Just to quantify my statement - parents should and I’m sure do get out and about with their kids on physical activities, or even just low-key supervising kids playing amongst each other.
But the old tales of running around with neighbourhood kids til dinner time was a daily ritual for me, at least in my primary school years.
My parents didn’t have time to supervise me all the time, nor did they need to.
Dinner still needs to be cooked etc.
These people should not be having kids.Originally Posted by The Dunster
That’s my only point here.
Notice how we are attacking the most vulnerable in society here and aiming absolutely nothing at the Plutocrats in charge of the system.
If this actually happened the plutocrats would find a way to innovate around it and bring these kids back into line as consumers very quickly.
The majority of the worlds wealth is held by less than 200 individuals. These people control pretty much everything from the financial system to ultimately what to produce, when to produce it , and for whom to produce it.
On top of that they pay no tax which ultimately means their incomes are surplus to their productive value to society. This has nothing to do with funding government spending. It's about the fact that this surplus income leads to asset price spikes and complete ownership of essential services - ultimately leading to a too big to fail type scenario which will see Governments and Central Banks throwing billions of people under the bus to save less than 200 individuals.
Agree with you one billion percent Plague on this issue. But unfortunately the grand design of humans is rather flawed when it comes to fertility.
And from an economic perspective, the current system is designed to function primarily on consumption - and consumption through people spending more than they earn.
Information / services are a quick and easy dollar for the elites - actual manufacturing of sports goods not so much - hence kids playing at the park and so on doesn't produce enough surplus income for the elites.
Last edited by The Dunster; 29-11-2017 at 03:23 PM.
Seperate issue the wealthy elite and what we discussing here
Being a lazy fat **** these days is almost a birth right for this generation
Just look at how there is a complete lack of self responsibility for people's decisions that effect their lives.
Like FFS it ain't McDonalds fault you are a fat ****. It is your choice to eat their food and sit on your arse all day
Interesting thing is that the amount of people who think picking up take out junk food saves time compared to cooking a healthy meal
Like FFS 10/15 mins and you can cook some meat vegetables can be cooked under the bare minimum amount of supervision
Ain't ****ing hard to do
Cooking food for your family isn't an imposition on you and if it is you probably need to reassess your priorities
That’s not my point.
I’m saying nobody can be in 2 places at once. If everyone needs to be fed, someone has to cook (agree with your sentiments on fast food BTW).
So it could be a choice between playing outside/ doing some sort of fun activity with your kids, or cooking them a nice meal.
If I ever have kids, hopefully I will feel confident and safe enough to let them run around with their friends until dinner time.
But I’m not a parent, may never decide to have children. What I forecast and the reality of being a parent are I’m sure worlds apart.
What role does the ever-increasing load of homework play in the lower activity levels of children?
Again, this is coming from someone with no dependents, but ideally I would love to tell any kids I had to play outside until dinner, then do an hour of homework before bathing and bed etc.
Whatever they get done in that hour is enough for me. If their teacher doesn’t like it, they can take it up with me
Any parents of school-aged kids have an accurate take on this?
To say that the wealthy elites are another issue is to suggest they don't have any influences on peoples decisions. The simple truth though is that they do - it's called supplier induced demand.
I'm not disagreeing with you though on how people need to accept more responsibility - but to have them shoulder all the blame is not right either. These people are the victims of marketing directed at separating people from their money.
For whatever reasons, people get to the stage when it's just easier for them to buy food rather than go to the trouble of cooking it themselves which involves shopping, parking... and so on. Take away in general is always going to be faster when you take into account the steps actually involved in buying ingredients, preparing, and cooking a mean for a family. Not to mention the satisfaction of having others do something for you for a change when you have sent all day running around satisfying the demands of others at work - take away is in a sense an escape from work / a holiday / rest.
Myself, I occasionally eat take out or go to a restaurant - but in general we shop everyday and cook all meals with fresh ingredients and pretty much make everything from scratch.
However, money and time is not an issue for us and we don't have to schedule our lives around children and work. When you have four kids or so to feed and need to work around their schedules it's not so easy - and remember also that kids schedules are often beyond their control as well..
Last edited by The Dunster; 29-11-2017 at 05:52 PM.
It is a lazyness thing with people
Regardless of how much the media is manipulating them to believe shit is a certain way it still their decision
I get sick and tired of people saying I can't lose weight etc
Yet the same person can't say no to a slice of cake when offered
Yet the same person can't go for some exercise as they don't have time etc
Reality is if they wanted to lose weight they could say no to the cake and could find the time to exercise
Problem is that they are weak and make excuses for their failings
Denying oneself things to achieve something isn't that hard if you are not weak
Anything is achievable when you are able to deny yourself something you want
oooh yeah nature v nurture
This can be true. earings and rats on the 8 yo lad like dad but ive also seen asshole kids come from decent families as well eg 2 professionals and one low down crim.
Probs both applies.
Maybe its Qdots eg degen gonna be has some merit.
So which suburb might buys more Maccas St.Ives or Mac fields? yep socio econmic Q here
Screw Maccas at St Ives Hawk - Thai at Terrey Hills on Mccarrs Creek Rd is absolutely sensational. Besides the only Maccas at St Ives is in the shopping centre and it closes too early.
As far as parents influences on children it's difficult to measure. Incomes has a bit to do with it but it's a stronger correlation in Britain than it is in the USA and stronger in the USA than it is Australia.
The other measurement problem is trying to determine if a child who becomes an unemployed drug addict is worse than someone who earns seven figures with a coke / heroin problem that contributes nothing to society other than grief through mergers and acquisitions.
One thing we definitely know is that higher income earners consume a lot more alcohol than the low income earners do. With respect to illegal drugs it's the other way around in terms of usage but not quite as easy to determine in purely dollar terms.
Last edited by The Dunster; 29-11-2017 at 11:05 PM.
Ahh yes I've seen it too. Professional parents with a crim of a son. Problem is they focused entirely on bettering their career and gave the whole "butter wouldn't melt" approach to their son whilst failing to give any attention/affection throughout his early years. Often we have to look at the big picture. And I stand by my statement that in majority of cases a person is ultimately a product of their parents.
haha the corporate salesman discussing regional NSW ice epidemic and junkies infiltrating social housing whilst racking another line of coke gearing up for a big weekend off from selling overpriced funeral insurance to vulnerable over 50s.
Last edited by Wilso8948; 30-11-2017 at 11:25 AM.
Five star post.
Banking Royal commission should be a good laugh. Scotty M is already going into bat for the banks and overstating their importance to the economy
Banks made billions for themselves and their finacial planners managed to offer poor advice to customers - bankrupting far too many of them.
The banks only exist because of arrangements with the government and RBA.
Morrison taking the too big to fail line of thinking shows he's not fit for the job and should resign. Note he's a certainty to work for them when he leaves parliament.
Last edited by The Dunster; 30-11-2017 at 09:06 PM.
add in the trade unions and the catholics.
"yeah boys, lets bring in the biggest lobby groups in Canberra so we can wag our fingers at them and grab some dinner and drinks while they are in town".
anyone who gives more than 3 seconds of their time to this sort of horseshit is an idiot.
whoa whoa whoa, we dont all sell insurance.
Shame its not being done properly. I think I read $75m allocated to it and they have a year to dig up whatever they can and call it a day. They also waited until the banks agreed to it before deciding to go ahead. Sure officer, come search my property - would you just give me 15 minutes first?
Libs just checking the box to say they've done it.
Can we get a royal commission into shit internet next?
The Harvey Weinstein Effect has made its way to Australia. Having known people in the industry the Don Burke stuff was not a surprise - pretty much anyone that worked with the bloke said he was a khunt of epic proportions for more reasons than how he treated women - he treated everyone like shit apparently.
Not to make light any of what happened to the women here but some of the shit I'm reading from experts about how men treat women and why is simply ridiculous. Basically, men are rapists that see women purely as sexual objects - but women on the other hand are 100% pure of heart and treat all men equally with the highest of respect.
Really ? I'd say the mix of women treating men like shit would be just as alarming. Men don't commit suicide three to four times more than women because they are getting the best deal in life.
If women can seek a man because of his looks, status, wealth... and so on why can't men do the same ?
I mean when was the last time you saw an attractive woman with an ugly, out of shape, poor guy ? Rarely, and when you do it's a short term faze until something better comes along.
The sexual harassment and poor treatment of both women and men is a serious problem - but if the current crop of experts are all we have to find a solution things can only get worse.
Rather than further divide the sexes by attempting to homogenise them surely it would be better to celebrate the differences? Much like we are starting to with ssm and so on.
We can no more choose our gender than we can our sexuality - but from all the crap I'm reading about how men need to change I'm not so sure people actually have any viewpoint other than the ones popularised to them via marketing campaigns.
Last edited by The Dunster; 01-12-2017 at 12:20 PM.
Irks me a fair bit when you hear people being lynched for off the cuff remarks or jokes etc that are said to a small audience that are then reported in media and the original guy is a pig and how dare the "locker room talk" sexualise women etc etc.
Like sure, some people take it a step too far with their humour but the response should be a shake of the head and a "this guy", not people getting fired from jobs and demolished in media.
As you've said, women have their own "banter" and "locker room talk" etc but for some reason this is never mentioned, only the degree to which all men are sexist pigs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote