Alberta Advantage' does not include toddlers and working moms

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Exact opposite actually. If anything it is judging those who don't put the effort that I think I needed to put in.

Get help now, before you end up in a Criminal Minds episode.

I let my kid watch those BTW. He's 4. We watch that and porn while we clean our guns.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

Get help now, before you end up in a Criminal Minds episode.

I let my kid watch those BTW. He's 4. We watch that and porn while we clean our guns.

Good strong argument, I see you read the study and bring up some compelling, well thought out points that are worth discussion.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

First sentence is wrong again, it's not random ... it's rather specific actually.

Anyway not sure what you are asking ... what does better off mean? Financially?

Nope, it's random. You've failed to discuss the income factor.

Yes.

Agreed? Thank You!

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Good strong argument, I see you read the study and bring up some compelling, well thought out points that are worth discussion.

There 4 pages of people trying to present arguments. And most of them actually agreed with your original thoughts. Sadly, you've no idea what you're speaking about, and not interested in listening.

So this is more fun.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

There 4 pages of people trying to present arguments. And most of them actually agreed with your original thoughts. Sadly, you've no idea what you're speaking about, and not interested in listening.

So this is more fun.

hmmm the only thing accurate at all in here is your punctuation.

Most DIDN'T agree with the original thoughts, that is what turned this into a long thread.

I've spent about 150 hours with about 1000 kids over the last 14 years so I think I have a little experience with the development of kids.

I have been listening, and of everyone posting only Phonton has had thoughts that I've thought are interesting and worth thinking about ... you and many others just ... well ... say what you said which is nothing.

[Nancy]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

hmmm the only thing accurate at all in here is your punctuation.

Most DIDN'T agree with the original thoughts, that is what turned this into a long thread.

I've spent about 150 hours with about 1000 kids over the last 14 years so I think I have a little experience with the development of kids.

I have been listening, and of everyone posting only Phonton has had thoughts that I've thought are interesting and worth thinking about ... you and many others just ... well ... say what you said which is nothing.

150 hours total spread across 1000 kids? No offense, but that's not a lot of experience.

If you support mothers staying home to care for their children, would you therefore support extending maternity benefits to two or three years?

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Nancy

150 hours total spread across 1000 kids? No offense, but that's not a lot of experience.

If you support mothers staying home to care for their children, would you therefore support extending maternity benefits to two or three years?

Yes of course actually 5. And that is 150 hrs w each kid, total time is about 14 X 150.

[Sylvanfan]

I think the idea of mom stays home with the kids sounds a bit too Leave it to Beaver to me. Why can't people be good at their careers and still be good parents? What if both parents are really good at their career...Is it a great benefit to have someone who's really good at what they do, just drop it for 5-7 years until their kids are in school? Why can't we have top notch child care people who are really good at early child hood care, and be able to make it both accessable, and affordable? Really...if we can all only be great at one thing in life...how the hell would we ever be good parents.....thats about as broad of a skillset as you can get. To blanket parenting as one singular skill seems silly to me. I hope that the government and private bussiness both take initiatives to try and keep a skilled working mother in the work force. Given how short workers are these days...would be a damn shame to lose a lot of them who offer great skills to the work force to uphold this utopian ideal that mom stays home to raise the kids.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I think the idea of mom stays home with the kids sounds a bit too Leave it to Beaver to me. Why can't people be good at their careers and still be good parents? What if both parents are really good at their career...Is it a great benefit to have someone who's really good at what they do, just drop it for 5-7 years until their kids are in school? Why can't we have top notch child care people who are really good at early child hood care, and be able to make it both accessable, and affordable? Really...if we can all only be great at one thing in life...how the hell would we ever be good parents.....thats about as broad of a skillset as you can get. To blanket parenting as one singular skill seems silly to me. I hope that the government and private bussiness both take initiatives to try and keep a skilled working mother in the work force. Given how short workers are these days...would be a damn shame to lose a lot of them who offer great skills to the work force to uphold this utopian ideal that mom stays home to raise the kids.

Basically akin to the old saying: Fast, cheap, right. Pick two.

There is a tradeoff with everything, and in this case, the woman in the story doesn't want to pay for her decisions, both to resume her career, and to use a care facility that charges three grand a month. Wah wah wah.

[Cowboy89]

I'm starting to get a little sick of hearing stuff from people like: Alberta Advantage doesn't include insert the phrase "hardworking" (because it certainly sounds a lot better than "dog F*&#ing") Insert shameless self-interested demographic here. Only to hear the only justification being that in our free world, that also suffers from a lack of limitless resources, sometimes tradeoffs have to be made to get things done and that certainly a "Hardworking" demographic like Insert Shameless self-interested demographic here somehow deserve the public purse to subsidize something to enable them to have their cake and eat it too. Afterall Insert shameless self-interested demographic here provides Insert overstated contribution to society made by shameless self-interested that's endangered by not getting their cake and eating it too.

This pretty much sums up post-boom Alberta whine from anyone who feels that they should have hit it rich like many others on the basis of nothing other than having maintained their primary residence within the boundaries of a politically defined geographic region.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

So she gets bored of parenting before the kids are ready to go to school, puts her kids in what looks like to be high-society private academy daycares ($3000 a month??), and complains that she's not getting the Alberta Advantage?

Obviously you don't know how much child care costs. Here in Red Deer it is $900 a month for day care. She has three kids so it would cost her $2700 here. Maybe Edmonton is a little higher. Still, it is almost impossible to find a spot. I know a family that puts there 1 year old in day care only two days a week. Problem is there is no such thing as part time child care (unless you find the right day home), so they pay $900 for 8 days a month. (I know that that doesn't seem very smart, just letting you know what the costs of day care actually are).

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

No, 2 income families should realize that for about 5 years until school starts that raising their own kid is more important than their career. Careers are not more important than kids.

+1 +1 +1 +1 +1.

Our generation will be known by those who dont want to take responsibility for thier own actions, and if someone says anything they will attack their character. Parents sole responsibility in life is their childrem, if you are unable to make that commitment, then dont have kids.

[Metro Gnome]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I'm starting to get a little sick of hearing stuff from people like: Alberta Advantage doesn't include insert the phrase "hardworking" (because it certainly sounds a lot better than "dog F*&#ing") Insert shameless self-interested demographic here. Only to hear the only justification being that in our free world, that also suffers from a lack of limitless resources, sometimes tradeoffs have to be made to get things done and that certainly a "Hardworking" demographic like Insert Shameless self-interested demographic here somehow deserve the public purse to subsidize something to enable them to have their cake and eat it too. Afterall Insert shameless self-interested demographic here provides Insert overstated contribution to society made by shameless self-interested that's endangered by not getting their cake and eating it too.

This pretty much sums up post-boom Alberta whine from anyone who feels that they should have hit it rich like many others on the basis of nothing other than having maintained their primary residence within the boundaries of a politically defined geographic region.

Thank you.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I'm starting to get a little sick of hearing stuff from people like: Alberta Advantage doesn't include insert the phrase "hardworking" (because it certainly sounds a lot better than "dog F*&#ing") Insert shameless self-interested demographic here. Only to hear the only justification being that in our free world, that also suffers from a lack of limitless resources, sometimes tradeoffs have to be made to get things done and that certainly a "Hardworking" demographic like Insert Shameless self-interested demographic here somehow deserve the public purse to subsidize something to enable them to have their cake and eat it too. Afterall Insert shameless self-interested demographic here provides Insert overstated contribution to society made by shameless self-interested that's endangered by not getting their cake and eating it too.

This pretty much sums up post-boom Alberta whine from anyone who feels that they should have hit it rich like many others on the basis of nothing other than having maintained their primary residence within the boundaries of a politically defined geographic region.

Precisely.

The entitlement complex some poeple have in Alberts and Canada is astounding... society should not be on the hook so people can have everything they want without sacrifice.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Precisely.

The entitlement complex some poeple have in Alberta and Canada is astounding... society should not be on the hook so people can have everything they want without sacrifice.

Well stated!

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I'm starting to get a little sick of hearing stuff from people like: Alberta Advantage doesn't include insert the phrase "hardworking" (because it certainly sounds a lot better than "dog F*&#ing") Insert shameless self-interested demographic here. Only to hear the only justification being that in our free world, that also suffers from a lack of limitless resources, sometimes tradeoffs have to be made to get things done and that certainly a "Hardworking" demographic like Insert Shameless self-interested demographic here somehow deserve the public purse to subsidize something to enable them to have their cake and eat it too. Afterall Insert shameless self-interested demographic here provides Insert overstated contribution to society made by shameless self-interested that's endangered by not getting their cake and eating it too.

This pretty much sums up post-boom Alberta whine from anyone who feels that they should have hit it rich like many others on the basis of nothing other than having maintained their primary residence within the boundaries of a politically defined geographic region.

+1 goes without saying (or at least should).

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Precisely.

The entitlement complex some poeple have in Alberts and Canada is astounding... society should not be on the hook so people can have everything they want without sacrifice.

My sentiments exactly. Thus far I've stayed out of this thread because of all the needless mud slinging. My wife and I have made sacrifices in order for her to stay home with the boys, but we wouldn't trade the experience for the world.

The first years of a child's life are so formative; you can't tell me that seeing little Johnny for 1/2 hour at 6:30am, plucking the little bugger out of his sleep because you have to get to work in time, and seeing him for an hour after work before he has to get in the tub and go to bed, is good for a kid.

The kid sees more of the daycare workers than his own parents 5 days a week. And when little Johnny needs a firmer hand because he is pushing his boundaries and testing his limits (as most kids are apt to do), the daycare's hands are usually tied.

Our SUV is nearly five years old, my car is 2 years old and we can't afford a new X-5 or a vacation to the Carribean every winter. Oh, the humanity!!!

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

The first years of a child's life are so formative; you can't tell me that seeing little Johnny for 1/2 hour at 6:30am, plucking the little bugger out of his sleep because you have to get to work in time, and seeing him for an hour after work before he has to get in the tub and go to bed, is good for a kid.

Well, my folks both worked - my father is a teacher and my mother worked in IT for Oil and Gas and made a damn fine living for us doing it - and myself and my siblings were raised with a huge amount of help by hired, live-in nannies.

Making this choice allowed my parents to do the following:
1. Bring in enough money to run a comfortable home.
2. Keep themselves engaged, occupied and satisfied with their own lives, outside the home.

I firmly believe that parents having lives outside the home in which they are happy and engaged produces better parents. To say nothing of the fact that, because they were freed from things like daily child care and moderate cleaning and household tasks, they were prepared for and capable of devoting attention and energy to myself and my siblings during the evenings and weekends we spent together.

It`s one thing to criticize people for an un-earned sense of entitlement, but to criticize the way people choose to parent - especially in the form of generalizations - is unfair and irresponsible.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by driveway

Well, my folks both worked - my father is a teacher and my mother worked in IT for Oil and Gas and made a damn fine living for us doing it - and myself and my siblings were raised with a huge amount of help by hired, live-in nannies.

In my opinion, that makes a huge difference in the discipline department. Plus, you're not carting the kids around like luggage at all sorts of ungodly hours: they at least recognize a home as a home, and not as a place where they sleep.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I've spent about 150 hours with about 1000 kids over the last 14 years so I think I have a little experience with the development of kids.

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

And that is 150 hrs w each kid, total time is about 14 X 150.

Sorry, this confuses me. You said 150 hours per kid for 1000 kids? That is 150 000 hours... Considering there are only 8760 hours in a year I think you numbers are off. If you mean 150 hours per year that is a little more believable to me but still leaves you far from experienced in child raising.