Alberta Advantage' does not include toddlers and working moms

[habernac]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Well to me almost anyone who WANTED to be a good parent, or really WANTED to be good at something ... can. If you dedicate yourself to something you can be good at it. I wasn't naturally good at connecting with 10 year olds but after some committment I figured that out ... and now have a large folder full of letters from parents thanking me for being about to communicate with their kids in ways nobody has ... if you are truly dedicated to something ... you can figure it out. So to me a parent is still a better option than a institution (special needs kids and other unique situations notwithstanding).

You are right it's tough to use blanket statements, but when it all boils down, society has now decided that careers are more important than parenting. To me someone who is at home has a more important 'career' than anyone else on the planet ... but that view is becomming more and more of a minority, which is sad ... and to me, selfish.

I've just told you the opposite, but you ignored it. We both work because we have to to afford to live in a booming city. We spend as much time as we can with our's, but in the end, we need two paychecks to make ends meet. The career is secondary, neither of us is married to our jobs. Could we do it on one? sure. But I'm not sure we'd all get along so well living in a one bedroom apartment.

In a perfect world, we'd all have a parent home all the time to look after the little ones. That was made all but impossible when Imperial Oil moved it's head office here and the housing market went bananas.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

I've asked before in this thread and I'm going to have to ask again: Can you PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE provide some kind of link to studies showing that kids that go to daycare centres become juvenile delinquents, or as the other poster stated, murderers?

You seem to be pinning your argument on anecdotal "evidence" and I want to see some hard proof.

In fairness, where in Flames in 07's comment that you quoted did he argue that kids that go to daycare centres become "juvenile delinquents"?

All he said was that parents do a better job parenting than an institution does. That seems reasonable to the point of being obvious.

[EVERLAST]

okay so I guess I shouldnt say anything but here it goes.

I am 40 and have a wife and a 2 year old. The wife doesnt drive and cannot work because of illness. Its been that way for the last 5 years.

I have a good job and am greatful for it but we are just barely making it by and there are allot of people out there that feel that they are entitled to something from everybody else. Take my ex wife who for the last 9 years has soaked me for child support on a now 21 yr old college student (who is NOT mine) and I pay for my 12 year old that lives with mom. Just using that as an example.

I see this CRAP and wonder now if I am brain damaged b/c before today I NEVER THOUGHT I should be entitled to a dime. I figured there were people out there that were always gonna be worse off than my fibromyalgic a$$ and that I should just suck it up and be quiet.

WHATAFRIGGIN JOKE....................Shut the *&^% up lady you aint entitled to jack until you've walked a millimeter in my shoes.

I think most people are good but this crap just really gets me goin. sheesh.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Well to me almost anyone who WANTED to be a good parent, or really WANTED to be good at something ... can.

Sweet, my goal of being a particle physicist is within my grasp!

If you dedicate yourself to something you can be good at it. I wasn't naturally good at connecting with 10 year olds but after some committment I figured that out ... and now have a large folder full of letters from parents thanking me for being about to communicate with their kids in ways nobody has ... if you are truly dedicated to something ... you can figure it out. So to me a parent is still a better option than a institution (special needs kids and other unique situations notwithstanding).

Wanting, being dedicated, and just working at it aren't always enough, especially with something as time sensitive as a developing toddler or preschooler.

That's great that you have good skills with 10 year olds, but that's not the same as raising a kid from day one. Depending on the example given by the grandparents, often commitment is NOT enough to figure it out.

There's a place for institutionalized child care. I'm not a proponent of it as a replacement for parents as you seem to be saying anyone who does it is, but I think its useful and does not have the negative impact that you are saying it does.

You are right it's tough to use blanket statements, but when it all boils down, society has now decided that careers are more important than parenting. To me someone who is at home has a more important 'career' than anyone else on the planet ... but that view is becomming more and more of a minority, which is sad ... and to me, selfish.

I don't think that view is nearly as prevalent as you think it is. Anything beyond your opinion to support that?

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

To me someone who is at home has a more important 'career' than anyone else on the planet .

So why cheapen it by suggesting that your few hours a week with 10 year olds is almost the same or gives you any insight inot being a parent. Or that wanting to be good at it must mean doing it the way you would...but don't.

seriously man...i can't figure out if you're niave, if you're looking for some kind of medal, or if you're overcompesating for your own guilt or something.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In fairness, where in Flames in 07's comment that you quoted did he argue that kids that go to daycare centres become "juvenile delinquents"?

All he said was that parents do a better job parenting than an institution does. That seems reasonable to the point of being obvious.

It's not in what I quoted. It is in post #16 where he said that kids that go to daycare are fat, do not respect authority and are poorly socialized. Do you agree with that statement?

It does not seem reasonable to the point of being obvious.... at least not to me. I have not seen a study to suggest that children are less well off going to daycare than having a parent stay home with them. You can't just say "oh, well it's obvious" and leave it at that.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

So why cheapen it by suggesting that your few hours a week with 10 year olds is almost the same or gives you any insight inot being a parent. Or that wanting to be good at it must mean doing it the way you would...but don't.

seriously man...i can't figure out if you're niave, if you're looking for some kind of medal, or if you're overcompesating for your own guilt or something.

You completely missed the point ... let me know where I'm comparing dealing with 10 year old with full time parenting. You are just jumping to conclusions.

I was pointing out that if someone wants to do something well, they can if they work hard enough at it. I can give you a different example if that makes you feel better.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by photon

Sweet, my goal of being a particle physicist is within my grasp!

ya cause that's the same thing ... particle physicist and parenting require about the same capacity. But even with your extreme and irrelavant example yes you could if you worked hard enough at it.

Originally Posted by photon

There's a place for institutionalized child care. I'm not a proponent of it as a replacement for parents as you seem to be saying anyone who does it is, but I think its useful and does not have the negative impact that you are saying it does.

Many do ... most do if you think that's a minority of cases that is where we'd disagree, I haven't done a study but I'd be shocked if the majority of kids in childcare are there because their parents had no other option.

Originally Posted by photon

I don't think that view is nearly as prevalent as you think it is. Anything beyond your opinion to support that?

Can't think of anything better than this thread. At least 2 if not more people refer to staying at home as inferior to having a career.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by habernac

I've just told you the opposite, but you ignored it. We both work because we have to to afford to live in a booming city. We spend as much time as we can with our's, but in the end, we need two paychecks to make ends meet. The career is secondary, neither of us is married to our jobs. Could we do it on one? sure. But I'm not sure we'd all get along so well living in a one bedroom apartment.

In a perfect world, we'd all have a parent home all the time to look after the little ones. That was made all but impossible when Imperial Oil moved it's head office here and the housing market went bananas.

You are quoting something that was not even a reply to you, so yes it was ignoring what you said ... but since you have stuck your nose it:

It's your choice to live in a booming city. It's a free country, you choose your lifestyle to a degree much higher than you are giving credit for.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

It's not in what I quoted. It is in post #16 where he said that kids that go to daycare are fat, do not respect authority and are poorly socialized. Do you agree with that statement?

It does not seem reasonable to the point of being obvious.... at least not to me. I have not seen a study to suggest that children are less well off going to daycare than having a parent stay home with them. You can't just say "oh, well it's obvious" and leave it at that.

I didn't say that ... this is just another example of you putting words in my mouth. Imagine how smart you must feel when you put words in other peoples mouth. If you want to argue a position fine, but all you do is lie about what I say. What I said is that this is a trend ... and in related news so is the popularity of institutionalized parenting.

So just for your clarity so you don't find another opportunity to lie about what I say:

I think the trends are linked. Not hard wired for every single kid ... but overall the two trends are linked.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

ya cause that's the same thing ... particle physicist and parenting require about the same capacity. But even with your extreme and irrelavant example yes you could if you worked hard enough at it.

You did say "or really WANTED to be good at something", I can only reply to what you say, not what you mean.

And I would say parenting is harder than physics in some ways, in physics at least when you run an experiment you know the result right away, and it's consistent. And the results don't change depending on which proton you use.

Many do ... most do if you think that's a minority of cases that is where we'd disagree, I haven't done a study but I'd be shocked if the majority of kids in childcare are there because their parents had no other option.

Well I usually try to base how I think about things on more than "I'd be shocked if", so forgive me if I don't agree.

Can't think of anything better than this thread. At least 2 if not more people refer to staying at home as inferior to having a career.

Which posts are those?

[photon]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

It's your choice to live in a booming city. It's a free country, you choose your lifestyle to a degree much higher than you are giving credit for.

So would you say taking a child away from grandparents, cousins, aunts, uncles is a good thing?

That's the problem when you make everything black and white...

[photon]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I think the trends are linked. Not hard wired for every single kid ... but overall the two trends are linked.

That's a common logical fallacy; correlation is not the same as causation. You'll have to provide some evidence if you want to maintain there's a link between the two.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

So just for your clarity so you don't find another opportunity to lie about what I say: I think the trends are linked. Not hard wired for every single kid ... but overall the two trends are linked.

To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to. Okay, you said in post 16 that you believe there is a direct correlation between fat, disrespectful and socially maladjusted kids and daycare. Is *THAT* accurate?

If so, I want to see some kind of study that backs that up.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to. Okay, you said in post 16 that you believe there is a direct correlation between fat, disrespectful and socially maladjusted kids and daycare. Is *THAT* accurate?

If so, I want to see some kind of study that backs that up.

No, it's not ToMAYto ToMAHto, there is a large difference, although I'd understand why you'd ignore it.

http://www.econ.ubc.ca/kevinmil/rese...2005.final.pdf

Here's a start, first study I found on the topic. Actually the second, the first linked child care to increased risk to cancer, which tells me like most things you'll find studies that will say almost anything.

I just go on my own interaction with hundreds and hundreds of kids and noting both the shift in overall behavior AND in particular those that have dedicated full time parents.

It's a long read but the summary at the front says:
The introduction of universal, highly-subsidized childcare in Quebec in the late 1990s provides an opportunity to address these issues. We carefully analyze the impacts of Quebec’s “$5 per day childcare” program on childcare utilization, labor supply, and child (and parent) outcomes in two parent families. We find strong evidence of a shift into new childcare use, although approximately one third of the newly reported use appears to come from women who previously worked and had informal arrangements. The labor supply impact is highly significant, and our measured elasticity of 0.236 is slightly smaller than previous credible estimates. Finally, we uncover striking evidence that children are worse off in a variety of behavioral and health dimensions, ranging from aggression to motor-social skills to illness. Our analysis also suggests that the new childcare program led to more hostile, less consistent parenting, worse parental health, and lower-quality parental relationships.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I don't' have kids because we decided if we were to have kids we believe someone had to stay home ... and neither of us wanted to.

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Well to me almost anyone who WANTED to be a good parent, or really WANTED to be good at something ... can. If you dedicate yourself to something you can be good at it.

So you bottled out of having kids as neither of you were prepared to make a sacrifice and you just didn't want it enough.

Then you come on here and judge those that put in the effort.

Brillant!

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by photon

Which posts are those?

Posts #11 and #24.

As for proof I posted a link to a study which was the first I found, probably because it's from UBC, therefore close to here (I believe Google uses proximity as a criteria for results) I'd link to more but I don't think that will do anything, you could probably find some that say that day daycare prevents alien attacks, so I probably isn't worth my time to read through a dozen studies when I'm sure people will just write them off because it would be rather inconvenient to think "what if" any of it is true.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Bagor

So you bottled out of having kids as neither of you were prepared to make a sacrifice and you just didn't want it enough.

Then you come on here and judge those that put in the effort.

Brillant!

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

I know raising kids is hard work, probably moreso than some which is why we decided not to have any.

Anymore conclusions that are the opposite of the truth you'd like to try?

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Anymore conclusions that are the opposite of the truth you'd like to try?

Well saying as this appears to be the let's throw out random judging of people thread.

I conclude that by having two earners in our household that we (or indeed any household with two earners) is on average better off than the average single earning household.

Agree with that?

[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?

Also, I'm pretty much done with dealing with people who are looking for the opportunity to put words in my mouth and make up what my argument must be ... rather than discussing if there is actually a correlation or not. Which strikes me as the obvious reply that only one person has actually tried to address.

If you have a point you want to lead me down just PM me.