- This topic has 490 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 3 months ago by
5yes.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 30, 2011 at 4:31 PM #701193May 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM #700008
eavesdropper
Participant[quote=briansd1]Bob Schieffer said be nice to your kids. They will be the ones choosing the nursing homes.[/quote]
Not worried about that, Brian. I’ve been convinced for years that euthanasia will become legal when the majority of baby boomers reach age 68 or 70.
Mark my words. Most of us didn’t raise our kids with a strong sense of responsibility to others, including the family unit. Where would we expect them to get it? From watching old episodes of “The Waltons” or “Little House on the Prairie”? “The Real McCoys”?
Nah, our goose is cooked (geese are cooked?). Payback’s gonna be a bitch for the “Me” generation.
May 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM #700104Participant[quote=briansd1]Bob Schieffer said be nice to your kids. They will be the ones choosing the nursing homes.[/quote]
Not worried about that, Brian. I’ve been convinced for years that euthanasia will become legal when the majority of baby boomers reach age 68 or 70.
Mark my words. Most of us didn’t raise our kids with a strong sense of responsibility to others, including the family unit. Where would we expect them to get it? From watching old episodes of “The Waltons” or “Little House on the Prairie”? “The Real McCoys”?
Nah, our goose is cooked (geese are cooked?). Payback’s gonna be a bitch for the “Me” generation.
May 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM #700692Participant[quote=briansd1]Bob Schieffer said be nice to your kids. They will be the ones choosing the nursing homes.[/quote]
Not worried about that, Brian. I’ve been convinced for years that euthanasia will become legal when the majority of baby boomers reach age 68 or 70.
Mark my words. Most of us didn’t raise our kids with a strong sense of responsibility to others, including the family unit. Where would we expect them to get it? From watching old episodes of “The Waltons” or “Little House on the Prairie”? “The Real McCoys”?
Nah, our goose is cooked (geese are cooked?). Payback’s gonna be a bitch for the “Me” generation.
May 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM #700840Participant[quote=briansd1]Bob Schieffer said be nice to your kids. They will be the ones choosing the nursing homes.[/quote]
Not worried about that, Brian. I’ve been convinced for years that euthanasia will become legal when the majority of baby boomers reach age 68 or 70.
Mark my words. Most of us didn’t raise our kids with a strong sense of responsibility to others, including the family unit. Where would we expect them to get it? From watching old episodes of “The Waltons” or “Little House on the Prairie”? “The Real McCoys”?
Nah, our goose is cooked (geese are cooked?). Payback’s gonna be a bitch for the “Me” generation.
May 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM #701198Participant[quote=briansd1]Bob Schieffer said be nice to your kids. They will be the ones choosing the nursing homes.[/quote]
Not worried about that, Brian. I’ve been convinced for years that euthanasia will become legal when the majority of baby boomers reach age 68 or 70.
Mark my words. Most of us didn’t raise our kids with a strong sense of responsibility to others, including the family unit. Where would we expect them to get it? From watching old episodes of “The Waltons” or “Little House on the Prairie”? “The Real McCoys”?
Nah, our goose is cooked (geese are cooked?). Payback’s gonna be a bitch for the “Me” generation.
May 30, 2011 at 5:12 PM #700013Participant[quote=walterwhite]Friends just paid a small fortune to have their runaway kid kidnapped and taken to military type school out of state. Sad. When you have kids they’re yours forever.
What about recalcitrant teens? Give em the boot? Juvenile hall? [/quote]
Precisely the problem, scaredy. We fail to spend the time and effort necessary to raise our children properly. They act out. We ignore it, and, instead, buy them a new iPad or a car. They act out in a louder, more destructive way. We still try to ignore it, but the law won’t let us. We then find someone who will handle the problem for us, even if we have to shell out a lot of dough for it.
It’s so much easier to simply keep indulging them or ignoring them. I mean, no one ever told us that we’d have to touch these little creatures, or spend time actually listening to them. I mean, I had a kid to give ME unconditional love.
[quote=walterwhite] If an 18 yo were an adult we’d let her drink booze
[/quote]I’m not endorsing underage drinking, but my feeling is, if our country is willing to send an 18 year-old off to die in a war, they should also give him or her the right to walk into a bar and buy a drink. Just my opinion.
Anyway, what’s the difference? We give them cell phones, so that they can kill people while they text and drive. Why not booze?
[quote=walterwhite] of course the reverse is true too. If you got depressed or lost yr job and couldn’t get another one you wouldn’t lean on anyone in your family right?[/quote]
Absolutely you should be able to lean on people in your family when you have a reversal of circumstances. However, I think that many of us are talking about adult kids who are performing “leaning” of a one-way nature, and sucking their parents dry financially and emotionally and physically. Of course, many of the parents have their own issues, which is why they have “entitled” kids in the first place.
While we’re on the subject of entitlement, I’m tired of hearing many of the 20-to-30 age group bitch about what the baby boomers have left them. I can’t speak for how their parents may have fucked them up. But so many of them are bitching because they can’t get well-paying jobs, or because they have a degree in 1200 BC Middle-African Ceramics but are forced to work as a bank teller. Someone needs to tell them to shut up and grow up. The employment situation was no better in the 1970s and early 1980s. The economy sucked, and most people had to go out and get some (any) work experience to build up a resume. (Sorry, but I’ve been steaming ever since I read the thread about the “poor” law school and other graduates who can’t get $150K – $200K per year jobs to pay off their ridiculous school loans. Puh-leeeeze!)
May 30, 2011 at 5:12 PM #700109Participant[quote=walterwhite]Friends just paid a small fortune to have their runaway kid kidnapped and taken to military type school out of state. Sad. When you have kids they’re yours forever.
What about recalcitrant teens? Give em the boot? Juvenile hall? [/quote]
Precisely the problem, scaredy. We fail to spend the time and effort necessary to raise our children properly. They act out. We ignore it, and, instead, buy them a new iPad or a car. They act out in a louder, more destructive way. We still try to ignore it, but the law won’t let us. We then find someone who will handle the problem for us, even if we have to shell out a lot of dough for it.
It’s so much easier to simply keep indulging them or ignoring them. I mean, no one ever told us that we’d have to touch these little creatures, or spend time actually listening to them. I mean, I had a kid to give ME unconditional love.
[quote=walterwhite] If an 18 yo were an adult we’d let her drink booze
[/quote]I’m not endorsing underage drinking, but my feeling is, if our country is willing to send an 18 year-old off to die in a war, they should also give him or her the right to walk into a bar and buy a drink. Just my opinion.
Anyway, what’s the difference? We give them cell phones, so that they can kill people while they text and drive. Why not booze?
[quote=walterwhite] of course the reverse is true too. If you got depressed or lost yr job and couldn’t get another one you wouldn’t lean on anyone in your family right?[/quote]
Absolutely you should be able to lean on people in your family when you have a reversal of circumstances. However, I think that many of us are talking about adult kids who are performing “leaning” of a one-way nature, and sucking their parents dry financially and emotionally and physically. Of course, many of the parents have their own issues, which is why they have “entitled” kids in the first place.
While we’re on the subject of entitlement, I’m tired of hearing many of the 20-to-30 age group bitch about what the baby boomers have left them. I can’t speak for how their parents may have fucked them up. But so many of them are bitching because they can’t get well-paying jobs, or because they have a degree in 1200 BC Middle-African Ceramics but are forced to work as a bank teller. Someone needs to tell them to shut up and grow up. The employment situation was no better in the 1970s and early 1980s. The economy sucked, and most people had to go out and get some (any) work experience to build up a resume. (Sorry, but I’ve been steaming ever since I read the thread about the “poor” law school and other graduates who can’t get $150K – $200K per year jobs to pay off their ridiculous school loans. Puh-leeeeze!)
May 30, 2011 at 5:12 PM #700697Participant[quote=walterwhite]Friends just paid a small fortune to have their runaway kid kidnapped and taken to military type school out of state. Sad. When you have kids they’re yours forever.
What about recalcitrant teens? Give em the boot? Juvenile hall? [/quote]
Precisely the problem, scaredy. We fail to spend the time and effort necessary to raise our children properly. They act out. We ignore it, and, instead, buy them a new iPad or a car. They act out in a louder, more destructive way. We still try to ignore it, but the law won’t let us. We then find someone who will handle the problem for us, even if we have to shell out a lot of dough for it.
It’s so much easier to simply keep indulging them or ignoring them. I mean, no one ever told us that we’d have to touch these little creatures, or spend time actually listening to them. I mean, I had a kid to give ME unconditional love.
[quote=walterwhite] If an 18 yo were an adult we’d let her drink booze
[/quote]I’m not endorsing underage drinking, but my feeling is, if our country is willing to send an 18 year-old off to die in a war, they should also give him or her the right to walk into a bar and buy a drink. Just my opinion.
Anyway, what’s the difference? We give them cell phones, so that they can kill people while they text and drive. Why not booze?
[quote=walterwhite] of course the reverse is true too. If you got depressed or lost yr job and couldn’t get another one you wouldn’t lean on anyone in your family right?[/quote]
Absolutely you should be able to lean on people in your family when you have a reversal of circumstances. However, I think that many of us are talking about adult kids who are performing “leaning” of a one-way nature, and sucking their parents dry financially and emotionally and physically. Of course, many of the parents have their own issues, which is why they have “entitled” kids in the first place.
While we’re on the subject of entitlement, I’m tired of hearing many of the 20-to-30 age group bitch about what the baby boomers have left them. I can’t speak for how their parents may have fucked them up. But so many of them are bitching because they can’t get well-paying jobs, or because they have a degree in 1200 BC Middle-African Ceramics but are forced to work as a bank teller. Someone needs to tell them to shut up and grow up. The employment situation was no better in the 1970s and early 1980s. The economy sucked, and most people had to go out and get some (any) work experience to build up a resume. (Sorry, but I’ve been steaming ever since I read the thread about the “poor” law school and other graduates who can’t get $150K – $200K per year jobs to pay off their ridiculous school loans. Puh-leeeeze!)
May 30, 2011 at 5:12 PM #700845Participant[quote=walterwhite]Friends just paid a small fortune to have their runaway kid kidnapped and taken to military type school out of state. Sad. When you have kids they’re yours forever.
What about recalcitrant teens? Give em the boot? Juvenile hall? [/quote]
Precisely the problem, scaredy. We fail to spend the time and effort necessary to raise our children properly. They act out. We ignore it, and, instead, buy them a new iPad or a car. They act out in a louder, more destructive way. We still try to ignore it, but the law won’t let us. We then find someone who will handle the problem for us, even if we have to shell out a lot of dough for it.
It’s so much easier to simply keep indulging them or ignoring them. I mean, no one ever told us that we’d have to touch these little creatures, or spend time actually listening to them. I mean, I had a kid to give ME unconditional love.
[quote=walterwhite] If an 18 yo were an adult we’d let her drink booze
[/quote]I’m not endorsing underage drinking, but my feeling is, if our country is willing to send an 18 year-old off to die in a war, they should also give him or her the right to walk into a bar and buy a drink. Just my opinion.
Anyway, what’s the difference? We give them cell phones, so that they can kill people while they text and drive. Why not booze?
[quote=walterwhite] of course the reverse is true too. If you got depressed or lost yr job and couldn’t get another one you wouldn’t lean on anyone in your family right?[/quote]
Absolutely you should be able to lean on people in your family when you have a reversal of circumstances. However, I think that many of us are talking about adult kids who are performing “leaning” of a one-way nature, and sucking their parents dry financially and emotionally and physically. Of course, many of the parents have their own issues, which is why they have “entitled” kids in the first place.
While we’re on the subject of entitlement, I’m tired of hearing many of the 20-to-30 age group bitch about what the baby boomers have left them. I can’t speak for how their parents may have fucked them up. But so many of them are bitching because they can’t get well-paying jobs, or because they have a degree in 1200 BC Middle-African Ceramics but are forced to work as a bank teller. Someone needs to tell them to shut up and grow up. The employment situation was no better in the 1970s and early 1980s. The economy sucked, and most people had to go out and get some (any) work experience to build up a resume. (Sorry, but I’ve been steaming ever since I read the thread about the “poor” law school and other graduates who can’t get $150K – $200K per year jobs to pay off their ridiculous school loans. Puh-leeeeze!)
May 30, 2011 at 5:12 PM #701203Participant[quote=walterwhite]Friends just paid a small fortune to have their runaway kid kidnapped and taken to military type school out of state. Sad. When you have kids they’re yours forever.
What about recalcitrant teens? Give em the boot? Juvenile hall? [/quote]
Precisely the problem, scaredy. We fail to spend the time and effort necessary to raise our children properly. They act out. We ignore it, and, instead, buy them a new iPad or a car. They act out in a louder, more destructive way. We still try to ignore it, but the law won’t let us. We then find someone who will handle the problem for us, even if we have to shell out a lot of dough for it.
It’s so much easier to simply keep indulging them or ignoring them. I mean, no one ever told us that we’d have to touch these little creatures, or spend time actually listening to them. I mean, I had a kid to give ME unconditional love.
[quote=walterwhite] If an 18 yo were an adult we’d let her drink booze
[/quote]I’m not endorsing underage drinking, but my feeling is, if our country is willing to send an 18 year-old off to die in a war, they should also give him or her the right to walk into a bar and buy a drink. Just my opinion.
Anyway, what’s the difference? We give them cell phones, so that they can kill people while they text and drive. Why not booze?
[quote=walterwhite] of course the reverse is true too. If you got depressed or lost yr job and couldn’t get another one you wouldn’t lean on anyone in your family right?[/quote]
Absolutely you should be able to lean on people in your family when you have a reversal of circumstances. However, I think that many of us are talking about adult kids who are performing “leaning” of a one-way nature, and sucking their parents dry financially and emotionally and physically. Of course, many of the parents have their own issues, which is why they have “entitled” kids in the first place.
While we’re on the subject of entitlement, I’m tired of hearing many of the 20-to-30 age group bitch about what the baby boomers have left them. I can’t speak for how their parents may have fucked them up. But so many of them are bitching because they can’t get well-paying jobs, or because they have a degree in 1200 BC Middle-African Ceramics but are forced to work as a bank teller. Someone needs to tell them to shut up and grow up. The employment situation was no better in the 1970s and early 1980s. The economy sucked, and most people had to go out and get some (any) work experience to build up a resume. (Sorry, but I’ve been steaming ever since I read the thread about the “poor” law school and other graduates who can’t get $150K – $200K per year jobs to pay off their ridiculous school loans. Puh-leeeeze!)
May 31, 2011 at 12:16 AM #700072CA renter
Participant[quote=eavesdropper]
AN, I can’t speak for John, but I think that he is like many of us on this thread that are against giving educated and able-bodied adult children a totally free ride….
I have no problem with kids who remain at home because rents are too high, or because of job loss, or just because they want to. But I’ve always expected them to be contributing members of the family unit if they live here, and that doesn’t change when they’re 18 or 25 or 35. I would never “throw my kid out” because he wants to save money on rent or because he lost his job, or because I think he needs to live on his own because he’s 18. But if my adult kid was telling me to f–k off, or was “borrowing” my money or credit cards because he was “short on funds”, or was refusing to look for a job at the same time he was refusing to do any household errands or tasks, he would be escorted to the door with his luggage, and asked to return his key (my feeling is that if my kid wants to be treated as a guest instead of a contributing member of the household, I’ll treat him as a guest.) But my kids were all raised to be contributing members of a family, and, in the process, developed and acquired the skills to cope with adult responsibilities on their own.[/quote]
What you’ve pointed out is key: we’re not talking about “throwing out” decent, hard-working kids who are trying to better their lives. We’re talking about not enabling the twitchy-thumbed video game addicts — and their TV/computer-addicted counterparts — who believe they are entitled to sit on the couch all day, eating and drinking their parents’ food, and using their home (and all the comforts therein) without feeling the slightest inclination to pay or work for any of it.
May 31, 2011 at 12:16 AM #700169Participant[quote=eavesdropper]
AN, I can’t speak for John, but I think that he is like many of us on this thread that are against giving educated and able-bodied adult children a totally free ride….
I have no problem with kids who remain at home because rents are too high, or because of job loss, or just because they want to. But I’ve always expected them to be contributing members of the family unit if they live here, and that doesn’t change when they’re 18 or 25 or 35. I would never “throw my kid out” because he wants to save money on rent or because he lost his job, or because I think he needs to live on his own because he’s 18. But if my adult kid was telling me to f–k off, or was “borrowing” my money or credit cards because he was “short on funds”, or was refusing to look for a job at the same time he was refusing to do any household errands or tasks, he would be escorted to the door with his luggage, and asked to return his key (my feeling is that if my kid wants to be treated as a guest instead of a contributing member of the household, I’ll treat him as a guest.) But my kids were all raised to be contributing members of a family, and, in the process, developed and acquired the skills to cope with adult responsibilities on their own.[/quote]
What you’ve pointed out is key: we’re not talking about “throwing out” decent, hard-working kids who are trying to better their lives. We’re talking about not enabling the twitchy-thumbed video game addicts — and their TV/computer-addicted counterparts — who believe they are entitled to sit on the couch all day, eating and drinking their parents’ food, and using their home (and all the comforts therein) without feeling the slightest inclination to pay or work for any of it.
May 31, 2011 at 12:16 AM #700757Participant[quote=eavesdropper]
AN, I can’t speak for John, but I think that he is like many of us on this thread that are against giving educated and able-bodied adult children a totally free ride….
I have no problem with kids who remain at home because rents are too high, or because of job loss, or just because they want to. But I’ve always expected them to be contributing members of the family unit if they live here, and that doesn’t change when they’re 18 or 25 or 35. I would never “throw my kid out” because he wants to save money on rent or because he lost his job, or because I think he needs to live on his own because he’s 18. But if my adult kid was telling me to f–k off, or was “borrowing” my money or credit cards because he was “short on funds”, or was refusing to look for a job at the same time he was refusing to do any household errands or tasks, he would be escorted to the door with his luggage, and asked to return his key (my feeling is that if my kid wants to be treated as a guest instead of a contributing member of the household, I’ll treat him as a guest.) But my kids were all raised to be contributing members of a family, and, in the process, developed and acquired the skills to cope with adult responsibilities on their own.[/quote]
What you’ve pointed out is key: we’re not talking about “throwing out” decent, hard-working kids who are trying to better their lives. We’re talking about not enabling the twitchy-thumbed video game addicts — and their TV/computer-addicted counterparts — who believe they are entitled to sit on the couch all day, eating and drinking their parents’ food, and using their home (and all the comforts therein) without feeling the slightest inclination to pay or work for any of it.
May 31, 2011 at 12:16 AM #700905Participant[quote=eavesdropper]
AN, I can’t speak for John, but I think that he is like many of us on this thread that are against giving educated and able-bodied adult children a totally free ride….
I have no problem with kids who remain at home because rents are too high, or because of job loss, or just because they want to. But I’ve always expected them to be contributing members of the family unit if they live here, and that doesn’t change when they’re 18 or 25 or 35. I would never “throw my kid out” because he wants to save money on rent or because he lost his job, or because I think he needs to live on his own because he’s 18. But if my adult kid was telling me to f–k off, or was “borrowing” my money or credit cards because he was “short on funds”, or was refusing to look for a job at the same time he was refusing to do any household errands or tasks, he would be escorted to the door with his luggage, and asked to return his key (my feeling is that if my kid wants to be treated as a guest instead of a contributing member of the household, I’ll treat him as a guest.) But my kids were all raised to be contributing members of a family, and, in the process, developed and acquired the skills to cope with adult responsibilities on their own.[/quote]
What you’ve pointed out is key: we’re not talking about “throwing out” decent, hard-working kids who are trying to better their lives. We’re talking about not enabling the twitchy-thumbed video game addicts — and their TV/computer-addicted counterparts — who believe they are entitled to sit on the couch all day, eating and drinking their parents’ food, and using their home (and all the comforts therein) without feeling the slightest inclination to pay or work for any of it.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.