Tell an opinion you have that is in the strong minority

[Anonymous]

I think euthanasia should be offered to patients upon receiving a diagnosis of Alzheimers, dementia, ALS, Lewy body, etc. It doesn't have to be done right away, but there should be some legally-binding paperwork available that a patient can sign while they're still able to make decisions that gives a designated family member the right to make the call when things have gotten really bad. I really doubt anyone in Generation X or younger is going to want to put that kind of burden on our kids or grandchildren, after watching our parents have to deal with caring for our grandparents, especially because very few of us will have the type of pensions or long-term care plans in place that allow many of today's older generations to pay for nursing care. If I get to the point where I have to start wearing diapers and can't remember the names of my kids, I'm peacing out.

[Anonymous]

I think kids do too many activities. and it is more about the parents' egos - and their need to fill time - than it is about the kids' interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think kids do too many activities. and it is more about the parents' egos - and their need to fill time - than it is about the kids' interests.

I agree, but I think it's more about parents being uncomfortable filling time with their own children.

[Anonymous]

oops. actually we agree!

[Anonymous]

I've been looking at and following the Humans of NY pic re that school in Brooklyn (the Bronx) that the photographer went to and raised money for. I seriously don't get why teachers choose to work in such places and then talk about how tough it is. No -- you are not changing the world.

The fact is that most (not all -- there are exceptions) who live in those areas and attend those schools don't believe in education. I don't fault the kids. I fault the parents. Most (again -- not all) dream that their kid will get drafted to the NFL or the NBA and make millions; they stress that over an education that could let a kid at least go to city/community college, get a job that pays 40-50k and allows you out of the projects. No -- they think it's either NFL money or nothing at all. The US just doesn't have the same emphasis on education that a lot of poor countries don't. I'm not even talking about India and China because they'll be discounted as "Asians are all about education." But even a teacher they interviewed at that school who is from Nigeria said -- students in Nigerian villages are so much poorer and get much less -- they don't get free breakfast; they come to school with no shoes; they sit on the floor all day at school -- yet there is a belief that education will help them uplift in some way and that causes them to WANT the education and work hard; maybe not to a $4 million job but to a $30k job which is still better than where their parents are at now.

But here in the US, you have kids living in the projects, coming to school in top of the line sneakers, being given free breakfast and lunch (at least in NYC) and still not having their homework done or talking back to the teacher or whatever and just not wanting to be in school. And then people make excuses about "they're worried about their home life" or "you don't understand -- it's hard to learn when you're hungry." I'm sure African village children are worried about their home lives too and are hungrier, yet they still make an effort. So yeah -- I blame the parents; and moreso I don't see why any adult with a degree sacrifices his/her life to teach in these schools, earn way less than he/she would in wealthier districts, and put up with this garbage bc they really aren't changing anything. Let's be honest more than half the boys they're teaching will end up in jail or as drug dealers, no matter how much the teachers slave away on that algebra lesson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been looking at and following the Humans of NY pic re that school in Brooklyn (the Bronx) that the photographer went to and raised money for. I seriously don't get why teachers choose to work in such places and then talk about how tough it is. No -- you are not changing the world.

The fact is that most (not all -- there are exceptions) who live in those areas and attend those schools don't believe in education. I don't fault the kids. I fault the parents. Most (again -- not all) dream that their kid will get drafted to the NFL or the NBA and make millions; they stress that over an education that could let a kid at least go to city/community college, get a job that pays 40-50k and allows you out of the projects. No -- they think it's either NFL money or nothing at all. The US just doesn't have the same emphasis on education that a lot of poor countries don't. I'm not even talking about India and China because they'll be discounted as "Asians are all about education." But even a teacher they interviewed at that school who is from Nigeria said -- students in Nigerian villages are so much poorer and get much less -- they don't get free breakfast; they come to school with no shoes; they sit on the floor all day at school -- yet there is a belief that education will help them uplift in some way and that causes them to WANT the education and work hard; maybe not to a $4 million job but to a $30k job which is still better than where their parents are at now.

But here in the US, you have kids living in the projects, coming to school in top of the line sneakers, being given free breakfast and lunch (at least in NYC) and still not having their homework done or talking back to the teacher or whatever and just not wanting to be in school. And then people make excuses about "they're worried about their home life" or "you don't understand -- it's hard to learn when you're hungry." I'm sure African village children are worried about their home lives too and are hungrier, yet they still make an effort. So yeah -- I blame the parents; and moreso I don't see why any adult with a degree sacrifices his/her life to teach in these schools, earn way less than he/she would in wealthier districts, and put up with this garbage bc they really aren't changing anything. Let's be honest more than half the boys they're teaching will end up in jail or as drug dealers, no matter how much the teachers slave away on that algebra lesson.

Choice? Many teachers need work and apply to a dozen districts. One district offers them a job, and a placement the day before school starts.

On another note, many teachers who have taught in urban and suburban settings will tell you that the suburbs are harder because of all the parents who email constantly about "why did Larla get an A-???"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Viewing pornography is the same as having an affair.

not even close. if you're bothered by your SO watching porn that's one thing, but to say they're the same is nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish American society didn't put athletes and those in the entertainment industry on pedestals.

Oh, I completely agree. And don't think they deserve to make the sickening amounts of money they make. Our priorities are completely out of whack.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I think college athlete who pull in major money for universities should be able to make some sort of profit.

Fuck no. The athlete worship in this country is insane. WHO CARES if you can throw a ball, you're not saving lives.

NFL should not be a tax-exempt organization. We should cap players' salaries.

Aside from a free ride and some campus celebrity, unless a player makes it to the pros, college football players at big name schools are used and spit out by the schools. Winning teams make millions of dollars each season for schools without having to pay players.

Aside from a free ride? A free ride has significant monetary value, and I think that's enough as "payment" for college football players. Most of the best players choose schools out of state -- even state schools out of state can be 50k with room and board, food etc. 50k over 4 years is 200k. At D1 schools esp the ones that are football obsessed, players get a lot of free "stuff." I know Penn State the best and know a few guys on that team. They get a ton of free clothing, and I'm not suggesting just a few PSU football sweatshirts. Everything from multiple pairs of sneakers to backpacks to athletic gear to winter coats are provided to them; I'm sure the NCAA has a cap but conservatively I'd say it can't be less than 2k of stuff per year. You could practically move your son into the dorms with one pair of clothing on his back, and the rest would be taken care of. This year the school got all of the football players (and all athletes) i-pads. When they made a bowl game this year, they got a swag bag consisting of the usual sweatshirts/hats etc. but also an apple TV, Bluetooth speakers, and gift cards in addition to a week in NYC; sure they practiced during the week, but they also got to see shows, do touristy things and eat at nice restaurants -- all of which costs money; so there's another 1-2k per player. The university (or maybe the NCAA) has now also decided to provide additional food beyond just providing a meal plan, so there's an endless supply of snacks and drinks available to athletes in their athletic facilities -- so there's another few hundred dollars/month that students don't have to spend on snacks and meal supplements for after practice. While all these "extras" seem small, they add up to about 5k/yr combined -- 20k over 4 years.

I'd say 220k over 4 years is plenty of payment to a football player, even if the program is making millions. If that's not enough for their "talent," they're not compelled to play college ball, they can take their talent straight to the NFL draft if anyone will have them. And remember not every player is a starter that's generating ticket sales; I could see those guys feeling like they deserve more but half the team or more is on the practice squad and they get the same benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think euthanasia should be offered to patients upon receiving a diagnosis of Alzheimers, dementia, ALS, Lewy body, etc. It doesn't have to be done right away, but there should be some legally-binding paperwork available that a patient can sign while they're still able to make decisions that gives a designated family member the right to make the call when things have gotten really bad. I really doubt anyone in Generation X or younger is going to want to put that kind of burden on our kids or grandchildren, after watching our parents have to deal with caring for our grandparents, especially because very few of us will have the type of pensions or long-term care plans in place that allow many of today's older generations to pay for nursing care. If I get to the point where I have to start wearing diapers and can't remember the names of my kids, I'm peacing out.

AGREE AGREE AGREE AGREE!

Did I say I agree? Times 1000!

Dealing with this now… such a burden. I am also "peacing out" before I get to this point.

[Anonymous]

I guess we can all "peace out" in Oregon.

[Anonymous]

i don't have a strong opinion about it, but I struggle with the idea singles who have or adopt children. i admire it in theory, but I also think there is a benefit to kids when they have more than one adult in their lives. I also see that many of the single parents I know use daycare/babysitters a lot so that they can do the things they need or want to do for themselves. That's understandable, but I just don't know how great it is for the kid(s). I'm sure that some of my perspective comes from being the child of divorced parents who spent a lot of time alone when my mom worked and my dad lived in another state.

That said, I MYOB and have and would never say this thought aloud.

[Anonymous]

Michele Obama can't hold a candle to her First Lady predecessors.

[Anonymous]

I understand your post about single parents by choice, but the one I know absolutely adores her sperm donor babies. She is very good about getting the support around her that she needs to make it work. She has male role models who support her, even though they aren't spouses/partners.

She definitely has the "it takes a village" concept in mind.

While a loving 2 parent home is the ideal, I don't think those who do it differently are ruining their kids or anything. As long as you do fill the voids in some way (as I mentioned with my friend having male role models around helping out).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate nicknames. My kid has a name that has no obvious nicknames and if we have more, they'll have short names too.

Preach! I despise nicknames.

Hah, the next of my friends who says they like the name Charlotte, nickname Charlie, is getting a swift kick to the uterus.

I shall prepare myself then --- I have a Charlotte and we call her Chuck or Chuckie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Michele Obama can't hold a candle to her First Lady predecessors.

What? I think she's one of the best we've had. Many of the others were way too dull.