Who here, being white, keeping everything the same about your life, job, house, etc., would like to wake up one morning and be black for a month?
I would. I would also like to be Donald Trump for a month.
good god. who in their right mind would want to be that guy.
instead of talking out your ass....maybe you should be Donald Trump for one month, it may widen your eye's a little.
talking out my ass?
please tell me how being President P**** Grabber would widen my eyes. the guy hasn't had a hardship in his entire life, and he thinks it's perfectly acceptable to sexually assault women and walk into a room full of teenage/20 something women in various stages of undress "just because I can".
you wanting to be him speaks volumes.
generally, "walk a mile" isn't a saying that is applied to rich rapists.
some people just don't understand, and apparently never will understand, just how truly difficult it is to overcome the circumstances that many were born into. working hard DOES NOT equal success. there are millions out there who work 100 times harder than any of us and still can't put clothes on their kids backs.
it has nothing to do with lack of family values. what does that even mean?
a guy I work with, when we were discussing his aboriginal racism, said to me "I have an aborigial friend on my hockey team, he came from the inner city, he was poor, no dad, etc, etc, but he got out and is successful. why can't the rest of them?". that is such a blatantly ignorant, but unfortunately prevalent, attitude. because 1 guy was able to beat the odds, millions of others should be able to mimic his success. sounds like white math to me.
and he's an accountant. he should know better.
A lot of it has to do with want and inner drive. Not everybody has that drive inside them to succeed. Not saying that that is the one and only reason and that it will always work out, but I think it's a major one player. I've got a good friend who grew up in the inner city with no dad. His story is similar to the one you mentioned, but he said his main goal was because he wanted something better. He didn't want to settle like so many of his neighborhood friends who took the easy road and just dealt drugs or skated by or turned to crime that you so often hear about. And yes, even if you work hard and bust your butt, it may not always work out. But a lot of it is up to the individual. If you want something bad enough, you can usually make it happen. If they are busting it and it's not paying off, make a change.
you make it sound so easy. there must be millions out there who just simply don't want to make a change and are perfectly happy with a shitty life. alright then.
I think you'd be shocked to find out how many actually are. Not all, or even most, by any means, but a lot more than I expected. Working with kids and families in one of the worst neighborhoods in the state, in South-Central LA, a neighborhood where these kids go to the schools that are featured in movies like Stand And Deliver, or Lean On Me, it was a shock to me. I remember the first time a parent told me their son didn't need to go to school because he just wants to work in his uncle's garage, or the first mom to tell me her daughter didn't need to stay in school because her job was just to provide grandbabies. There is definitely a culture in inner cities that places education very low on the list of priorities. Sometimes it is the result of family problems outside of their control, sometimes it is from the choices they made. I don't think anyone can define THE problem that keeps inner cities so poor. Its a cycle of many problems, but it has been a taboo to mention the lack of family or especially father figures in these houses. I think it is important to recognize all the problems. So many grow up in broken households, which leads to gangs and crime and becoming a parent at 17 and the pattern just repeats. I've seen kids drop out because the single parent is working 2 jobs and no one is there to make sure to go to school. I've seen others who want to go to school be forced to stay home and raise their 5 younger siblings because mom is working and cant afford child care. So then that daughter doesn't get an education, winds up working 2 minimum wage jobs trying to raise 5 kids 10 years later and her kids are in the same boat she was. How do you stop that? I think not recognizing some of those problems creates more issues.
It is less they are deciding to not make the change, but more the bad decisions their parents made make it very difficult to make that change, and they repeat those same bad decisions with their kids. Or that lifestyle is all they know, and don't realize a better one is a real possibility. Or they chose their gang family over their deadbeat dad they never met and their mom who is never home.
Asking if this is a result of their skin color is not an easy question. Currently, I would say no child is denied any opportunity because of their skin color. But was probably true 3-4 generations ago, and as a result their grandparents didn't have the same opportunities, which directly affected their parents, and now them. But how do you break that cycle?
some people just don't understand, and apparently never will understand, just how truly difficult it is to overcome the circumstances that many were born into. working hard DOES NOT equal success. there are millions out there who work 100 times harder than any of us and still can't put clothes on their kids backs.
it has nothing to do with lack of family values. what does that even mean?
a guy I work with, when we were discussing his aboriginal racism, said to me "I have an aborigial friend on my hockey team, he came from the inner city, he was poor, no dad, etc, etc, but he got out and is successful. why can't the rest of them?". that is such a blatantly ignorant, but unfortunately prevalent, attitude. because 1 guy was able to beat the odds, millions of others should be able to mimic his success. sounds like white math to me.
and he's an accountant. he should know better.
A lot of it has to do with want and inner drive. Not everybody has that drive inside them to succeed. Not saying that that is the one and only reason and that it will always work out, but I think it's a major one player. I've got a good friend who grew up in the inner city with no dad. His story is similar to the one you mentioned, but he said his main goal was because he wanted something better. He didn't want to settle like so many of his neighborhood friends who took the easy road and just dealt drugs or skated by or turned to crime that you so often hear about. And yes, even if you work hard and bust your butt, it may not always work out. But a lot of it is up to the individual. If you want something bad enough, you can usually make it happen. If they are busting it and it's not paying off, make a change.
you make it sound so easy. there must be millions out there who just simply don't want to make a change and are perfectly happy with a shitty life. alright then.
I think you'd be shocked to find out how many actually are. Not all, or even most, by any means, but a lot more than I expected. Working with kids and families in one of the worst neighborhoods in the state, in South-Central LA, a neighborhood where these kids go to the schools that are featured in movies like Stand And Deliver, or Lean On Me, it was a shock to me. I remember the first time a parent told me their son didn't need to go to school because he just wants to work in his uncle's garage, or the first mom to tell me her daughter didn't need to stay in school because her job was just to provide grandbabies. There is definitely a culture in inner cities that places education very low on the list of priorities. Sometimes it is the result of family problems outside of their control, sometimes it is from the choices they made. I don't think anyone can define THE problem that keeps inner cities so poor. Its a cycle of many problems, but it has been a taboo to mention the lack of family or especially father figures in these houses. I think it is important to recognize all the problems. So many grow up in broken households, which leads to gangs and crime and becoming a parent at 17 and the pattern just repeats. I've seen kids drop out because the single parent is working 2 jobs and no one is there to make sure to go to school. I've seen others who want to go to school be forced to stay home and raise their 5 younger siblings because mom is working and cant afford child care. So then that daughter doesn't get an education, winds up working 2 minimum wage jobs trying to raise 5 kids 10 years later and her kids are in the same boat she was. How do you stop that? I think not recognizing some of those problems creates more issues.
It is less they are deciding to not make the change, but more the bad decisions their parents made make it very difficult to make that change, and they repeat those same bad decisions with their kids. Or that lifestyle is all they know, and don't realize a better one is a real possibility. Or they chose their gang family over their deadbeat dad they never met and their mom who is never home.
Asking if this is a result of their skin color is not an easy question. Currently, I would say no child is denied any opportunity because of their skin color. But was probably true 3-4 generations ago, and as a result their grandparents didn't have the same opportunities, which directly affected their parents, and now them. But how do you break that cycle?
besides your first sentence, you basically said the same thing I did.
how do you break the cycle? obviously no easy answer. but telling people to "move on" and "I know one black guy that did it, so why can't you?" as GF and others suggest, isn't going to do it. social programs, community support. take the power away from the gangs. legalizing some street drugs would be a very good start. put the money made from that back into the inner city to help these people build better lives. but first and foremost you need LEADERS who give a shit and are able to convince white middle-to-upper-class families that these people matter and aren't to be ignored and told to "get over it".
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
some people just don't understand, and apparently never will understand, just how truly difficult it is to overcome the circumstances that many were born into. working hard DOES NOT equal success. there are millions out there who work 100 times harder than any of us and still can't put clothes on their kids backs.
it has nothing to do with lack of family values. what does that even mean?
a guy I work with, when we were discussing his aboriginal racism, said to me "I have an aborigial friend on my hockey team, he came from the inner city, he was poor, no dad, etc, etc, but he got out and is successful. why can't the rest of them?". that is such a blatantly ignorant, but unfortunately prevalent, attitude. because 1 guy was able to beat the odds, millions of others should be able to mimic his success. sounds like white math to me.
and he's an accountant. he should know better.
A lot of it has to do with want and inner drive. Not everybody has that drive inside them to succeed. Not saying that that is the one and only reason and that it will always work out, but I think it's a major one player. I've got a good friend who grew up in the inner city with no dad. His story is similar to the one you mentioned, but he said his main goal was because he wanted something better. He didn't want to settle like so many of his neighborhood friends who took the easy road and just dealt drugs or skated by or turned to crime that you so often hear about. And yes, even if you work hard and bust your butt, it may not always work out. But a lot of it is up to the individual. If you want something bad enough, you can usually make it happen. If they are busting it and it's not paying off, make a change.
you make it sound so easy. there must be millions out there who just simply don't want to make a change and are perfectly happy with a shitty life. alright then.
I think you'd be shocked to find out how many actually are. Not all, or even most, by any means, but a lot more than I expected. Working with kids and families in one of the worst neighborhoods in the state, in South-Central LA, a neighborhood where these kids go to the schools that are featured in movies like Stand And Deliver, or Lean On Me, it was a shock to me. I remember the first time a parent told me their son didn't need to go to school because he just wants to work in his uncle's garage, or the first mom to tell me her daughter didn't need to stay in school because her job was just to provide grandbabies. There is definitely a culture in inner cities that places education very low on the list of priorities. Sometimes it is the result of family problems outside of their control, sometimes it is from the choices they made. I don't think anyone can define THE problem that keeps inner cities so poor. Its a cycle of many problems, but it has been a taboo to mention the lack of family or especially father figures in these houses. I think it is important to recognize all the problems. So many grow up in broken households, which leads to gangs and crime and becoming a parent at 17 and the pattern just repeats. I've seen kids drop out because the single parent is working 2 jobs and no one is there to make sure to go to school. I've seen others who want to go to school be forced to stay home and raise their 5 younger siblings because mom is working and cant afford child care. So then that daughter doesn't get an education, winds up working 2 minimum wage jobs trying to raise 5 kids 10 years later and her kids are in the same boat she was. How do you stop that? I think not recognizing some of those problems creates more issues.
It is less they are deciding to not make the change, but more the bad decisions their parents made make it very difficult to make that change, and they repeat those same bad decisions with their kids. Or that lifestyle is all they know, and don't realize a better one is a real possibility. Or they chose their gang family over their deadbeat dad they never met and their mom who is never home.
Asking if this is a result of their skin color is not an easy question. Currently, I would say no child is denied any opportunity because of their skin color. But was probably true 3-4 generations ago, and as a result their grandparents didn't have the same opportunities, which directly affected their parents, and now them. But how do you break that cycle?
I don't think it's taboo to talk about single parent black households, I think it's how it gets talked about that pisses people off. It often gets framed that it a black problem, or a "cultural" problem, but white families in the same situation are talked about differently. I also know many whites from small towns/rural areas who also don't put a high value on education and don't see a lot if future opportunities. Is this a "culture" also? It's not often referenced as such. This reminds me of an interesting bit of research recently that showed non-custodial black fathers significantly more involved in their kid's lives than their white counterparts. That tends to go sgainst a lot of the stereotypes that come up in these discussions.
some people just don't understand, and apparently never will understand, just how truly difficult it is to overcome the circumstances that many were born into. working hard DOES NOT equal success. there are millions out there who work 100 times harder than any of us and still can't put clothes on their kids backs.
it has nothing to do with lack of family values. what does that even mean?
a guy I work with, when we were discussing his aboriginal racism, said to me "I have an aborigial friend on my hockey team, he came from the inner city, he was poor, no dad, etc, etc, but he got out and is successful. why can't the rest of them?". that is such a blatantly ignorant, but unfortunately prevalent, attitude. because 1 guy was able to beat the odds, millions of others should be able to mimic his success. sounds like white math to me.
and he's an accountant. he should know better.
A lot of it has to do with want and inner drive. Not everybody has that drive inside them to succeed. Not saying that that is the one and only reason and that it will always work out, but I think it's a major one player. I've got a good friend who grew up in the inner city with no dad. His story is similar to the one you mentioned, but he said his main goal was because he wanted something better. He didn't want to settle like so many of his neighborhood friends who took the easy road and just dealt drugs or skated by or turned to crime that you so often hear about. And yes, even if you work hard and bust your butt, it may not always work out. But a lot of it is up to the individual. If you want something bad enough, you can usually make it happen. If they are busting it and it's not paying off, make a change.
you make it sound so easy. there must be millions out there who just simply don't want to make a change and are perfectly happy with a shitty life. alright then.
I think you'd be shocked to find out how many actually are. Not all, or even most, by any means, but a lot more than I expected. Working with kids and families in one of the worst neighborhoods in the state, in South-Central LA, a neighborhood where these kids go to the schools that are featured in movies like Stand And Deliver, or Lean On Me, it was a shock to me. I remember the first time a parent told me their son didn't need to go to school because he just wants to work in his uncle's garage, or the first mom to tell me her daughter didn't need to stay in school because her job was just to provide grandbabies. There is definitely a culture in inner cities that places education very low on the list of priorities. Sometimes it is the result of family problems outside of their control, sometimes it is from the choices they made. I don't think anyone can define THE problem that keeps inner cities so poor. Its a cycle of many problems, but it has been a taboo to mention the lack of family or especially father figures in these houses. I think it is important to recognize all the problems. So many grow up in broken households, which leads to gangs and crime and becoming a parent at 17 and the pattern just repeats. I've seen kids drop out because the single parent is working 2 jobs and no one is there to make sure to go to school. I've seen others who want to go to school be forced to stay home and raise their 5 younger siblings because mom is working and cant afford child care. So then that daughter doesn't get an education, winds up working 2 minimum wage jobs trying to raise 5 kids 10 years later and her kids are in the same boat she was. How do you stop that? I think not recognizing some of those problems creates more issues.
It is less they are deciding to not make the change, but more the bad decisions their parents made make it very difficult to make that change, and they repeat those same bad decisions with their kids. Or that lifestyle is all they know, and don't realize a better one is a real possibility. Or they chose their gang family over their deadbeat dad they never met and their mom who is never home.
Asking if this is a result of their skin color is not an easy question. Currently, I would say no child is denied any opportunity because of their skin color. But was probably true 3-4 generations ago, and as a result their grandparents didn't have the same opportunities, which directly affected their parents, and now them. But how do you break that cycle?
I don't think it's taboo to talk about single parent black households, I think it's how it gets talked about that pisses people off. It often gets framed that it a black problem, or a "cultural" problem, but white families in the same situation are talked about differently. I also know many whites from small towns/rural areas who also don't put a high value on education and don't see a lot if future opportunities. Is this a "culture" also? It's not often referenced as such. This reminds me of an interesting bit of research recently that showed non-custodial black fathers significantly more involved in their kid's lives than their white counterparts. That tends to go sgainst a lot of the stereotypes that come up in these discussions.
You definitely find this in the south. I know the Repubs like to talk about how the Democrats like to keep the black people poor and uneducated (and therefore jobless and on welfare) but there are just as many whites here in that position.
some people just don't understand, and apparently never will understand, just how truly difficult it is to overcome the circumstances that many were born into. working hard DOES NOT equal success. there are millions out there who work 100 times harder than any of us and still can't put clothes on their kids backs.
it has nothing to do with lack of family values. what does that even mean?
a guy I work with, when we were discussing his aboriginal racism, said to me "I have an aborigial friend on my hockey team, he came from the inner city, he was poor, no dad, etc, etc, but he got out and is successful. why can't the rest of them?". that is such a blatantly ignorant, but unfortunately prevalent, attitude. because 1 guy was able to beat the odds, millions of others should be able to mimic his success. sounds like white math to me.
and he's an accountant. he should know better.
A lot of it has to do with want and inner drive. Not everybody has that drive inside them to succeed. Not saying that that is the one and only reason and that it will always work out, but I think it's a major one player. I've got a good friend who grew up in the inner city with no dad. His story is similar to the one you mentioned, but he said his main goal was because he wanted something better. He didn't want to settle like so many of his neighborhood friends who took the easy road and just dealt drugs or skated by or turned to crime that you so often hear about. And yes, even if you work hard and bust your butt, it may not always work out. But a lot of it is up to the individual. If you want something bad enough, you can usually make it happen. If they are busting it and it's not paying off, make a change.
you make it sound so easy. there must be millions out there who just simply don't want to make a change and are perfectly happy with a shitty life. alright then.
I think you'd be shocked to find out how many actually are. Not all, or even most, by any means, but a lot more than I expected. Working with kids and families in one of the worst neighborhoods in the state, in South-Central LA, a neighborhood where these kids go to the schools that are featured in movies like Stand And Deliver, or Lean On Me, it was a shock to me. I remember the first time a parent told me their son didn't need to go to school because he just wants to work in his uncle's garage, or the first mom to tell me her daughter didn't need to stay in school because her job was just to provide grandbabies. There is definitely a culture in inner cities that places education very low on the list of priorities. Sometimes it is the result of family problems outside of their control, sometimes it is from the choices they made. I don't think anyone can define THE problem that keeps inner cities so poor. Its a cycle of many problems, but it has been a taboo to mention the lack of family or especially father figures in these houses. I think it is important to recognize all the problems. So many grow up in broken households, which leads to gangs and crime and becoming a parent at 17 and the pattern just repeats. I've seen kids drop out because the single parent is working 2 jobs and no one is there to make sure to go to school. I've seen others who want to go to school be forced to stay home and raise their 5 younger siblings because mom is working and cant afford child care. So then that daughter doesn't get an education, winds up working 2 minimum wage jobs trying to raise 5 kids 10 years later and her kids are in the same boat she was. How do you stop that? I think not recognizing some of those problems creates more issues.
It is less they are deciding to not make the change, but more the bad decisions their parents made make it very difficult to make that change, and they repeat those same bad decisions with their kids. Or that lifestyle is all they know, and don't realize a better one is a real possibility. Or they chose their gang family over their deadbeat dad they never met and their mom who is never home.
Asking if this is a result of their skin color is not an easy question. Currently, I would say no child is denied any opportunity because of their skin color. But was probably true 3-4 generations ago, and as a result their grandparents didn't have the same opportunities, which directly affected their parents, and now them. But how do you break that cycle?
I don't think it's taboo to talk about single parent black households, I think it's how it gets talked about that pisses people off. It often gets framed that it a black problem, or a "cultural" problem, but white families in the same situation are talked about differently. I also know many whites from small towns/rural areas who also don't put a high value on education and don't see a lot if future opportunities. Is this a "culture" also? It's not often referenced as such. This reminds me of an interesting bit of research recently that showed non-custodial black fathers significantly more involved in their kid's lives than their white counterparts. That tends to go sgainst a lot of the stereotypes that come up in these discussions.
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
So you'd rather tear up the family than come up with a more creative solution that keeps the family intact?
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
Do you support abortion rights and Planned Parenthood?
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
So you'd rather tear up the family than come up with a more creative solution that keeps the family intact?
Its not like I'd look forward to tearing a family apart. But I would not to continue to reward an adult capable of making decisions but continue to chose to have a 5th or 6th child at 30 years old while working for minimum wage. We had the difficult discussion this year with my wife, she wanted a third child. I was not going to have a third purely for financial reasons since money is tight for us right now with just 2. I expect other adults to be accountable for their decisions as well. Mistakes happen, that's fine, and maybe a third can happen. But when you are up to 5 or 6 kids that is just careless or taking advantage of the system that is supporting them. At that point my concerns are not with the parents, but what is best for the child. And dropping out of school to take on the responsibilities that of a mom is not best for the child. What is best is preventing this cycle from repeating and that will start by making sure the children finish school, and not rewarding the single mom for having 6 kids by paying her bills for her. And now you have 6 kids who don't finish school and what is going to happen to them and their children? If there is a more creative option I'd listen, but I'd only be interested in one that isn't rewarding the bad decision making. Any form of assistance that allows that family to continue on that path will only create the same scenario in the next generation. No one is helped. A creative option I would approve (and I know you all are waiting for my approval) would be to take the children away temporarily until the mom can prove she can support them. In the meantime have a program designed for moms in this situation where they can learn skills to get a better job. If she completes the program and gets a better job, she gets the kids back. That could be a start. If she doesn't, there are lots of families out there waiting years to adopt babies. It is when they are older it becomes difficult to find a permanent home for them. Ever watch the show "Shameless"? Its a pretty funny show, but that family dynamic is very real in the inner city. And the show is actually based on the creator's own experience.
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
So you'd rather tear up the family than come up with a more creative solution that keeps the family intact?
Its not like I'd look forward to tearing a family apart. But I would not to continue to reward an adult capable of making decisions but continue to chose to have a 5th or 6th child at 30 years old while working for minimum wage. We had the difficult discussion this year with my wife, she wanted a third child. I was not going to have a third purely for financial reasons since money is tight for us right now with just 2. I expect other adults to be accountable for their decisions as well. Mistakes happen, that's fine, and maybe a third can happen. But when you are up to 5 or 6 kids that is just careless or taking advantage of the system that is supporting them. At that point my concerns are not with the parents, but what is best for the child. And dropping out of school to take on the responsibilities that of a mom is not best for the child. What is best is preventing this cycle from repeating and that will start by making sure the children finish school, and not rewarding the single mom for having 6 kids by paying her bills for her. And now you have 6 kids who don't finish school and what is going to happen to them and their children? If there is a more creative option I'd listen, but I'd only be interested in one that isn't rewarding the bad decision making. Any form of assistance that allows that family to continue on that path will only create the same scenario in the next generation. No one is helped. A creative option I would approve (and I know you all are waiting for my approval) would be to take the children away temporarily until the mom can prove she can support them. In the meantime have a program designed for moms in this situation where they can learn skills to get a better job. If she completes the program and gets a better job, she gets the kids back. That could be a start. If she doesn't, there are lots of families out there waiting years to adopt babies. It is when they are older it becomes difficult to find a permanent home for them. Ever watch the show "Shameless"? Its a pretty funny show, but that family dynamic is very real in the inner city. And the show is actually based on the creator's own experience.
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
So you'd rather tear up the family than come up with a more creative solution that keeps the family intact?
Its not like I'd look forward to tearing a family apart. But I would not to continue to reward an adult capable of making decisions but continue to chose to have a 5th or 6th child at 30 years old while working for minimum wage. We had the difficult discussion this year with my wife, she wanted a third child. I was not going to have a third purely for financial reasons since money is tight for us right now with just 2. I expect other adults to be accountable for their decisions as well. Mistakes happen, that's fine, and maybe a third can happen. But when you are up to 5 or 6 kids that is just careless or taking advantage of the system that is supporting them. At that point my concerns are not with the parents, but what is best for the child. And dropping out of school to take on the responsibilities that of a mom is not best for the child. What is best is preventing this cycle from repeating and that will start by making sure the children finish school, and not rewarding the single mom for having 6 kids by paying her bills for her. And now you have 6 kids who don't finish school and what is going to happen to them and their children? If there is a more creative option I'd listen, but I'd only be interested in one that isn't rewarding the bad decision making. Any form of assistance that allows that family to continue on that path will only create the same scenario in the next generation. No one is helped. A creative option I would approve (and I know you all are waiting for my approval) would be to take the children away temporarily until the mom can prove she can support them. In the meantime have a program designed for moms in this situation where they can learn skills to get a better job. If she completes the program and gets a better job, she gets the kids back. That could be a start. If she doesn't, there are lots of families out there waiting years to adopt babies. It is when they are older it becomes difficult to find a permanent home for them. Ever watch the show "Shameless"? Its a pretty funny show, but that family dynamic is very real in the inner city. And the show is actually based on the creator's own experience.
So punish the parent and harm the kids by removing the kids just to make sure she's not "rewarded"? Sorry, but every intervention should have the priority of keeping the family together. It's damaging, heavy handed and demeaning to think parents should lose custody of their kids in situations like this. You'd probably say there's no easy answers, so you shouldn't promote the easy answer of removing the kids from the home.
I'd rather do that than have them stay with parents who don't allow them to go to school. What chance are they going to have them? Its not about punishing the parents, its what is better for the kids. And if the kids are in a home where the parents don't allow them to attend school, they need to be in a home that does.
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
So you'd rather tear up the family than come up with a more creative solution that keeps the family intact?
Its not like I'd look forward to tearing a family apart. But I would not to continue to reward an adult capable of making decisions but continue to chose to have a 5th or 6th child at 30 years old while working for minimum wage. We had the difficult discussion this year with my wife, she wanted a third child. I was not going to have a third purely for financial reasons since money is tight for us right now with just 2. I expect other adults to be accountable for their decisions as well. Mistakes happen, that's fine, and maybe a third can happen. But when you are up to 5 or 6 kids that is just careless or taking advantage of the system that is supporting them. At that point my concerns are not with the parents, but what is best for the child. And dropping out of school to take on the responsibilities that of a mom is not best for the child. What is best is preventing this cycle from repeating and that will start by making sure the children finish school, and not rewarding the single mom for having 6 kids by paying her bills for her. And now you have 6 kids who don't finish school and what is going to happen to them and their children? If there is a more creative option I'd listen, but I'd only be interested in one that isn't rewarding the bad decision making. Any form of assistance that allows that family to continue on that path will only create the same scenario in the next generation. No one is helped. A creative option I would approve (and I know you all are waiting for my approval) would be to take the children away temporarily until the mom can prove she can support them. In the meantime have a program designed for moms in this situation where they can learn skills to get a better job. If she completes the program and gets a better job, she gets the kids back. That could be a start. If she doesn't, there are lots of families out there waiting years to adopt babies. It is when they are older it becomes difficult to find a permanent home for them. Ever watch the show "Shameless"? Its a pretty funny show, but that family dynamic is very real in the inner city. And the show is actually based on the creator's own experience.
Are you celabite? Serious question.
not sure how that's relevant, unless youre trying to imply anyone who doesn't have at least 6 or 7 kids floating around must be celibate? But no.
For me I'd like to start by hammering into parents what they are doing to their kids when they allow them to not finish school, or in some cases force them to drop out. They are working 2 jobs because they only make minimum wage, but they only make minimum wage because they didn't finish school. It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
it's not enabling if that parent is working 18 hour days and needs care for their younger children. it's surviving.
It is a lack of education and resources that prompted the mother to make the bad decisions to put the family in that place. As harsh as it sounds, if you cannot care for your children you should not have them. And forcing one child to sacrifice her future for the rest is not caring for them. In my opinion this is when CPS needs to step in and remove some children from the house. I know it sounds harsh, but those children are not being cared for properly if they are being forced to miss school in order to help provide.
So you'd rather tear up the family than come up with a more creative solution that keeps the family intact?
Its not like I'd look forward to tearing a family apart. But I would not to continue to reward an adult capable of making decisions but continue to chose to have a 5th or 6th child at 30 years old while working for minimum wage. We had the difficult discussion this year with my wife, she wanted a third child. I was not going to have a third purely for financial reasons since money is tight for us right now with just 2. I expect other adults to be accountable for their decisions as well. Mistakes happen, that's fine, and maybe a third can happen. But when you are up to 5 or 6 kids that is just careless or taking advantage of the system that is supporting them. At that point my concerns are not with the parents, but what is best for the child. And dropping out of school to take on the responsibilities that of a mom is not best for the child. What is best is preventing this cycle from repeating and that will start by making sure the children finish school, and not rewarding the single mom for having 6 kids by paying her bills for her. And now you have 6 kids who don't finish school and what is going to happen to them and their children? If there is a more creative option I'd listen, but I'd only be interested in one that isn't rewarding the bad decision making. Any form of assistance that allows that family to continue on that path will only create the same scenario in the next generation. No one is helped. A creative option I would approve (and I know you all are waiting for my approval) would be to take the children away temporarily until the mom can prove she can support them. In the meantime have a program designed for moms in this situation where they can learn skills to get a better job. If she completes the program and gets a better job, she gets the kids back. That could be a start. If she doesn't, there are lots of families out there waiting years to adopt babies. It is when they are older it becomes difficult to find a permanent home for them. Ever watch the show "Shameless"? Its a pretty funny show, but that family dynamic is very real in the inner city. And the show is actually based on the creator's own experience.
Are you celabite? Serious question.
not sure how that's relevant, unless youre trying to imply anyone who doesn't have at least 6 or 7 kids floating around must be celibate? But no.
So you have access to birth control and understand the potential consequences of having sex, right? And you have options available to you, right?
Yes, and I know where you are going. I still don't think anything will justify not allowing your children to get an education. If a parent is unable to provide for her children and requires them to work or take care of other children and misses school in the process, those kids need to be in a different home. Otherwise you end up with 6 more uneducated kids, who will grow up working minimum wage, each with 6 kids who are in the same boat they were and will never even have the opportunity to break the poverty cycle.
How do you guarantee that the foster home will be better? How do you justify the trauma to the kids of being taken away from their families? How do you deal with their separation from siblings, given that the likelihood of five or six kids being placed together is close to nil?
Don't get me wrong; I'm not happy about families not prioritizing education for their children. But what you are proposing as a solution is far worse.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
People might argue that that is rewarding people for poor choices.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
In most of the situations Ive seen it wouldn't be all the kids. The 15 year old daughter is forced to stay home to take care of the 1 or 2 not in school yet. It would be those 1 or 2 not in school so the daughter can go to school. And most foster kids are temporary. Give some requirements for the mother to meet and help her meet them. And if she meets it she gets the kids back and have programs that offer short-term reduced childcare so she has time to figure out when to do the following year, like finding a work schedule where child care isn't needed. I'm all for assistance, I'm just against totally free handouts that don't hold a capable adult accountable.
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
People might argue that that is rewarding people for poor choices.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
I would argue that would be helping them make the right choice and avoiding a mistake. And anyone who complains I'd just argue its a lot cheaper than the alternative of the state raising or supporting the children that would otherwise happen.
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
People might argue that that is rewarding people for poor choices.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
I would argue that would be helping them make the right choice and avoiding a mistake. And anyone who complains I'd just argue its a lot cheaper than the alternative of the state raising or supporting the children that would otherwise happen.
Of course it's cheaper. Plus more effective, more humane, and more reasonable. But a big chunk of your country has enough trouble with just the idea of birth control. Free birth control will blow their minds.
I would also argue that it makes more sense to provide it free before the recipients are in the situation of being single mothers, not after. But that would typically involve acknowledging that young people sometimes have sex before marriage, and we all know that shouldn't happen, right?
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
People might argue that that is rewarding people for poor choices.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
I would argue that would be helping them make the right choice and avoiding a mistake. And anyone who complains I'd just argue its a lot cheaper than the alternative of the state raising or supporting the children that would otherwise happen.
Of course it's cheaper. Plus more effective, more humane, and more reasonable. But a big chunk of your country has enough trouble with just the idea of birth control. Free birth control will blow their minds.
I would also argue that it makes more sense to provide it free before the recipients are in the situation of being single mothers, not after. But that would typically involve acknowledging that young people sometimes have sex before marriage, and we all know that shouldn't happen, right?
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
People might argue that that is rewarding people for poor choices.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
I would argue that would be helping them make the right choice and avoiding a mistake. And anyone who complains I'd just argue its a lot cheaper than the alternative of the state raising or supporting the children that would otherwise happen.
Of course it's cheaper. Plus more effective, more humane, and more reasonable. But a big chunk of your country has enough trouble with just the idea of birth control. Free birth control will blow their minds.
I would also argue that it makes more sense to provide it free before the recipients are in the situation of being single mothers, not after. But that would typically involve acknowledging that young people sometimes have sex before marriage, and we all know that shouldn't happen, right?
Who has ever suggested Americans don't have sex? First I've heard of that.
And if youre worried about access to birth control I'd rather develop programs that offer free birth control to single moms than to deal with the consequences of raising 6 kids on minimum wage.
People might argue that that is rewarding people for poor choices.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
I would argue that would be helping them make the right choice and avoiding a mistake. And anyone who complains I'd just argue its a lot cheaper than the alternative of the state raising or supporting the children that would otherwise happen.
Of course it's cheaper. Plus more effective, more humane, and more reasonable. But a big chunk of your country has enough trouble with just the idea of birth control. Free birth control will blow their minds.
I would also argue that it makes more sense to provide it free before the recipients are in the situation of being single mothers, not after. But that would typically involve acknowledging that young people sometimes have sex before marriage, and we all know that shouldn't happen, right?
Who has ever suggested Americans don't have sex? First I've heard of that.
I don't think anyone ever said American's don't have sex. There are far too many of you for that.
And that's not what I said, either.
Are you really trying to argue against the fact that many, many people, often of a religious bent, are so unable to accept that many teens and young adults will have sex that they attempt to deny them access to appropriate information and effective birth control?
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
please tell me how being President P**** Grabber would widen my eyes. the guy hasn't had a hardship in his entire life, and he thinks it's perfectly acceptable to sexually assault women and walk into a room full of teenage/20 something women in various stages of undress "just because I can".
you wanting to be him speaks volumes.
generally, "walk a mile" isn't a saying that is applied to rich rapists.
www.headstonesband.com
Not all, or even most, by any means, but a lot more than I expected.
Working with kids and families in one of the worst neighborhoods in the state, in South-Central LA, a neighborhood where these kids go to the schools that are featured in movies like Stand And Deliver, or Lean On Me, it was a shock to me.
I remember the first time a parent told me their son didn't need to go to school because he just wants to work in his uncle's garage, or the first mom to tell me her daughter didn't need to stay in school because her job was just to provide grandbabies.
There is definitely a culture in inner cities that places education very low on the list of priorities. Sometimes it is the result of family problems outside of their control, sometimes it is from the choices they made.
I don't think anyone can define THE problem that keeps inner cities so poor. Its a cycle of many problems, but it has been a taboo to mention the lack of family or especially father figures in these houses. I think it is important to recognize all the problems.
So many grow up in broken households, which leads to gangs and crime and becoming a parent at 17 and the pattern just repeats.
I've seen kids drop out because the single parent is working 2 jobs and no one is there to make sure to go to school. I've seen others who want to go to school be forced to stay home and raise their 5 younger siblings because mom is working and cant afford child care. So then that daughter doesn't get an education, winds up working 2 minimum wage jobs trying to raise 5 kids 10 years later and her kids are in the same boat she was. How do you stop that? I think not recognizing some of those problems creates more issues.
It is less they are deciding to not make the change, but more the bad decisions their parents made make it very difficult to make that change, and they repeat those same bad decisions with their kids. Or that lifestyle is all they know, and don't realize a better one is a real possibility. Or they chose their gang family over their deadbeat dad they never met and their mom who is never home.
Asking if this is a result of their skin color is not an easy question. Currently, I would say no child is denied any opportunity because of their skin color. But was probably true 3-4 generations ago, and as a result their grandparents didn't have the same opportunities, which directly affected their parents, and now them. But how do you break that cycle?
how do you break the cycle? obviously no easy answer. but telling people to "move on" and "I know one black guy that did it, so why can't you?" as GF and others suggest, isn't going to do it. social programs, community support. take the power away from the gangs. legalizing some street drugs would be a very good start. put the money made from that back into the inner city to help these people build better lives. but first and foremost you need LEADERS who give a shit and are able to convince white middle-to-upper-class families that these people matter and aren't to be ignored and told to "get over it".
www.headstonesband.com
It blows my mind every time I see a parent enable and essentially set a path for their children to live a life of poverty. But they just don't see their decisions as having that impact.
https://www.ted.com/talks/j_d_vance_america_s_forgotten_working_class
And PBS interview:
https://charlierose.com/videos/29349
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
We had the difficult discussion this year with my wife, she wanted a third child. I was not going to have a third purely for financial reasons since money is tight for us right now with just 2. I expect other adults to be accountable for their decisions as well. Mistakes happen, that's fine, and maybe a third can happen. But when you are up to 5 or 6 kids that is just careless or taking advantage of the system that is supporting them. At that point my concerns are not with the parents, but what is best for the child. And dropping out of school to take on the responsibilities that of a mom is not best for the child. What is best is preventing this cycle from repeating and that will start by making sure the children finish school, and not rewarding the single mom for having 6 kids by paying her bills for her. And now you have 6 kids who don't finish school and what is going to happen to them and their children?
If there is a more creative option I'd listen, but I'd only be interested in one that isn't rewarding the bad decision making. Any form of assistance that allows that family to continue on that path will only create the same scenario in the next generation. No one is helped. A creative option I would approve (and I know you all are waiting for my approval) would be to take the children away temporarily until the mom can prove she can support them. In the meantime have a program designed for moms in this situation where they can learn skills to get a better job. If she completes the program and gets a better job, she gets the kids back. That could be a start. If she doesn't, there are lots of families out there waiting years to adopt babies. It is when they are older it becomes difficult to find a permanent home for them.
Ever watch the show "Shameless"? Its a pretty funny show, but that family dynamic is very real in the inner city. And the show is actually based on the creator's own experience.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
But no.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Don't get me wrong; I'm not happy about families not prioritizing education for their children. But what you are proposing as a solution is far worse.
I would not; but, you know, some might.
I'm all for assistance, I'm just against totally free handouts that don't hold a capable adult accountable.
I would also argue that it makes more sense to provide it free before the recipients are in the situation of being single mothers, not after. But that would typically involve acknowledging that young people sometimes have sex before marriage, and we all know that shouldn't happen, right?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
And that's not what I said, either.
Are you really trying to argue against the fact that many, many people, often of a religious bent, are so unable to accept that many teens and young adults will have sex that they attempt to deny them access to appropriate information and effective birth control?
It's good to promote abstinence for young teens, but I think it is far more helpful to teach proper birth control and the risks.
Think of previous generations and the ridiculous expectations for young adults established by religion: no sex and no masturbation lest you go blind.
Let me tell you the risk was worth the reward.