This is the terrible economic Pain we are feeling?

[Anonymous]

Submitted by DrChaos on April 3, 2008 – 5:24pm.

One thing which I know is true:

Children have no idea whether the house they’re in is rented or owned unless somebody tells them. There’s no need to. And they don’t care.

Umm, yeah…Until the owner tells you you have to “move”. Then you can bet your bottom dollar the kids will care, dude.

As long as you can afford the home, owning a home is always better than renting when you have children. Always.

[Anonymous]

Submitted by surveyor on April 3, 2008 – 5:09pm.

Let’s look at the definition of correlation. It states that casuality is ONE of the ways a correlation is made.

Now your statement says that “correlation does not imply causation”. Actually, I beg to differ. Correlation DOES IMPLY causation.

Yeah, but the keyword here is “ONE”. Causality is only one of the ways a correlation is made, there are others; Therefore correlation does NOT imply causality. DR is right in this case, dude.

[Anonymous]

Submitted by surveyor on April 3, 2008 – 5:09pm.

Let’s look at the definition of correlation. It states that casuality is ONE of the ways a correlation is made.

Now your statement says that “correlation does not imply causation”. Actually, I beg to differ. Correlation DOES IMPLY causation.

Yeah, but the keyword here is “ONE”. Causality is only one of the ways a correlation is made, there are others; Therefore correlation does NOT imply causality. DR is right in this case, dude.

[Anonymous]

Submitted by surveyor on April 3, 2008 – 5:09pm.

Let’s look at the definition of correlation. It states that casuality is ONE of the ways a correlation is made.

Now your statement says that “correlation does not imply causation”. Actually, I beg to differ. Correlation DOES IMPLY causation.

Yeah, but the keyword here is “ONE”. Causality is only one of the ways a correlation is made, there are others; Therefore correlation does NOT imply causality. DR is right in this case, dude.

[Anonymous]

Submitted by surveyor on April 3, 2008 – 5:09pm.

Let’s look at the definition of correlation. It states that casuality is ONE of the ways a correlation is made.

Now your statement says that “correlation does not imply causation”. Actually, I beg to differ. Correlation DOES IMPLY causation.

Yeah, but the keyword here is “ONE”. Causality is only one of the ways a correlation is made, there are others; Therefore correlation does NOT imply causality. DR is right in this case, dude.

[Anonymous]

Submitted by surveyor on April 3, 2008 – 5:09pm.

Let’s look at the definition of correlation. It states that casuality is ONE of the ways a correlation is made.

Now your statement says that “correlation does not imply causation”. Actually, I beg to differ. Correlation DOES IMPLY causation.

Yeah, but the keyword here is “ONE”. Causality is only one of the ways a correlation is made, there are others; Therefore correlation does NOT imply causality. DR is right in this case, dude.

[afx114]

If you are going to say that owning a house leads to an improved childhood, you might as well say that owning a BMW or owning a 60″ flat screen improves your childhood. Its not the owning of stuff, its the *ability* to own stuff, including health care, medicine, educational tools, etc that improves a childhood. Saying that owning a house is itself an indicator of a successful childhood is missing the forrest for the trees.

[afx114]

If you are going to say that owning a house leads to an improved childhood, you might as well say that owning a BMW or owning a 60″ flat screen improves your childhood. Its not the owning of stuff, its the *ability* to own stuff, including health care, medicine, educational tools, etc that improves a childhood. Saying that owning a house is itself an indicator of a successful childhood is missing the forrest for the trees.

[afx114]

If you are going to say that owning a house leads to an improved childhood, you might as well say that owning a BMW or owning a 60″ flat screen improves your childhood. Its not the owning of stuff, its the *ability* to own stuff, including health care, medicine, educational tools, etc that improves a childhood. Saying that owning a house is itself an indicator of a successful childhood is missing the forrest for the trees.

[afx114]

If you are going to say that owning a house leads to an improved childhood, you might as well say that owning a BMW or owning a 60″ flat screen improves your childhood. Its not the owning of stuff, its the *ability* to own stuff, including health care, medicine, educational tools, etc that improves a childhood. Saying that owning a house is itself an indicator of a successful childhood is missing the forrest for the trees.

[afx114]

If you are going to say that owning a house leads to an improved childhood, you might as well say that owning a BMW or owning a 60″ flat screen improves your childhood. Its not the owning of stuff, its the *ability* to own stuff, including health care, medicine, educational tools, etc that improves a childhood. Saying that owning a house is itself an indicator of a successful childhood is missing the forrest for the trees.

[DWCAP]

The thing I learned reading up on this subject is that alot of people confuse what is good for children with atributes that are comonly found with home ownership. Children do best under stable, loving households with active/attentive parents. Weither they pay rent or morgage is irrelevant, as long as all the bills are paid and constantant problems of insufficient money are not present in the house they will be fine. Higher income people tend to have more time and resources to dedicate to their household and children than lower income people, and this brings more stable atmospheres that allow for greater success. Ownership may be a common way to identify a stable household but it in no means is a qualification for one. Infact lower income (maybe just younger/less experienced) parents may do BETTER as renters if they are able to dedicate more resources to their childs upbringing by a reduced rent payment vs a morgage.

Whats most important is not the status of Owner or Renter, but the quality of the household the child is reared in and the level of dedication of the parents to the success of their child.

[DWCAP]

The thing I learned reading up on this subject is that alot of people confuse what is good for children with atributes that are comonly found with home ownership. Children do best under stable, loving households with active/attentive parents. Weither they pay rent or morgage is irrelevant, as long as all the bills are paid and constantant problems of insufficient money are not present in the house they will be fine. Higher income people tend to have more time and resources to dedicate to their household and children than lower income people, and this brings more stable atmospheres that allow for greater success. Ownership may be a common way to identify a stable household but it in no means is a qualification for one. Infact lower income (maybe just younger/less experienced) parents may do BETTER as renters if they are able to dedicate more resources to their childs upbringing by a reduced rent payment vs a morgage.

Whats most important is not the status of Owner or Renter, but the quality of the household the child is reared in and the level of dedication of the parents to the success of their child.

[DWCAP]

The thing I learned reading up on this subject is that alot of people confuse what is good for children with atributes that are comonly found with home ownership. Children do best under stable, loving households with active/attentive parents. Weither they pay rent or morgage is irrelevant, as long as all the bills are paid and constantant problems of insufficient money are not present in the house they will be fine. Higher income people tend to have more time and resources to dedicate to their household and children than lower income people, and this brings more stable atmospheres that allow for greater success. Ownership may be a common way to identify a stable household but it in no means is a qualification for one. Infact lower income (maybe just younger/less experienced) parents may do BETTER as renters if they are able to dedicate more resources to their childs upbringing by a reduced rent payment vs a morgage.

Whats most important is not the status of Owner or Renter, but the quality of the household the child is reared in and the level of dedication of the parents to the success of their child.

[DWCAP]

The thing I learned reading up on this subject is that alot of people confuse what is good for children with atributes that are comonly found with home ownership. Children do best under stable, loving households with active/attentive parents. Weither they pay rent or morgage is irrelevant, as long as all the bills are paid and constantant problems of insufficient money are not present in the house they will be fine. Higher income people tend to have more time and resources to dedicate to their household and children than lower income people, and this brings more stable atmospheres that allow for greater success. Ownership may be a common way to identify a stable household but it in no means is a qualification for one. Infact lower income (maybe just younger/less experienced) parents may do BETTER as renters if they are able to dedicate more resources to their childs upbringing by a reduced rent payment vs a morgage.

Whats most important is not the status of Owner or Renter, but the quality of the household the child is reared in and the level of dedication of the parents to the success of their child.

[Author]

Posts