3 ms·
The fact that they tracked into a high paying job despite their risk-aversion and limited ability to think abstractly seems to vindicate their parent's method o
by spamizbad 8y ago
The fact that they tracked into a high paying job despite their risk-aversion and limited ability to think abstractly seems to vindicate their parent's method of raising children.
Most parents aren't trying to raise the next brilliant artist, entrepreneur, or intellectual[1]. They just want their kids to have a stable, safe, happy life.
[1] And those that try often don't know what they're doing and end up inflicting emotional damage, so the best case: A successful but absolutely miserable adult.
- awat 8y agoI agree to a certain extent that if replicating an upper middle class lifestyle is the parenting goal this can be successful. The big concern I have with that parenting model is antedoctoally these seem to be the people I have seen fall the hardest when dealing with adversity. For someone who had a long linear career progression a lay-off or temporary underemployment sucks and could cause a lifestyle downsizing but is manageable. For the person who’s entire existence expects xxx,xxx income that’s where foreclosures on very nice homes and bankruptcy happen.
- redsparrow 8y agoIt may vindicate the parent's method, but only up to the point where their child gets the job. It seems that the system will let the coddled individual get that far. I wonder what happens to the coddled people after that. Right now they probably have a hard time, but maybe the system is evolving to let those people, at least in some industries, stay in their bubble. (I hope not...)