Georgia School Closings Protested

[albionmoonlight]

Figured that the Georgians on board would get a kick out of this.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/09....ap/index.html

Seems that we want our government to anticipate problems and be proactive. Until it is. Then we don't want that.

Actually, I think that all we really want is state-provided childcare in the disguise of schools--but that's another topic.

[miked]

This is precisely what a state in the bottom 10 education needs. Less school to conserve gas. I don't really see how this is considered "proactive" considering the revenue lost from people missing work and things like that will help. Maybe if he put caps on the insane amount of gas guzzling SUVs and trucks people love to sit in traffic in...

[Radii]

I think this has less to do with education vs gas conservation or any of the other arguments(I listened to Boortz for 2 minutes on the way to work today to hear his enlightened moaning about how this is forcing parents to spend time with their children and obviously parents don't want that or some such nonsense)... anyway, I think there is a pretty valid complaint about the logistical nightmare that was caused by holding off on a final decision on this until after school had let out on Friday afternoon.

Cancel school Tuesday and Wednesday, or make the announcement by noon to give people at least a little time before the weekend began to make decisions on taking off work/coming up with a 2 day daycare solution, and I think there would be far less complaining on the matter.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by miked

This is precisely what a state in the bottom 10 education needs. Less school to conserve gas.

Right. That problem was caused by just not spending enough time in the classroom? Guess Georgia would be "Top 10" if they had not cancelled these two days. After all, using "snow days" already built into the calendar somehow reduces the amount of class time, right?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Radii

Cancel school Tuesday and Wednesday, or make the announcement by noon to give people at least a little time before the weekend began to make decisions on taking off work/coming up with a 2 day daycare solution, and I think there would be far less complaining on the matter.

As far as I can tell, the announcement came before the vast majority of people would have left work. The time for businesses and employees to address it was before people left on Friday afternoon. I don't think most people work "school hours."

[Tekneek]

I'd also like to add, if you can find time to go stage a little protest at the capital, you can obviously deal with your kids unexpectedly staying at home.

"It's certainly caused a lot of problems for working parents today, and it causes problems for these kids who need to be learning and not just hanging out, watching the Cartoon Network at home," said mother Randy Faigin David of suburban Atlanta.

So teach them something instead of putting them in front of the TV, dumbass. I have to wonder if this woman can even feed herself after making a statement like that.

Democrats, including state party Chairman Bobby Kahn, criticized the move.

"The first thing he decided to do was close schools," Kahn said. "That shows something about his views on education and his priorities."

Sure thing, Bobby. You're a partisan asshole. If Roy Barnes did it, you'd act like it was a brilliant idea. Democrats and Republicans are so stupid. They think nobody remembers the way they are just contrarian.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

As far as I can tell, the announcement came before the vast majority of people would have left work. The time for businesses and employees to address it was before people left on Friday afternoon. I don't think most people work "school hours."

That's a fine line though, since even though the announcement came before most businesses closed, etc. I'm not sure how many of them knew about it before they got home (or at least got in the car, etc.)

Heck, the only reason I knew about it before 5pm was because it was mentioned here. Otherwise, I doubt I would have had any idea it was announced until it showed up on ajc.com at the earliest. And that's with me being online most of the day, which is a lot more access to news,etc. than the average person has at work AFAIK.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

As far as I can tell, the announcement came before the vast majority of people would have left work. The time for businesses and employees to address it was before people left on Friday afternoon. I don't think most people work "school hours."

Though you technically are right assuming a 9-5 workday, the press conference wasn't held until 4pm and it really wasn't wide public knowledge right then, Oliegirl saw a quick blurb on Fox News leading to my rumor post on FOFC at 3:55, and that wasn't confirmed until slightly after 4pm by those of us who spend too much time on the internet while at work. Now take instead a good employee who is heads down and leaves at 5pm, he isn't going to find out about it until he gets home most likely, by 4pm a lot of people have cut out early, people taking weekend trips may not hear about it at all because there was no announcement coming home with the kids from the school itself, etc etc. Lots of headache could have been avoided here by making a noon decision instead of a 4pm one.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

So teach them something instead of putting them in front of the TV, dumbass.

See, that would require more effort than sending them off to state-funded daycare.

Meanwhile, am I the only person familiar with Atlanta that gets the feeling that Randy Faigin David will turn out to be a "Debbie Dunwoody"? I've got a sneaking suspicion that she was just pissed that her ALTA match had to be postponed.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

As far as I can tell, the announcement came before the vast majority of people would have left work. The time for businesses and employees to address it was before people left on Friday afternoon. I don't think most people work "school hours."

Yeah, but it came across quite late in the work day. I mentioned this in the other thread, but I happened to be on a DeKalb school system-owned bus when the decision was made, so I probably heard before most. I called my wife at work. She couldn't find anything on official news sites until after 4:00pm, I think, and she was looking for it. A good number of people leave right at 5:00pm on Fridays, and some play CD's in their car, or ride home in quiet. Quite a few folks showed up at the Tucker game in the 6:30pm-7:30pm range, and didn't find out until others told them then.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Sure thing, Bobby. You're a partisan asshole. If Roy Barnes did it, you'd act like it was a brilliant idea. Democrats and Republicans are so stupid. They think nobody remembers the way they are just contrarian.

No doubt. It gets very old.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Meanwhile, am I the only person familiar with Atlanta that gets the feeling that Randy Faigin David will turn out to be a "Debbie Dunwoody"? I've got a sneaking suspicion that she was just pissed that her ALTA match had to be postponed.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Well, I didn't see a picture of Ms. David, but here's a shot of her friend who joined her little "teach-in" at the Capitol.



I hadn't seen this before guessing earlier, but now I'm really thinking ALTA is involved in this somehow.

(For non-Atlantan's, ALTA is the Atlanta Lawn Tennis Association. Think subdivision dwellers with waaaay too much time on their hands.)

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well, I didn't see a picture of Ms. David, but here's a shot of her friend who joined her little "teach-in" at the Capitol.



I hadn't seen this before guessing earlier, but now I'm really thinking ALTA is involved in this somehow.

(For non-Atlantan's, ALTA is the Atlanta Lawn Tennis Association. Think subdivision dwellers with waaaay too much time on their hands.)

Oh, she's ALTA all the way.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well, I didn't see a picture of Ms. David, but here's a shot of her friend who joined her little "teach-in" at the Capitol.



I hadn't seen this before guessing earlier, but now I'm really thinking ALTA is involved in this somehow.

(For non-Atlantan's, ALTA is the Atlanta Lawn Tennis Association. Think subdivision dwellers with waaaay too much time on their hands.)

I'm hot for teacher.

[oliegirl]

A teacher called in to a local radio station yesterday afternoon while they were discussing/debating this...I thought she had a really good outlook on the situation as she is a teacher and a parent and saw both sides. As a teacher, she was disappointed that there was no school for 2 days because it would cause them to basically re-do anything they had learned on Friday and hoped to carry into the new week. As a parent, she realized that "shit happens" and if you aren't ready and willing to throw your plans out the window to take care of your kids, then you shouldn't be a parent.

To those that protested it, I'd ask....what is the difference in finding out with 2 full days to plan for sitters, friends to help, etc...and waking up at 6 am and realizing your child has a fever and you will be staying home tending to him/her instead of going to work?

Granted, I am a stay at home mom, so I view it a little differently, but I don't like the attitude that a lot of parents have about their kids. They act like it's a burden to stay home with them for 2 days, or for those that work, like it's the end of the world if they have to work from home or miss a day or two of work. Radii has heard me say it a million times, but regardless of your job, extra-curricular activities, etc...your kids should come first. The public school system is not there to act as a babysitter so you can go play ALTA and such. I'd like to know how many of the mom's who protested are active in their kids school and are there on a regular basis. I'd bet not many.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... but regardless of your job, extra-curricular activities, etc...your kids should come first.

Bingo.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Radii

Now take instead a good employee who is heads down and leaves at 5pm, he isn't going to find out about it until he gets home most likely...

I can buy it for small companies. Large companies have people whose only job is to look for warnings and alerts from authorities, including government alerts, weather warnings, building security, and so on. They should have known immediately and pushed it out to everyone. I know for a fact that there is an entire department for dealing with these related matters at my employer, and up to this point not a single official memo/email has come out about it. They are simply ignoring the problem and passing it onto their employees to take 'emergency time off.'

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Large companies have people whose only job is to look for warnings and alerts from authorities, including government alerts, weather warnings, building security, and so on.

Maybe some do, but I'm quite certain many do not.

Depending on your definition of "large company", I can think of at least three off the top of my head that have nothing resembling what you're describing, and they're between 150-250 employees each.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Depending on your definition of "large company", I can think of at least three off the top of my head that have nothing resembling what you're describing, and they're between 150-250 employees each.

By large, I mean 500 or more. I have worked at two companies with 500+ employees and they had staff who were tasked with making sure they were tuned in to any sort of alerts/changes that could impact the workplace at all from traffic light outages in the immediate vicinity to terrorist alerts.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

I can buy it for small companies. Large companies have people whose only job is to look for warnings and alerts from authorities, including government alerts, weather warnings, building security, and so on. They should have known immediately and pushed it out to everyone. I know for a fact that there is an entire department for dealing with these related matters at my employer, and up to this point not a single official memo/email has come out about it. They are simply ignoring the problem and passing it onto their employees to take 'emergency time off.'

And what should the employer have done about it? Other than an informational/courtesy message saying - FYI - Ga. Public Schools are closed tomorrow? Should they give the parents time off with pay? Not dock them for the days off? I took Anthony out to lunch yesterday and saw no less than 3 women with work ID badges on toting their kids into Wendy's on their lunch break. They obviously found a way to make it work. Now I know that not all employers would have said it's OK to bring your kids in, but if there were 3 at Wendy's in the half hour we were there, how many others were out there? A lot I would bet.

For me it comes down to this - if you disagree with the decision from a political standpoint, then that is fine. However, if you are a parent and have spent the last 4 days bitching and moaning about how inconvenient it is for you to be home with your kid(s) for 2 days - then you seriously need to rethink your priorities.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

And what should the employer have done about it?

If they cared about their employees and their morale, they would have been aware of the pronouncement and at least got the ball rolling for the employees who would be affected. You tell them that, given the circumstances, there won't be any black marks on their record for taking those 2 days as vacation without proper notice (this is an issue at my employer - if you take time off without a 7 day warning, it is flagged in the 'attendance system'). You tell the managers to allow telecommuting for those days for any jobs that can be done remotely, if the employee is able to do that or wants to do that instead of taking time off. If they did NONE of those positive things, they could have done their part to inform employees who are parents and their managers so things could be worked out on Friday evening and nobody would be jumping through hoops on Monday morning.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

By large, I mean 500 or more. I have worked at two companies with 500+ employees and they had staff who were tasked with making sure they were tuned in to any sort of alerts/changes that could impact the workplace at all from traffic light outages in the immediate vicinity to terrorist alerts.

I used to be in a Civic organization, and if I recall correctly, a statistic was mentioned at one meeting that over 80% of Georgians work for a company or organization with less than 100 employees.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I used to be in a Civic organization, and if I recall correctly, a statistic was mentioned at one meeting that over 80% of Georgians work for a company or organization with less than 100 employees.

That is something I figured to be true anyway. Still, they all should have been able to resolve the matters on Friday night. Companies that size probably have owners, or top executives, that are actually able to deal directly with these matters. You see some big news that you know is going to cause problems for you and some of your employees on Monday and Tuesday. You start making arrangements for how you will deal with it immediately. Are there actually employers who DON'T have off-hours contact information for their staff?

[ISiddiqui]

regardless of your job, extra-curricular activities, etc...your kids should come first.

If everyday in your job is required to pay the rent, then I'd disagree wholeheartedly. Hell, where would the kids be if pop didn't make enough to keep the apartment?

Even if that isn't the case, I wouldn't put the kids before the job that pays the bills... but that's just me .

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

If everyday in your job is required to pay the rent, then I'd disagree wholeheartedly. Hell, where would the kids be if pop didn't make enough to keep the apartment?

A bad situation. Hopefully you weren't in this situation when you had the kids, else you are a terrible planner. If you've been a good tenant and always pay on time, most reasonable people would not toss you out over this sort of event. YMMV.

Even if that isn't the case, I wouldn't put the kids before the job that pays the bills... but that's just me .

If the job is more important than the kids, please find them a new home.

[ISiddiqui]

Sometimes people are JUST that poor. And poor people don't have the same access to birth control. It happens. There are families that are living from paycheck to paycheck. Just because you think they are poor planners doesn't remove that.

If the job is more important than the kids, please find them a new home.

Please, most people think their jobs are more important than the kids. The end to your argument is that families where both parents work are bad families because they are putting their jobs above their kids.

I hate this "it's all for the kids" crap. They should know their role, rather than being the center of their parent's lives .

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

By large, I mean 500 or more.

from http://www.sba.gov/advo/stats/profiles/04ga.pdf

As of 2001, 157,000 of the 161,000 employer firms in Georgia were <500 workers. And 2.6 million of our 3.5 million workers worked for companies < 500.

So about 75% work for sub-500 employee companies AND that doesn't appear to account for companies with more than one location.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I hate this "it's all for the kids" crap. They should know their role, rather than being the center of their parent's lives .

What somebody else said -- either please don't have any or if you do, find them a home with someone who actually understands the responsbility of a parent.

I wouldn't have thought it possible, but I believe you just managed to set a new all-time low-water mark for a post.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I wouldn't have thought it possible, but I believe you just managed to set a new all-time low-water mark for a post.

Actually you hold the Top 100 (all of them) on the low-water mark for a post.

And since when was the responsibility of a parent to be a slave to their kids? What do you think "It's all for the kids" MEANS?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Sometimes people are JUST that poor. And poor people don't have the same access to birth control. It happens. There are families that are living from paycheck to paycheck. Just because you think they are poor planners doesn't remove that.

I don't know what it takes to get free birth control from the community health center, but I know it can be done. Failure to seek that out does not absolve you of responsiblity.

Please, most people think their jobs are more important than the kids. The end to your argument is that families where both parents work are bad families because they are putting their jobs above their kids.

I do think that parents who pay other people to keep their kids (when you go outside of family or close friends) 40 hours or more a week are making a mistake. I wouldn't want to make it illegal for them to do so, but you should be making some sacrifices when you have kids (more than just writing daycare checks). That's just my opinion, but I'm not intending to go around pushing that agenda.

I hate this "it's all for the kids" crap. They should know their role, rather than being the center of their parent's lives .

Yeah, be seen and not heard, clean the house, make dinner, take out the trash...do all the things I don't want to do...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Actually you hold the Top 100 (all of them) on the low-water mark for a post.

From an utterly worthless piece of shit like you, that's high praise, I appreciate it.

Like I said earlier, whatever you do, please don't breed. At least that would increase hope for the future.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

What somebody else said -- either please don't have any or if you do, find them a home with someone who actually understands the responsbility of a parent.

Thanks, Jon. Wasn't it Tekneek who said that?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

I don't know what it takes to get free birth control from the community health center, but I know it can be done. Failure to seek that out does not absolve you of responsiblity.

Please. There are plenty of families that have to live paycheck to paycheck and have kids. What, you just going to play the blame game and tell them to suffer (and who'll suffer the most?). Also those families living paycheck to paycheck may not have been in that situation when they had kids. People do get laid off and have to take worse jobs because their job has gone overseas.

I do think that parents who pay other people to keep their kids (when you go outside of family or close friends) 40 hours or more a week are making a mistake. I wouldn't want to make it illegal for them to do so, but you should be making some sacrifices when you have kids (more than just writing daycare checks). That's just my opinion, but I'm not intending to go around pushing that agenda.

What? Women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen? Perhaps it doesn't apply to you, but it seems that this argument has become more prominent as women leave the home and go into the workplace. Not many men are willing to be stay at home dads, so that leaves women to go back to the home... and I don't think they want to take a step back in their accepted social position.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Thanks, Jon. Wasn't it Tekneek who said that?

Sorry, I was in the quick reply mode & couldn't see the full thread when I was composing. No slight intended.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

from http://www.sba.gov/advo/stats/profiles/04ga.pdf

As of 2001, 157,000 of the 161,000 employer firms in Georgia were <500 workers. And 2.6 million of our 3.5 million workers worked for companies < 500.

So about 75% work for sub-500 employee companies AND that doesn't appear to account for companies with more than one location.

I thought it would be high, but not that high. Ok. I get that point. I still think small companies have more to lose by letting this become a "Monday morning problem" and should be innovative so neither they or their employees have to spend all weekend worried about it. Maybe the only people worried about it WERE the parents who can't stand their kids and would rather be at the country club/tennis court/etc.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

From an utterly worthless piece of shit like you, that's high praise, I appreciate it.

Like I said earlier, whatever you do, please don't breed. At least that would increase hope for the future.

Unfortunetly I bet a neanderthal like you has already spawned. Should have sterilized you when we had the chance. Would have made the world a better place... as I guess would a loaded gun pointed at your head, and the trigger pulled.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Please. There are plenty of families that have to live paycheck to paycheck and have kids. What, you just going to play the blame game and tell them to suffer (and who'll suffer the most?). Also those families living paycheck to paycheck may not have been in that situation when they had kids. People do get laid off and have to take worse jobs because their job has gone overseas.

I thought I specifically mentioned that people who were in that situation when they had the kids were bad planners. I know things happen out of people's control, especially these days, and I feel bad for them. That's when you need some family around to help you out, or someone to help you. Once again, as I said, a very good tenant who always pays on time and never causes problems is very unlikely to get evicted because of losing these two days. Any landlord I've ever known, both as a tenant and otherwise, has been very reasonable with their good tenants.

What? Women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen? Perhaps it doesn't apply to you, but it seems that this argument has become more prominent as women leave the home and go into the workplace. Not many men are willing to be stay at home dads, so that leaves women to go back to the home... and I don't think they want to take a step back in their accepted social position.

My wife and I have a standing agreement that whichever one can make the most money goes to work and the other one stays home. We juggled our schedules and passed on promotions for 3 1/2 years before my wife stopped working. We made it so that one of us was with him 5 days a week and the other two days were split between the grandparents. That worked out and he was always with family, but things have been better since my wife stayed home. If she landed a job making more than I do, we would switch roles immediately.

Having kids is not for everyone. If you aren't prepared to make them the center of your life, don't bother having them. Nobody in this country EVER has to have kids if they don't want to. Of that, I am 100% certain.

By the way, it is really shameful that society has made stay-at-home parents a bad thing. No one should be ashamed of it.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sorry, I was in the quick reply mode & couldn't see the full thread when I was composing. No slight intended.

I was mostly kidding. I just forgot to hide a at the bottom. No offense taken. It is interesting that we can find one thing we might agree on.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

I thought I specifically mentioned that people who were in that situation when they had the kids were bad planners.

And my response is 'so what'? Saying they need to take responsibility and are bad planners doesn't change anything. And who ends up suffering in the end? The kids you are trying to protect. You can call them bad planners, but that won't make them go away. They are still around there and the paying for day care or them taking a day off may allow them to keep the apartment (but it may not), but it may take food from the family's mouths.

Saying it's their fault doesn't solve anything.

My wife and I have a standing agreement that whichever one can make the most money goes to work and the other one stays home.

And what about two people that want to work. Who, perhaps, have a dream or a cause and want to work for it? Maybe they want kids as well, and maybe they raise them pretty well.

You can't say that the kids of parents who both work turn out badly all the time. A lot of them turn out alright (and better). I've known plenty of successful people whose parents both worked. That's the way they did it.

If you aren't prepared to make them the center of your life, don't bother having them.

And WHY do they have to be the center of your life in order for you to be a good parent? That's just silly, IMO. You can be a good parent while both of you work. It's been done.

it is really shameful that society has made stay-at-home parents a bad thing.

You can't see where women may recoil from having their societal 'role' being a stay-at-home parent. There are a lot of men who won't give up their jobs. Women are advancing up the corporate ladder. It's a mark of equality between the sexes. Putting them back in the kitchen is something they'd consider a step back.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Having kids is not for everyone. If you aren't prepared to make them the center of your life, don't bother having them.

I'd go one step further probably -- PLEASE don't bother having them if that's the case. There's already far too many kids out there suffering from a lack of parenting to add any more to the number.

By the way, it is really shameful that society has made stay-at-home parents a bad thing. No one should be ashamed of it.

Hey, we've agreed twice in one thread, stop already

As a guy who has done the SAH dad thing, I could go on at some length about the psychological adjustments you have to make in order to deal with it. It's very different than a lot of the norms I grew up with, but to tell you the truth, if somebody as psychologically bent as I am can handle the adjustment then I believe it's definitely conquerable for the majority of people.
(Like I often say, if you find a situation where I'm the well-adjusted one ... well, you've got a really f'ed up situation).

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

And my response is 'so what'? Saying they need to take responsibility and are bad planners doesn't change anything. And who ends up suffering in the end? The kids you are trying to protect. You can call them bad planners, but that won't make them go away. They are still around there and the paying for day care or them taking a day off may allow them to keep the apartment (but it may not), but it may take food from the family's mouths.

People should learn that it takes more to be a parent than simply having the kids. It should be treated like the biggest decision you will ever make in your life. I don't know if you are right or wrong. I doubt anybody, other than deadbeats, is going to go without just because of these two days. When you see a news article, or even a blog entry, about families starving or having to live on the streets because of school being closed two days this week, please PM me, ok?

Saying it's their fault doesn't solve anything.

It solves the problem of figuring out who wasn't being responsible. It also reveals who needs to get the problem fixed.

And what about two people that want to work. Who, perhaps, have a dream or a cause and want to work for it? Maybe they want kids as well, and maybe they raise them pretty well.

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. Like I said, I wasn't saying we should make it illegal. I just think it is a mistake. I don't know how being a parent to your kids and making sure you are there for them 24/7 is any less of a cause or dream to work for than anything else. Once again, I say, having children is not for everyone and if you are more dedicated to this other "dream" or "cause", maybe you should let people whose "dream" or "cause" is raising children get to it.

You can't say that the kids of parents who both work turn out badly all the time. A lot of them turn out alright (and better). I've known plenty of successful people whose parents both worked. That's the way they did it.

Anecdotal evidence rarely proves much, as I have had to admit in discussions before. All of this is relative and standards are more relaxed than ever before. Parenting is being outsourced like never before. Kids are being raised by complete strangers on payroll jobs. Kids should be raised by those who love them.

And WHY do they have to be the center of your life in order for you to be a good parent? That's just silly, IMO. You can be a good parent while both of you work. It's been done.

It's all relative. Ask any kid what they would prefer. Have one parent take a year off and be there everyday with their child and then ask them if the kid wants them to go back to work fulltime.

You can't see where women may recoil from having their societal 'role' being a stay-at-home parent. There are a lot of men who won't give up their jobs. Women are advancing up the corporate ladder. It's a mark of equality between the sexes. Putting them back in the kitchen is something they'd consider a step back.

If you want the professional life, find a husband who wants to stay home or don't have kids. It really isn't that hard. If your career defines who you are, stick with it. For the record, I have a problem with men whose first love is their job as well. Obviously somebody has to make the money, but don't have a family if all you really want to do is work. Kids want parents that are there for them much more than they want parents who make lots of money.

Society has decided that having kids and raising them is a minor bump in the road. That you can still go and do all the things you ever wanted to do. In fact, they make 'daycare' seem like the 'right thing to do' by changing the names to 'learning academies.' Parents have the guilt removed and become convinced their kid is actually going to go to Harvard because they spent 45 hours a week in daycare from the age of 6 months. It's all bullshit.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Society has decided that having kids and raising them is a minor bump in the road. That you can still go and do all the things you ever wanted to do. In fact, they make 'daycare' seem like the 'right thing to do' by changing the names to 'learning academies.' Parents have the guilt removed and become convinced their kid is actually going to go to Harvard because they spent 45 hours a week in daycare from the age of 6 months. It's all bullshit.

To YOU, because frankly, I find your views to be the bullshit on this issue. You can raise your kids and both work jobs. People have finally realized the kids don't have to be the central focus in life and more power to them!

You still haven't shown me why your kids should be the central point of your life. Because you think they grow up to be better kids? Where is the proof of that?

If you want the professional life, find a husband who wants to stay home or don't have kids. It really isn't that hard.

And find the US in a population growth crisis as faces Europe . Economic crisis so a few kids get raised by their 'rents?