WTF is wrong with some people?

Yes of course I am aware of that. My point was roughly 100 years ago, they would be the norm in many places. And I would imagine that many people on this board come from families like this just a generation or so removed.

[shaunjohnson]

Originally Posted by BrianG

I personally think everyone should be sterilized right when they are born, and then, if they want, it can be reversed later on when they come of age (I say at least 25 years old). But, they have to pay for the procedure (to discourage the freeloaders), and they must pass a competancy and financial responsibility screening.

good idea IMO!!
would stop the @#$%'s over here getting pregnant at 14!!!!

[_paralyzed_]

76Bentley- Good food for thought on all of the subjects. I definitely didn't mean anything to be offensive.

You can spin anything. Think of uptight people today making a stink about child labor laws for your 18 child family of yesteryear. That shit wouldn't fly.

My only question is how do we get the uninformed to all think on a global level, so as a whole we can correct these problems. That's why I say we are a plague. The majority of people don't think outside their own box, and they over use, over indulge, pollute and procreate.

Shit, I can't even get a decent pair of robot legs, and you think we will create the technology to save the planet?

I sure hope so.

[PBO]

Originally Posted by 76Bentley

For those of you that think 19 kids is ridiculous, you have no view of history. And I find it your attitudes offensive, my grandmother was one of 16 kids that survived, 18 total. They lived and were born long before anyone ever thought of a social program in the U.S. They were farmers in the mountains of Virginia and there family was the norm for lots of people in many areas of the U.S. People were from big families, they worked the land and they worked together.

and all the kids were comparatively poorly educated and they worked the land from a young age and suffered diseases like polio & small pox. Lets go back to those times...

I'm comparing apples & apples

[pinkpanda3310]

Other places might be feeling the pinch for elbow room but I love my three children.

I can't stand freeloaders much less those that are dumping there kids on grandma and grandpa.

I heard a saying once that has stuck- The rise of support groups is linked to the lack of Grandma's living at home. It is not the be and end all but an indication of the break down of the family unit leading to troubles.

Originally Posted by PBO

and all the kids were comparatively poorly educated and they worked the land from a young age and suffered diseases like polio & small pox. Lets go back to those times...

I'm comparing apples & apples

To me though you are not comparing apples to apples, you are making assumptions and value judgments about people from that time and you are confusing subjects. The discussion that you chimed in on was about the life style and large families.

I started out the discussion with the purpose of defending the Duggar's. As I mentioned before they are totally self reliant and reminiscent of a different time. When people had large close families, where they worked hard to impart the values that they believed in, and were finacially more sound than lots if not most of the people in our society now.

In a previous post I talk with excitement about the future, I in no means want to give up the progress on disease and ailments as you imply. That would be ridiculous.

You are right, my grandmother did not have a college education, but she and her siblings made sure they got the most out of what was offered to them vs the little bastards today that have no desire to learn. My local high school had a 51% graduation rate......what the hell?!?! just built a 50+million dollar high school, like that will solve the problem.

My grandmother worked as a bookkeeper and did very well at it, she worked until the day she was admitted to the hospital where she passed 2 weeks later at 94 years old.

I just wanted people in the discussion to see the difference between the Duggars and the woman in the story Freeze posted.

[JERRY2KONE]

We have eight kids and we are managing just fine. Sure things can get kind of tough, and if you do not plan properly or save for a rainy day as the saying goes, then you will end up sucking off of the system at some point. We have 5 kids grown and out who all pay their own way through school right now. We have 3 more here at home with us who are learning how to take responsibility for themselves. 10, 13, & 14 now and they clean their own rooms, do their own laundry, wash their own dishes as they use them, go to school, and even find work to make some pocket money for themselves. It is all in the way you teach them and the example you set for them. Self esteem is something that you have to help them develop so they can be competitive in society.

I do kind of agree about having some kind of system in place that is deemed to make sure that you are able to care for and pay for a child before you are allowed to breed. If you are expecting the Gov to pay your childs way because you are not able to, then surely that should not be allowed to happen. I believe that BrianG's idea is on teh right track.

Originally Posted by _paralyzed_

76Bentley- Good food for thought on all of the subjects. I definitely didn't mean anything to be offensive.

You can spin anything. Think of uptight people today making a stink about child labor laws for your 18 child family of yesteryear. That shit wouldn't fly.

My only question is how do we get the uninformed to all think on a global level, so as a whole we can correct these problems. That's why I say we are a plague. The majority of people don't think outside their own box, and they over use, over indulge, pollute and procreate.

Shit, I can't even get a decent pair of robot legs, and you think we will create the technology to save the planet?

I sure hope so.

Para,
I am glad to see people talk about this stuff! This is how to get people to think about this stuff.

I do reject the premise that the planet is in trouble, best example to me is look are Chernobyl. When that sucker melted down they said it would be a llllloooooonnnnnggggg time before it would return to normal....but in just what 25 years nature has reclaimed it. Amazing stuff, same thing with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but today back to thriving cities. And I would dare say a nuclear reactor melting down and nuclear blasts are much more devastating than most anything else that is going on today. If those things can be reversed than it all can. My fear for the future is not what we can do, but what we won't do.

For instance, your concern over pollution is correct when say applied to emerging economies, like India, like China......We can do everything right, but unless everyone does it is pointless. And why does our government feel the need to hamstring us with things like the Cap and Trade bill currently in the Congress? That is what worries me....will we do something stupid and stifle what needs to be done and can be done.

But what we can do is work and progress as a nation and be ready when the time is right to act as the US has always done. That is why I have Reagan as my avatar, not cause I am republican, because I am not. To me one group is as bad as another. No I dig Reagan, because he believed that the US was still the shinning city on the hill and that the future was better than the past.....the best days are ahead.

And no $hit, the robot legs are coming.....If you search DARPA and MIT, they are working on an exoskeleton for the military, but it will transfer into the private sector as well......I also saw recently where they have a robotic arm about 2-3 years away, I think the engineer said they had mapped 4 or 5 out of 23 or 24 pathways to make the arm work just as a real one would, can legs be far behind.....

So many amazing things coming, I have a 4 year old and a 1 year old....their life expectancy is over 100 years...just mind blowing! I wonder what all they will see.

Don't let the 24 hour news cycle get to you, I know it does me sometimes. I think that is where a lot of that stuff comes from.

[Kcaz25]

Originally Posted by BrianG

I personally think everyone should be sterilized right when they are born, and then, if they want, it can be reversed later on when they come of age (I say at least 25 years old). But, they have to pay for the procedure (to discourage the freeloaders), and they must pass a competancy and financial responsibility screening.

Sounds like BIG government and I know you're not for that.

[lutach]

Good thread. One is good and two should be the max if the parents are capable of taking care of them, but after the first one or two gets older, I think one or two more is ok since the first one or two would be paying taxes. If a parent doesn't have the resources to raise a child, then they shouldn't have any.

I really don't know what I'm talking about . I think two kids should be plenty to keep a family from vanishing. At the moment though, I think a couple or few countries should just calm down on the baby making machines.

[BrianG]

Originally Posted by Kcaz25

Sounds like BIG government and I know you're not for that.

You're right; it does sound like big gov't, and no, I don't go for that - usually. However, this is actually for the common good, not in the interest of furthering propaganda, lining their pockets with taxpayer dollars, or covering handout costs. I have a problem when other people's poor decisions affects me. If those same people were forced to accept full responsibility for their actions (no handouts at all), then we wouldn't need govt intervention. But since that is not the case, then further action is needed.

[PBO]

Originally Posted by 76Bentley

you are making assumptions and value judgments about people from that time and you are confusing subjects. The discussion that you chimed in on was about the life style and large families.

Nope, you've made that assumption, I made no reference to "people from that time"...go back & read my post that you were so offended by

When people had large close families, (they) were finacially more sound than lots if not most of the people in our society now.

I'm certain lack of contraception, infant mortality, lack of financial security or a hundred other issues had nothing to do with it...

Not sure why you're so upset by my opinion but I think you're contriving simple answers out of complex issues (of your own making) by applying rose coloured nostalgia to them

Originally Posted by PBO

Nope, you've made that assumption, I made no reference to "people from that time"...go back & read my post that you were so offended by



I'm certain lack of contraception, infant mortality, lack of financial security or a hundred other issues had nothing to do with it...

Not sure why you're so upset by my opinion but I think you're contriving simple answers out of complex issues (of your own making) by applying rose coloured nostalgia to them

I read your post carefully, don't need to go back. You were the one who commented on the general lack of education and medical advancements then, which I have answered.

The issues you list above with contraception, infant mortality......are as big a concern today as they were back then.


And no I don't have rose colored glasses, I am basing my opinion of fact and study of the US economy. The over use of credit is a big problem, our own government doesn't get it. Where as people from my grandparents generation that went through the Great Depression did not use it. They were savers and it was very unusual for them to borrow any money save except for a car or home. Further with out all of the social programs that people are sucking from today families were stronger, they were close knit and more self reliant.

[JERRY2KONE]

I do reject the premise that the planet is in trouble, best example to me is look are Chernobyl. When that sucker melted down they said it would be a llllloooooonnnnnggggg time before it would return to normal....but in just what 25 years nature has reclaimed it.

Where did you hear this from? They have sealed the reactor in concrete and it will remain that way for a very long time, because the radio activity is still high enough to kill humans. The area around the reactor has been cleared for something like 20 miles, and no one goes near it.

[redshift]

KiddofSpeed does Jerry, this site has been in my favs for many years- www.elenafilatova.com

And yes it is largely uninhabitable for at least a 2 hundred
mile radius. Won't stop this chick or her Kawi, awesome site.