Discussion in 'Markets & Economies' started by mmm....shiney!, Jun 17, 2012.
I'll give the English professor say 6 minutes to correct the mis spely word and grammar.If not i have invented a new word and you all will get more Ken Block links.
Tautological ? someones been spending too much time with the dictionary lol
I actually learnt that cool word in first year B.Econ in a an elective Logic subject.It's a great word to say in different accents and when you are drunk.
Try saying it holding your tongue whilst pissed.Its quite hard.
Looks like we've come a perfect circle
Wheel bearings replacement is a prick of a job particularly at night on the way to a race.I have found the best option are replacement hubs with the seats already set and bearings ready to go.
About $60 each for the lot.Now that is something to stack for the future.
The Grey Nomads are all in WA detecting.
As long as there are nuggets to be found the Nomads will have a potential income source once they run out of their own savings and will continue to roam the nations highways for many years to come.
I must admit, it's kind of hard to complain about how tough life is when you can go on a holiday and add a heap of gold to your stack by just picking it up.
(well maybe not "picking it up", there is a little digging involved)
I am selfish. I have no problem with it & never said I wasn't.
My decision to bring children into this world was entirely a selfish decision (as it is for any parent) and I did so accepting that my decision would have a set level of expectations and responsibilities that are a life long commitment and that's the key difference here that you don't seem to appreciate.
I derive immeasurable pleasure from having a close knit family. It gives me a sense of personal pride and accomplishment to note I can not only raise well adjusted, smart and critical thinkers in such a corrupt climate, but also that they appreciate what I give them.
It's a symbiotic, trading principle that I know the majority here bastardise into something evil to explain their own malign attitudes because it's not based on pure, instinctual emotion.
The difference here is that I won't just throw my kids to the wolves like my parents did and tell them to sink or swim. That is the mindset of that generation and even though they will try and claim we are the same, they are finding out quickly they are dead wrong.
As I just said, I derive great personal pleasure from the family unit. It is my source of strength and inspiration. The co-dependence on each other benefits all of us and from this level of mutual respect, comes the light and fluffy ideals that form the basis of life long relationships through love, marriage and family. The emotional and practical can and do tie together.
I don't see my children as batteries for my own self sufficiency and that is a key, fundamental difference in my family and those of my parent's generation.
A generation of people that have held a stranglehold of political power in this country for 40+ years and instituted every policy to benefit themselves (and screw everyone else) and then reserve the outright audacity to say to those they actively undermine 'we were able to do it, stop your bitching and do the same'
It's that level of ignorance, arrogance and petty ideals that have destroyed the foundations of not only mutual respect, but also utterly destroyed the concept for many that the 'traditional' relationship of parent and offspring were bound by an accepted standard.
My commentary noting this breakdown of the social contract and family unit are absolutely not a contradiction on my personal belief system in the slightest, but commentary on the relationship between the status quo and this particular generation's attitude towards it.
This is a step aside from the trader principle which is the only moral, ethical value under MY personal standards... but rather, commenting on what is REALLY the hypocritical nature of the nomad's creed.
Your assumptions and surmations on MY personal ideals are not only misguided, but completely, hopelessly and critically flawed in their foundation and whilst ignorance is logical (as you and many others here never even wanted to try and learn or understand my set of values in the first instance), it's the aggressive dismissal of my commentary that aggrevates me the most.
Not simply because it's wrong, but because it's just yet another attempt to sidestep, denounce and ignore the real issue that they KNOW is wrong, but have been able to mentally block out of their own objective reality - and then expect me to not only appreciate and accept the fact, but also adopt the same values for myself.
I will not bow to the status quo, no matter who makes the claim that I should - nor will I accept any assumption that I have a dual nature personality in denouncing what I apparently preach and condone.
It's two, completely different sets of ideals and my only frustration is that people continue to attack and undermine not only that which they don't understand, but that which they don't even WANT to understand.
My parents are baby boomers - if they shared the attitude that apparently is of ''that generation'' then I and my siblings would have been thrown to the streets years ago and told to sink or swim. Except.... they don't and we weren't.
Like any generation there are parents and children who fit stereotypes but that doesn't mean everyone is like that. I see plenty of generation X and Y parents who are already letting their children sink or swim and some of those kids are barely able to walk!
There are baby boomer parents everywhere who could be living it up in France or travelling around Australia that are not; because they are practically raising their grandkids, looking after elderly parents or still helping their middle aged children get along in life in one way or another. A great many more have no more funds that anyone else and can only dream of spending it all.
That's true. I have a neighbour who still has a lot of his kids at home and has his grand child over most days while the parents work. Extrapolating personal experience to a generalisation will often be wrong.
This is true, and I doubt anyone would criticise them for doing it. I don't think the issue is parents helping their kids, but kids that are whineing losers who have failed to achieve their goals and demand compensation from their parents, who they blame ( maybe rightly ) for the state of the world. My parents left me nothing, they chose to donate their life savings to pokies and bottle shops, and I couldn't care less. It wasn't my money they were spending.
Oh I agree mate, I'm generalising here because it fits the collective angle.
Anyone can lay claim to a specific situation which will undermine the assumption of a generalisation and that's not what I am getting at.
I have absolutely no reservation in beliefs at all that there's plenty of Xers and Ys and so forth who fit non stereotypical generational paradigms too, I think that goes without saying.
But we are not discussing specifics (unless we want to focus in on the usual playing of the man rather than the ball that goes on in forums like this when the points of logic are too difficult to debate any other way) and whilst discussing stereotypes is uncomfortable for many people, there are literally the nature of the beast.
Like it or not, the quality of our society is ruled by the collective and the collective operate on stereotypical ideals.
It's part of a political and social, financial and economic rhetoric and ideals. National policy is based around majority rule and by extention, the conduct of our lives and values (in general) follows suit.
Let's not degrade this discussion by trying to counter the generalised view with specific examples which go against the grain, because it's not only irrelevent, but it detracts of the real premise of the debate.
Just as the title of the thread and linked article are discussing a stereotypical collective, so too does it remain logical to keep the focus of discussion pertaining to a similar line of thinking.
This thread is all about the generalised perception and it's worth bearing this in mind, because exceptions to the rule can be found in *any* debate - but it doesn't automatically disprove the collective theory.
Don't take this as criticism to you Dandee, just gonna give my 2cents.
There is an issue with parenting. Specifically, there is no such thing as parenting education. What happen in this situation is that most of the time parents raise their kids in accordance to their taste/desire/standard/view.
Some stereotypical scenarios:
Cash based and protectionism parenting:
Buys everything, cotton swaddle, protects from everything, gives everything, no pressure to the kids, no behaviour correction. End result: Spoilt brat expecting world to cater to their needs always. Worst teens ever.
Whacks kids for everything the parent doesn't like, drunken abuse, etc. End result: Quite arbitrary, some are psychologically scarred for life and will perpetuate violence, some will stay normal and become "stronger".
Thing is, this is all cause and effect. If people raise kids with all sorts of un-earned privilege, then they never form a concept of earning a privilege. Their whole life, stuff seems to fall from the sky. So it is hard to blame their entitlement psychology on themselves, because the parents contributed to that problem.
The other extreme of throwing the kids to sink or swim is equally insane. If for their whole life they were swaddled, how are they going to swim? Or if this is done too early, it is just age inappropriate, no one in their right mind should ask a 5 year old to work in the mines for money.
A moderation of help, challenge and discipline will go a long way to form a mentally stronger kids and not having an entitled mentality.
Good luck to them, they'll need it seeing as I'm in Queensland
posts 167 and 171 contain a huge number of words.I didn't read them just noticed the massive slab of text.
!67 should be a donation for bandwidth
:lol: My girl just asked me what i was laughing at .
Separate names with a comma.