the ethics, but it's not reality for most.
Rich - I don't know what the divorce rate is these days but for my generation, it's rare to meet people who have both their parents still together (if at all). Let alone one who stays home to raise the kids. This whole world view you're espousing is antiquated from my perspective. I can admire the ethics, but it's not reality for most.
It's antiquated because people are selfish.....those divorced folks you speak of failed at family 101....they thought they wanted kids but obviously didn't think out the big picture and then bailed from a marriage, leaving the kids behind to suffer the consequences......they suck, and what sucks worse is now a generation considers this "normal". It's like folks who think they want a dog until they realize they don't want the responsibilty and drop them off at the Pound. You can't drop kids off at the pound.
Rich - I don't know what the divorce rate is these days but for my generation, it's rare to meet people who have both their parents still together (if at all). Let alone one who stays home to raise the kids. This whole world view you're espousing is antiquated from my perspective. I can admire the ethics, but it's not reality for most.
It's antiquated because people are selfish.....those divorced folks you speak of failed at family 101....they thought they wanted kids but obviously didn't think out the big picture and then bailed from a marriage, leaving the kids behind to suffer the consequences......they suck, and what sucks worse is now a generation considers this "normal". It's like folks who think they want a dog until they realize they don't want the responsibilty and drop them off at the Pound. You can't drop kids off at the pound.
I don't hang out in too many airport bars but I do have friends that are doctors and they all agree that a good percentage of the tests they recommend are unecessary and strictly a CYA move to avoid malpractice suits.
Tort reform needs to happen sooner than later.
Yes but the question is what sort of tort reform. The Republicans used to want to cap awards at $250,000 & out of that you'd have to pay the lawyers and the cost of the lawsuit, experts, etc. That's not a lot of $$$ if some jackass doctor f*^ked you up for life.
The AMA still supported this HCR bill without tort reform.
Divorce is not the only reason a child grows up with only one parent or even no parents for that matter.
True...
The post was directed at the astronomical divorce rate that JP quoted.
This ridiculous divorce rate is based in selfishness, although there are bound to be exceptions.
I had a Sociology professor who relayed the following story to his class...
He was talking about broken homes and single parent families and stated that EVERY kid that is a product of such a home has some sort of emotional scars. That it is impossible to avoid.
A girl in the back of the room threw up her hand and very angrily shouted at the professor "I'm from a single parent family and there's nothing wrong with me, Nothing Wrong With Me, NOTHING WRONG WITH ME!! While pounding the desk with her fist.
If in your case you and your siblings life was better because your parents divorced you are the exception, not the rule.
If in your case you and your siblings life was better because you're parents divorced you are the exception, not the rule.
Reality is a Mofo.
It's a common exception. Lots of dudes out there beating the shit out of their wives & kids, drinking up their paychecks, so on. A woman is doing her kids a big favor if she gets them away from those guys.
FACT. Goes for some guys getting their kids away from women, too, just not anywhere near as often.
Comments
Just because it isn't the *only* reason doesn't mean it shouldn't be tackled head on.
A corner store in my neighborhood lost their license to sell liquor and gambling products within weeks of one another.... they went out of business soon after.
The new big developments in my area are a gargantuan Applebees and a Costco.
There are healthier alternatives (though they're far fewer in number and less easily accessible than their downtown counterparts) but it doesn't mean people are gonna take advantage of them.
This really depends. It can be. But I've done the shopping for some of my wife's cooking and while it is certainly more healthy, and it will make a few extra servings, the sticker price on the meal itself is often substantial. And I'm certainly guilty of letting the last serving rot at the back of the fridge after I've eaten something 2-3 meals in a row, which can defeat the purpose.
Yeah, it depends, but not every meal is a steak either. A package of 96/4 burger patties and a package of whole wheat buns goes a lot further than the same amount of money spent at jack-in-the-box.
Also, that's what the freezer is for.
On a tangent- one thing that I learned from going to Taiwan is that chicken no longer tastes like chicken anymore. The chicken in Taiwan was from regular running around type chickens, and was very different from the factory chicken here. In fact I talked to one person who said they couldn't eat the chicken in taiwan because it was too different and tasted weird, even though they knew that it was because that's what chicken was actually supposed to taste like.
weird.
My Dad managed to work 2 jobs, spend time with his kids on weekends, coached every team he could and took his family on some type of vacation every year. he lived his life for his family which I find admirable. I realize not everyone was raised this way, but it's certainly something to aspire to regardless of time or place.
Those women who don't want to stay home and raise kids should seriously think about whether or not they should be a parent, especially if by making some personal sacrifices they have the ability to stay home and raise them. Too many folks want their cake and eat it too and not everyone is cut out to be a parent.
Sure there are plenty of folks who work 2 jobs and scrape by, but spending time with your kids, cooking food(which is cheaper than fast food), getting involved with your kids school, etc. doesn't cost a damn thing.
Face the facts, the work ethic that drove my 103 year old great grandmother to wake up at 5:00AM, work on her farm and then cook breakfast by 8:00AM is a dying thing.
And make no mistake, I'm talking about the lions share of our population. Middle class folks who put a higher priority on "keeping up with the Joneses" than feeding their kids properly or spending quality time with said kids. "Here's $50, now go away and don't bother me". If you make $50K or more you have no excuse.
If you want to use a lowest common denominator to make you point go for it, but the reality is the values of our citizens has changed for the worse just as much as the negatives your building your argument on.
Back in reality...
It's antiquated because people are selfish.....those divorced folks you speak of failed at family 101....they thought they wanted kids but obviously didn't think out the big picture and then bailed from a marriage, leaving the kids behind to suffer the consequences......they suck, and what sucks worse is now a generation considers this "normal". It's like folks who think they want a dog until they realize they don't want the responsibilty and drop them off at the Pound. You can't drop kids off at the pound.
Divorce is not the only reason a child grows up with only one parent or even no parents for that matter.
Yes but the question is what sort of tort reform. The Republicans used to want to cap awards at $250,000 & out of that you'd have to pay the lawyers and the cost of the lawsuit, experts, etc. That's not a lot of $$$ if some jackass doctor f*^ked you up for life.
The AMA still supported this HCR bill without tort reform.
True...
The post was directed at the astronomical divorce rate that JP quoted.
This ridiculous divorce rate is based in selfishness, although there are bound to be exceptions.
I had a Sociology professor who relayed the following story to his class...
He was talking about broken homes and single parent families and stated that EVERY kid that is a product of such a home has some sort of emotional scars. That it is impossible to avoid.
A girl in the back of the room threw up her hand and very angrily shouted at the professor "I'm from a single parent family and there's nothing wrong with me, Nothing Wrong With Me, NOTHING WRONG WITH ME!! While pounding the desk with her fist.
If in your case you and your siblings life was better because your parents divorced you are the exception, not the rule.
Reality is a Mofo.
It's a common exception. Lots of dudes out there beating the shit out of their wives & kids, drinking up their paychecks, so on. A woman is doing her kids a big favor if she gets them away from those guys.
FACT. Goes for some guys getting their kids away from women, too, just not anywhere near as often.
And this dude sucks, and failed miserably at being a Father/Husband.
what does this mean?
I respect your right to think this but I can't respect the thought itself.
Really??
You DON'T agree women should think about their parenting abilities before deciding to become a parent??
When done correctly.
This --> "??" does NOT strengthen your argument. Ever.
Edit: Feel free to take points off for my excessive CAPSLOCK for emphasis.
"We wouldn't need health care reform if there were fewer fat people."
I'm going to move off talking about divorce but if people are interested (and Rich, if you trust your sociologist buddies, at least give this a read), check out Andrew Cherlin's essay on American marriage/divorce rates from a year ago or so: http://soul-sides.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/American-Marriage-21st-century.pdf
Now...can we get back to the health care convo?
And specifically, I'm really curious if people think individual mandates will actually work.
You should see me attempt to text.....it's even worse.