Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But, it is. You have to want to be in poverty. It's a choice that people make.
I'm glad you liked my post, but I'm going to disagree with you here. For most people, poverty is the default program in our brains. That's because poverty and short term gratification tend to go hand in hand. The short term program in our brains goes for survival mode. In the course of human history, what's considered a basic middle class lifestyle in America was an unimaginably luxurious way of life 100 years ago, let alone a few thousand years ago. It takes a lot of effort to override that natural poverty program in our brains.
When a society elevates instant gratification over deferred gratification at almost every turn, you're going to have more poverty and more of a wealth/income gap.
All of these "articles" seem to think poverty is something that is "done"...
the first and only step to being wealth, step 1) get rich step 2) get on with your life
the author seems to think all the baby boomers are wealthy because they did it in the "right" order...
By the time you finish step 1 it will be too late for step 2. Unfortunately, children today are raised in concentration camps behind wire fences, and are not exposed to a wide variety of adults. Mature relationships are a learned skill that are modeled by the adult community. When they are surrounded by a couple of adults supervising a horde of gutter snipes, they don't have a chance.
A 2 parent family is better than a single parent. An extended family living close together is better than a 2 parent family.
If you aren't getting on with your life by the time you are 18, you are way behind the curve.
I used to see polls that the least desired women are the ones that had a kid out of wedlock. Probably isn't politically correct today but most likely still true.
I used to see polls that the least desired women are the ones that had a kid out of wedlock. Probably isn't politically correct today but most likely still true.
The least desirable are the ones who have multiple kids out of wedlock, then the ones who have one kid out of wedlock. If you really want to irritate her, refer to her kid(s) as baggage. Chances are you don't care, because you already wrote her off.
OK, you have a point .... why do you think so many out-of-wedlock babies are being born.
I still would tell my own kids that having a child out of wedlock is not a smart thing to do. Their seems to be a mountain of evidence that shows it is detrimental to long-term economic stability and success.
Personally i think lack of relevant sex education and readily available/easily accessible conceptions can account for it. We all know abstinence only, which is STILL being taught, doesn't work. Yet we do nothing to change that. We prevent teens from getting sex ed when they are actually, you know, having sex while also preventing them from getting contraceptions that could help with preventing pregnancies.
I lived in a city where sex ed was taboo and there were virtually no possible ways for teens to get birth control and, as a result, this city happens to have an incredibly high teen pregnancy rate! I did a bit of research and found that what the city was doing is a recipe for young parents.
Honestly i don't think anyone thinks having a child early is the smart thing, but the same cities with these issues also seem to be aggressively against birth control and talking about safe sex, so it's like what do you really think is going to happen? The kids are gonna have sex regardless, might as well make a half assed effort to keep them childless until older at least.
And trust me, I've met people older than me who don't know pre *** does have sperm in it and assume pull out method is effective then. Pretty sure if they had some form of reasonable sex ed, I wouldn't be 20 telling 25yos that they aren't right.
Having children before marriage doesn't mean the father isn't irresponsible. I've known many younger single moms receiving payments. Getting married just because your girlfriends decides to have the kid could be a bad decision and bad consequences.
Receiving payments. Hmm.
Back when I sold life insurance for a very short period, my sales pitch was directed to the husband, but my words were shaped for the wife.
I asked this question: "Sir, if you were to die, which household bills would stop?" It might take a moment, but out of the corner of my eye, I'd see the wife's eyes widen.
The fact is that most husbands consume very little of their own paychecks--the vast majority of it goes to the household. So when we talk about "child support payments," we're usually talking about only a small fraction of what the household needs...the departure of the father from the household barely decreases the household requirements.
I wonder what the statistics say about people who get married and have kids young compared to those who wait to marry and have kids when they are older and more financially secure.
Personally i think lack of relevant sex education and readily available/easily accessible conceptions can account for it. We all know abstinence only, which is STILL being taught, doesn't work. Yet we do nothing to change that. We prevent teens from getting sex ed when they are actually, you know, having sex while also preventing them from getting contraceptions that could help with preventing pregnancies.
I lived in a city where sex ed was taboo and there were virtually no possible ways for teens to get birth control and, as a result, this city happens to have an incredibly high teen pregnancy rate! I did a bit of research and found that what the city was doing is a recipe for young parents.
Where do you live? Tehran? Your Walmart doesn't have condoms on the shelves next to the baby oil? You don't have the Internet where you are?
When I was a teenager, the condoms were kept behind the pharmacist's counter and pharmacists wouldn't sell them to teens. We had to catch a bus to the state capital to buy a condom from a machine in the bus station men's rooms. But if we ever got a girl pregnant, we knew marriage was the unavoidable consequence--our own parents would insist on it as well as her parents and everyone in our society.
I work with teens here in Texas, and they're all well aware of the use of condoms and well aware that they can buy them.
However, I'm constantly amazed at the number of young women who don't want to get married, who tell me point blank, "I don't need a man to raise a child."
They are not being kept from facts, they're getting a contrary message from other sources that sound better in their ears.
I used to see polls that the least desired women are the ones that had a kid out of wedlock. Probably isn't politically correct today but most likely still true.
This is true. Women, both unwed mothers and women without children will declare it's unfair for a man to prefer a woman who doesn't already have children.
This is as unreasonable an expectation as those women who declare, "I don't need a man to help me raise a child," and I suspect that idea comes from the same source.
A good marriage places the husband-wife relationship above all other relationships. They must form an unbreakable partnership that not even children can penetrate.
There was a movie a few years ago where a grown daughter gets into an argument with her father, and her mother chimes on on the father's side. The young woman exclaims, "You always take Dad's side!" Her mother responds, "That's because when you leave, he's the one who stays."
But unwed mothers typically form that bond with their children--subsequent men can never have the relationship with a wife that they deserve to have. The women make that perfectly clear to them at the outset of the relationship.
Most men don't want to walk deliberately into that drama, nor, reasonably, should they.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
