Lurker > Zanzenburger

I applied for adoption over half a year ago. Two months ago, three girls were placed in our home as an emergency foster situation. The foster situation is currently turning into an adoption case (pending trial). I've been raising three little girls, ages 5, 4, and 2.

Jumping from 0-3 kids has been quite the life changer, as I had to completely redo my life to work around their schedules. At least with school starting again I have more time to myself and my work, but they are a handful. But I couldn't be happier. Those little buggers have tugged on the heart strings and I couldn't imagine letting them go anymore.

It'll be rough if the birth parents win the court case (which the case workers say they won't, but you never know).
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Some of those had me reacting the same way as the guys in the video. Pretty impressive stuff.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

weapon_d00d816 posted...

You never closed your quotations. This whole topic is technically within whatever you were quoting.

This made me laugh much harder than it should have.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

I usually take it as a challenge and respond accordingly.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

So a few questions cause curiosity got the best of me.

- Which would you say is the easiest to hardest methods of escaping/surviving based on your experience? (I noticed you mentioned the two hardest, but how do the other three rank against each other?)

- So how does the boat work? It seems Jason can just teleport in front of your car while you're trying to drive away. Can he do that with the boat? Or are you safe once you're on the boat?

- Have you witnessed anyone winning through the two most difficult methods yet?
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

So if you manage to escape, is the game over or do the remaining players continue to play until they escape as well or die?
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

As an employer, I use Indeed when I have job postings and am looking to hire.

A word of advice if you're using Indeed, take some time to make your application/resume stand out. Even if you personalize a cover letter for the job you are applying for. When I open a job on Indeed, I get hundreds of applications in a few days. And like 90% of the people applying don't even qualify for the job in the slightest. They just apply to everything in their area and just hope someone will call them.

As an employer, that's annoying, and I'm more likely to skip an actually good candidate as I'm skimming through the crap. I tend to pay more attention when there's a cover letter with some actual thought put into it showing that they actually bothered to research my company.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Morning bump
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a56278/oklahoma-democratic-victory/

Looks like they are already saying other states should follow suit.

For once my state isn't a national embarrassment (for now).
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

JohnLennon6 posted...

Why would anyone look towards Bernie Sanders for a successful political campaign?

Because it works. It gets people riled up that normally don't care about politics. It is driven by the people, not corporations and expensive lobbying.

The Oklahoma wins were primarily grassroots efforts. Ordinary people going door to door and getting others excited for the cause.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

HiddenRoar posted...

Imagine if you had posted this prior to the string of election defeats in states preceding the Georgia Special.

Imagine.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

legendarylemur posted...

People do often try to justify not going to college. But you go to college to learn to be an adult. It's sort of simple as that. It's of course not as simple as "you almost never do the job you learned at college to do" or some variance of that. But some people here are so wrapped up in being in debt and whatnot. There's also a reason why people who went to college earn more on average.

Though some do drop out and still do well. They're naturals and they had a reason and an end goal for dropping out. It isn't baseless, and a lot of those people also end up going to some form of graduate school eventually

There's always exceptions, but people can't deny college has its benefits.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Bump
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

scorpion41 posted...

Oklahoma is like Louisiana from a political stand point. It traditionally votes republican in national elections, but locally it can go either way. Louisiana kept Mary landrieu in the senate seat for over a decade before she was pushed out. Louisiana also elects democratic governors for the most part, with Jon bel Edwards winning during the height of republican domination. Don't get too excited over this flip flop.

The reason this is significant is because the seats that were flipped have been GOP-controlled for a very long time. The Tulsa seat has been GOP-controlled since 1993.

The bigger picture is that at the beginning of 2017, the Oklahoma DNC made a pledge to completely transform itself after its unexpected Bernie victory last year in the primaries. They realized that power was coming from progressive youths in the state and that was the future.

That's why the new head of the OK DNC is a 24-year-old woman. And the campaign manager for Michael, who won the Senate seat in the special election? A college student. They are taking a more Bernie Sanders grassroots approach to politics and, at least early results like this, show that it works.

Now we just have to wait and see if this approach has any longetivity to it. Can they keep this up with special elections going forward and especially 2018 elections?

If this works, could this model be applied in other red states to flip them little by little from the local level?

Just some thoughts worth pondering.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Were_Wyrm posted...

Hopefully dems will start focusing on the state level and fight from the bottom up instead of focusing on the federal level.

That has traditionally been their biggest weakness. Too much focus on winning presidential elections and no efforts on local politics. The ability to draw voting districts give local government a lot of power which can then help federal elections.

I'm glad there is more of a local push for government, thanks a lot to Bernie Sanders' grassroots motivation of the democratic party.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

I bought my wife's engagement ring as a 3-pack on Amazon. It came with her engagement wing and a wedding band for each of us. Cost a total of $300 for the whole package. Then we just went to a jewelry store to get them resized.

It looks pretty, but not extravagant. She loves it and still wears it. I recall her sister making fun of her for the small jewel on the ring, then showed her huge expensive rock on her hand by her fiance. Fast forward 5 years later, and her sister has been dumped at the altar twice and had to pawn off the rings to pay her bills. Meanwhile, our marriage is still great and getting better.

It's not about the rings, people. The rings are just a symbol. The relationship itself is much more important.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Slaya4 posted...

How is the business going? Are you on the up now?

Sort of. We're on a down right now, but that's because of seasonal shifts (summers are horrible for laser tag centers). Even three summers in we're still having to be super resourceful.

But overall, yes, we're on the up. We're consistently making a profit September through May. I just have to create a better summer plan to stay profitable in the summer. Either be open less hours or just save up more throughout the year. I should finish paying off one of my bigger debts the end of this year, though, so that should make my monthly costs much lower going into next summer. That should help.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

TheFireRises posted...

Keep in mind I'm in Ireland but high school here is more or less: study for 3 years (around 15-18), take several exams over two weeks, that decides your future in college, if any. Nothing else matters. Getting As all week but mess up? Doesn't matter.

Now, the reason I'm mentioning that is college here is definitely a major difference to high school. High school is more or less, rote learning. Including memorizing essays to write for say English or history. Outside of math (wherein you just learn the processes, not the whys), it's all rote learning.

So yeah, I'd agree that college education in general is a massive, massive difference - mainly because here at least, you have to take responsibility for your own actions and education. In high school you can quite literally fail everything, dump all your memory down on paper during those two weeks and succeed in getting into a top tier college.
Which changes drastically since college here treats you like you're a dumbass kid most of the time because they kinda expect that you are.

True. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've gathered from other countries not the US, is that higher education is more valued. As in, people understand the necessity of a college degree, not just for gaining employment, but for the learning aspect of it.

In the US, that's becoming rarer as more people think that college is worthless if it doesn't get you 6-figure salaries immediately after graduation.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Hexagon posted...

Well that's good for you to notice. When I was halfway through my undergrad I was in a science/engineering major with a GPA above 8.5 and I wanted to work over the summer. Never got a call back from walmart/metro/mcdonalds/wendys/clothes store etc. Stupid online questionnaires. Instead I got hired to work part time in something related to my field which was nice, but more stressful than what I wanted for a summer job.

Yeah, retail companies are weary of hiring college peeps, specifically because they can be "overqualified" for the job they want them to do. Those jobs are generally very standardized and monotonous, so they don't want someone coming in and getting all fancy with it.

In my company, despite being a part time, blue collar job, I give my employees more independence and authority in how to do their job. But with the added freedom come more judgment calls when things go wrong. Part of the job includes travelling around the state and setting up mobile laser tag parties. I'm not around to fix things if something goes wrong, so they need to be able to figure out a solution quick if things mess up.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Doe posted...

Mods are always wrong

http://www.swaylocks.com/sites/default/files/DOE_1.png
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

TheFireRises posted...

I do agree that for the most part, college education would make people better at most jobs on the basis of they need to think at a higher standard.

I think the point I'm trying to make is that it is hard to quantify the value of a college degree. Just take a look at the other topic about Republicans thinking higher education is bad for America, and the CE users making fun of liberal arts degree.

From my experience (both as an administrator of a university and a business owner), the experience gained from getting a college degree is very valuable and transferrable into the workforce, regardless of the degree.

You could argue the employability of certain degrees versus others, but you still gain pretty in depth critical thinking skills from attending college.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Melonfarms posted...

A constant noise keeps you distracted from non-constant little sounds that can keep you awake. Like sleeping with a fan.

This. Rain makes great white noise for falling asleep.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

shockthemonkey posted...

How much more do you pay people who have a college degree?

I pay them the same amount as it's part time employment. Though I'm considering upping the pay if it attracts more college-level employees.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

TheFireRises posted...

Is it possible it's just down to lack of experience in general?

College kids with their four years would have more experience with problem solving and analytical thinking than someone who's only worked say six months.
Different experience but greater amounts.

It's possible.

My college educated workers ranged from ages 19-28.

My non-college educated workers ranged from 16-40.

There's a larger range among the non-college educated worker. But like I said, of those, only one of them seemed to deliver the same performance as my college-educated ones, and he was a 16-year-old high school student.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Hell yeah I'd love to be able to stop for 8 seconds at a time.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

This is just one anecdotal example, but other business owners here can chime in if they'd like.

Since starting my laser tag business three years ago, I've gone through many employees. I'm doing my yearly employee reviews and I've noticed a very steep divide in worker performance over the last few years. My employees with some or a full college education were just much better employees overall. It didn't matter what degree they had. Just the fact that they attended college seemed to improve their work habits and performance.

Curious to find out why, I had a few meetings with my three managers (two current and one ex-manager). I wanted them to list their positive and negative qualities of all our employees with examples. I wanted to find out why the college-educated ones were so much better.

Their comments seemed to match pretty well with my own observations. The key here was problem-solving and critical-thinking skills. The laser tag business is a pretty hectic, fast-paced business. Especially when you have two parties and a retreat going on at the same time and you are dealing with the technology found in the laser tag guns.

The college-educated employees were much more independent when it came to troubleshooting. If something messed up, like a gun malfunctioned, or a kid got hurt, or a customer got angry, or we had a leak somewhere, they would immediately figure out a way to solve the problem. They would make last-second judgments and would generally fill me in later when the problem had been taken care of.

With my non-college employees, they did well enough with their given instructions. But the second something happened that did not have instructions on how to solve, they would freeze. They would stop everything they were doing to call me or a manager for help. Or the decisions they made were the worst decisions they could make and would cost us either money or customers. They weren't able to step back and look at the situation critically and make a sound decision based on the facts surrounding the problem.

As a business owner, this is pretty telling for me the value of a college degree. I've hired sociology majors, business majors, art majors, as well as computer science majors. Regardless of their degree, they showed a much better handling of basic job duties that required ambiguity, quick thinking, and judgment calls.

With my non-college workers, only one was able to show that same level of independence and high job performance. He was a gifted high school student who will easily go very far in life. The rest, while they weren't bad employees per se, just didn't give me the level of quality I've come to expect from the others. The worst of it was when I had to drive an hour to a mobile party to troubleshoot a game glitch for an employee, only to find out they forgot to turn on the administration software, something that was done with a single flip of a switch. An employee I've had for months that couldn't bother to attempt to figure it out before calling me in.

TL:DR: My college-educated employees are much more valuable workers to me because of their critical thinking skills and ability to work more independently and with more ambiguity than my non-college-educated workers.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

shockthemonkey posted...

It's got to help a little that both special elections were because Republicans resigned after being gross.

You would think that, but history (at least in this state) has had Republicans resigning for similar reasons replaced by other Republicans. Party over morals has been the trend here. I'm glad it's changing for once.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article160664109.html

Democrats have swept special elections for a state House vacancy from the Tulsa area and a state Senate vacancy from Oklahoma City, both vacated by Republicans who resigned.

In House District 75, which includes portions of east Tulsa and north Broken Arrow, unofficial results show voters picked Democrat Karen Gaddis over Republican Tressa Nunley on Tuesday. Both were vying to replace former Republican state Rep. Dan Kirby, who resigned this year after two former legislative assistants accused him of sexual harassment. Kirby has admitted he used poor judgment but denied harassing legislative aides.

In Senate District 44 in south Oklahoma City, voters selected Democrat Michael Brooks over Republican Joe Griffin. Brooks will replace ex-state Sen. Ralph Shortey, who is facing three felony counts alleging he solicited a 17-year-old boy for sex. Shortey is scheduled for a preliminary court appearance on July 25

And in a GOP primary in Norman's House District 46, voters picked Darin Chambers over Charlie Samples and Jimmy Shannon to oppose Democrat Jacob Rosencrants on Sept. 12. The winner will replace former Rep. Scott Martin, a Republican who resigned to become president and CEO of the Norman Chamber of Commerce.

Ever since electing a 24-year-old to lead and chair the DNC in Oklahoma a few months ago, the party has completely transformed itself in an effort to turn the traditionally-red state blue. It's still early, but the result of these two special elections show that they are serious about changing the status quo. Time will tell if the upcoming special elections will also result in some flipping of seats.

This is also one of the few southern states to vote Bernie Sanders during the primary last year, so Oklahoma has become quite unpredictable lately.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

People around here know the cop in question. They call him "Trigger" because he was notorious for pulling out his weapon during routine traffic stops. The guy was a little too trigger-happy.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

C/D You sang that in your head
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Muffinz0rz posted...

The phrase "mental health day" conjures the image of someone genuinely focused on trying to fix their brain because a true job is too hard - someone sitting around and meditating all day, doing yoga/tai chi, etc. when it's nothing more than an excuse to be lazy,

That's your problem. You're making a mental health day sound like something it is not. A mental health day is just that, a day to give your brain a break. It's just another way of saying you're sleeping in and messing around all day. But it's for a purpose. It's so you don't overwork yourself today.

They just have a term for it now. It legitimizes the need to relax as an intentional part of having a work/life balance and not just because someone is lazy. That fear of being called "lazy" is why so many people don't use their paid leave in America and why as a country we are overworked, overstressed, and get sick so much.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Don't know how I've missed this topic for this long.

The way I see Basic Science, it's that it's there to build off of, but we may not necessarily know what we will build from it. Because it's exploratory. We are travelling uncharted waters where we learn what we know and we learn what we don't know.

If we stop basic science in favor or applied science, it's not necessarily going to shut us down scientifically, as applied science still studies the unknown for specific purposes. But that purpose limits the scope of the study. So we are only studying what we are looking for, and we may miss out on anything that we could have found outside of that limited box of inquiry.

Basic science is valuable because we explore the unknown and have the potential to uncover pockets of knowledge that can then be used for specific purposes later. The risk with that is that many times we'll come up empty-handed and the research will be a dud (as is most research). I can see why people don't like it, because if it fails, you get nothing in return, and if it succeeds, you still get nothing in return, just the potential to spark a future study with a more direct benefit.

But as someone said earlier in the topic, science isn't exactly a new concept in our culture anymore, so the perceived need for basic science isn't as strong as it used to be. Only when we hit a serious stagnation point within applied sciences will there be a resurgence of interest in basic science. Or if we magically achieve world peace and we get bored with ourselves.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Yeah, the intro was surprisingly awesome for the show.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

I grew up in the 90's in NJ and we called them bodegas.

And that was pretty much our only shopping option most of the time because they were the only stores within walking distance and it was near impossible to have a car with all the traffic. Sure, we could go to the local C-Town, but we'd have to take a bus to get there and the whole process would be a 3-hour affair.

It was much easier to just go to the bodega and get what you need.

Though they were the best in regards to getting cold cuts and sliced cheese. They were pretty fresh and the guys would generally give you more for free. They are also more likely to give away slightly-expired foods for cheaper or free.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

In most circumstances, federal loans are generally better for you. First, let me cover some facts that pertain to both types of loans and then I'll cover their individual features.

Both:
- You cannot get rid of these loans, even if you default or declare bankruptcy
- Interest is charged on all loans, and usually at higher rates than other types of loans
+ You get a grace period after graduation before you are expected to pay back loans
+ You can apply for deferment or forbearance if you have problems paying off loans at any point

Federal loans:
+ Subsidized loans exist where the government pays your interest while you are in school. Private loans don't do that.
+ You are given many more repayment options than you would with a private loan
+ Loan consolidation is usually easier (you can consolidate all your federal loans but can't include your private loans)
+ With the current federal loan forgiveness program, you can actually have your loans permanently forgiven under certain circumstances (though current administration is looking to remove this)
+ Interest is pretty stable and doesn't budge much (I think it was 6.8% for unsubsidized loans last time I checked)
+ These are much easier to get without a cosigner since the government guarantees the loans (great if you have bad or no credit)
- Federal loans are subject to changes by the current federal administration at any given time (see above about the loan forgiveness program)
- If the government wants you to pay back your loans, they will come after you much easier than a private company can (i.e. wage garnishment, lawsuits)
- Due to the ease of getting these loans and the high amounts they offer (typically the cost of your tuition and fees and living expenses), it is very easy to rack up these loans and have much more to pay than you anticipated or prepared for.

Private loans:
+ You can shop around for better interest rates than private loans
+ Much easier to get if you already bank with that loan provider or if you deal with them in other ways
+ Private companies have to jump through more hoops to get you to pay your loans (but they still don't go away)
- Repayment options are usually pretty limited, so good luck if the minimum payment is too high for you
- If you are unlucky enough to sign up for a loan with a variable interest rate, they can spike that up on you and increase your payments (always opt for a fixed variable rate if available)
- You usually need a cosigner as they won't give you a large loan with little to no credit
- Private companies are often merged and closed down, so your account is often sold back and forth between companies. Goodbye privacy.
- They are here to make a profit, not here to help you. At least federal loans have little to gain by lending to you compared to the risk. Private companies will try harder to squeeze every penny out of you.

That's pretty much the bulk of it in a nutshell. I'd say go for a federal loan unless you have a private lender you're comfortable with and are more willing to work with you (like a local bank, for example).
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Probably should check the Arms board.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

- Free apartment
- Free meals for me and the wife
- Gym membership
- Spending allowance for snacks and other miscellaneous things
- Flexible work hours
- Mostly autonomous job responsibilities
- Pretty good health insurance
- Access to free concerts/comedians/other entertainment events (since I coordinate them)
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

I read "parenting" as "gaming" in topic title and had a different response.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Leanaunfurled posted...

Duncanwii posted...

TC of you want to play the first Metroid make sure you play Zero Mission. It's a remake of Metroid NES and has a save system and built in map.

Thanks for the rec :D

I will second that rec. Zero Mission is a 10/10 remake, makes the original completely irrelevant outside of nostalgia purposes.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Metroid 100% for me
Also the Rabbids game if you can play the co-op on the main campaign

Leanaunfurled posted...

And also Metroid, though I've never played one before and I want to start with the first one.

The first Metroid for the NES/Zero Mission, or the first Metroid Prime? If Prime 4 is what you're excited about, you don't really need to play anything outside of the Prime games to keep up. I don't doubt they'll release the Prime Trilogy for the Switch leading up to Prime 4. Greatest trilogy I've ever played.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Nubcake13 posted...

As a pilot no, and from reading the article is still takes a pilot to operate the aircraft, they just get to fly it remotely like a predator drone

most flying today anyway is all done by auto pilot although it's comical how people think an auto pilot it a simple on/off switch

This, lol. Autopilot isn't just "the win button" in a video game. You have to program it specifically to meet the needs of you area, like what altitude you want to fly at, the speed, taking into account restricted airspaces. Honestly, since most of the flights I flew were short, I didn't even bother with autopilot. It was easier to just set the trim to a comfortable level and just fly passively.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Cocytus posted...

PS: What is your opinion of the idea of privatizing ATC, as has been recently proposed?

That worries me. Our ATC system is finally getting its crap together and upgrading their 1980s equipment that is long overdue. The system we have works great. Its only issue has been inefficiency and worker stress but that problem is being phased out with the new navigation systems being installed.

Privatizing is essentially starting over. You have new managers looking at things from a perspective of "how can we keep planes safe" to "how can we make more money"? Private industries cut corners to save on costs. We cannot afford to do that in hectic air travel. If corners aren't cut, the only other option is raising ATC fees. That means airline prices will skyrocket. Imagine having the equivalent of toll booths at airports. You gotta pay extra based on where you are going and what company owns that district.

I can understand the idea if our ATC was problematic or dying, but we have one of the best ATC systems in the world. Trust me, you don't want to trust ATC to land you safely in Honduras.

Keep it the way it is, is my opinion.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

I'm a pilot and yes.

As others have said, flying is already pretty automated. Autopilot takes most of the work off flying and even takeoffs and landing go by specific measureable guidelines (take off when your speed reaches this, enrich the mixture and push trottle to full speed). They are tasks that computers can easily be programmed to do.

The question is what is the error control like? Where human pilots currently trump machines is during emergencies, like engine failures or power failures.

Once I had to land a plane with no working flaps. When you land a plane like that, you need a much longer runway. The runway ATC directed me to was too short. I had to make the call to abort the landing and find a different nearby airport.

We just need to safeguard planes for every possible thing that can go wrong.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Sativa_Rose posted...

The main thing I want to say is that I don't agree with this statement from an economic standpoint. The child is exchanging their labor for money, the same as the parent does with their employer. Unless you're basically just saying that the child has no real possessions and therefore there is no real change of ownership going on, I think the child actually is "earning" the money from an economic standpoint.

I guess my only argument here is that this is entirely family-driven from a household perspective, not a societal one. I never got paid for doing chores. It was just an expectation as part of a growing child that I was responsible for the maintaining of the house as someone who lived in it. There is no societal pressure that a child must be paid for chores just as an adult must be paid for doing work (in which there are laws that require this).

A child that gets paid for chores is done so because their parents believe it is a valuable learning lesson to pay them to do something they're supposed to be doing anyways. I see the allowance money as a benefit earned by the child, but parents can always stop the allowance transaction and not be in the wrong because it was their money anyways and the child is expected to do their chores, money or not. It's not like they have the right to just say "I will not make my bed" because their parents choose not to pay them anymore due to financial difficulties or whatever.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Sativa_Rose posted...

Hmm I didn't think of the roommates aspect of things. I think it's more the idea of not having any sense of your own property or having any say in what your boundaries are with any of your possessions. As an adult, you surely can have things that you aren't forced to share with a roommate at any random moment.

I think the main reason for this is this:

DevsBro posted...

Kids are expected to share because they don't own anything.

Technically, the parents own anything they give their kids. It's the parents choice, then, to tell the child how to use the item. It's only "theirs" in the informal sense as a way to raise them and get them to learn concepts. Kinda like allowance. The child is not really making the money for doing the chores because the parents already earned the money. The money only belongs to the child because the parents said so as part of a learning experience to teach them the value of hard work.

Once a child learns the aforementioned lesson on sharing, there is little reason for a parent to get involved.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

As the others have said, these are two different concepts you're combining into one.

In schools, sharing is emphasized because the students are using public property found in the classroom, like crayons and books. You will rarely see a teacher force a student to share something they brought from home, because it is theirs and it is their decision if they want to share it.

At home, sharing is emphasized because your siblings are roommates. Boundaries are more hazy even with personal property when you live with someone else. And yes, adults who are roommates do have to learn how to share. One of my areas as a college administrator is managing housing at our college. The number one judicial issues I deal with are due to roommates not knowing how to share, whether it is sharing the food in the fridge, sharing cleaning responsibilities, or even sharing friends (not kidding, this happens a lot). Learning to live with someone else means learning how to share, but also learning how to set boundaries.

And no sharing lesson is ever complete without the appropriate boundaries lesson. Any teacher teaching a student to share should also be teaching the student when something is rightfully theirs to use. Just because they are told to share their crayons with their neighbor doesn't mean the neighbor can just take the crayons whenever he or she wants to. Sharing is the process of working out a lack of resources in a mutually beneficial manner.

Adults should be able to handle that on their own without a third party getting involved (and when we do, that's when we have courts).
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.

Teddytalks posted...

There is only so much you can express with words dude. I am already aware of hoe nearly everybody think they deserve exceptional treatment. For the sake of the topic, I just wanted to focus on women, exploring that aspect, as men has already been discussed in the other 200+ post topic. Don't assume that all that is said is all that is thought. I know the entitlement in this generation. I see it firsthand on this boards and irl from friends. I just didn't mention in my posts because the focus was on girls.

If you wanted to focus on women to parallel that topic about young men, then I'd ask the question of what are young women doing with their lives now that so many men are withdrawing from the marriage/dating scene?

For one thing, I can tell you that women are overwhelmingly enrolling in college more than men. I work college admissions for 5-7 colleges throughout the year and in every single one we get more women applications than men applications. It's not that women get admitted more. It's that they apply more.

Women are more career-oriented, likely due to repeated messages as a child that a woman is powerful, independent, and can do anything. We have large numbers of programs designed to get girls more into the STEM fields. That seems to have had a ripple effect to get more girls into other fields as well.

As a result, less women are dating as they go to school to get their bachelor's and event masters degrees.

That commonly-spread statement that women in their 30s finally settle down for the "beta" guy after hooking up repeatedly in her 30s isn't the whole picture. A lot of it has to do with the fact that women in their 30s are just finishing school and are finally at a point where they can look for a partner. Even if they're done with school, they are out there looking for jobs or working jobs they are overqualified for minimum wage until they find something in their chosen field.

Meanwhile, they constantly see images in the media of empowered women doing all these great things to change America. Your average woman wonders why she can't be that impacting and amazing and so she works harder to achieve that dream of being an empowered, independent woman.

Some women will luck out and find a partner during this process, but just as young men have a difficult time in the current dating scene, women do as well. Women don't "date" anymore. Their choices have come down to "hooking up", "seeing someone", "hanging out", or "talking". And if they're lucky, things will work out and they can call it a relationship (though many aren't even opting for that label anymore).

The stereotypical women that men like to be bitter about that use them, cheat, and are vapid isn't the majority. They're just the most visible ones because they're the ones men see on Tinder apps and on reality shows and on the news. The average woman, the type of work with in colleges, is usually as invisible as the young men in the other topic. Except, instead of diving into video games and porn, they dive more into advanced degrees and full time jobs as servers, receptionists, and other retail-oriented labor.
---

Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.