4 ms·

Well, in an attempt to show charity in return at least, I will say this. 1. > are the ones that already lack parental attention, already have trouble making fr

• pas 4y ago
  Parents are always the problem, that's the problem :) Disadvantaged families have a hard time providing the nurture their kids need to overcome the gap. This is an incredibly self-reinforcing cycle, because the more help these kids get the more help other kids get too, so the gal remains. Social status, including all the things from home ownership, how green is your lawn, how big is your investment account to extracurricular activities for admissions (and credentialism) in general - but also the larger labor market too - are all close to zero sum locally. And mobility for disadvantaged groups is ridiculously low, because - again - things like status preserving structures like zoning regulations, school districts, etc.
  • Manu40 4y ago
    > Parents are always the problem, that's the problem Perhaps. But then, when my parents recognized they couldn't sufficiently make ends meet while living in one town; they did the only thing they knew would work. They moved. I know, that's not always possible for everyone, since people tend to have such a 'I can't do X' mindset. But they didn't. They sold everything not truly needed, and made it happen. That meant that we went without some things for a while, while we lived in the bush for a year or so, while dad got his job prospects back in order, and mom got the finances figured out again. I think we sometimes put ourselves in our holes, and that's where some of these gaps come from. Not all of them mind you. Some are just... there. Like you said, when you give to all, it means all move, meaning the gap moves with all. But if more people gave up on trying to live like the Jones, and just did what needs to happen for themselves, then I think that gap would disappear more and more. At least, it worked for us. And we were not a well off family, or anything like that. It required that my mother grow large gardens, go hunting, and get into making crafts and clothes using furs and such. I had squirrel mittens one year. Squirrel, mittens. I shit you not. We also were homeschooled for that year, since the bus route didn't come through that area of the province, and gas prices were going up during a time when the paychecks couldn't cover that kind of expense. But homeschooling could be covered due to government programs, if I understand correctly. (Funny how that works, huh?) So, I totally get what you are trying to get at. I lived it. But unlike many parents out there who basically just give up and blame the government, my parents didn't give up. Oh, they still blamed the government alright; but only for what it was actually responsible for, like causing a recession. (Of which they never will ever admit to lol.) Anyways. I think the best way to end my reply here is to say this. Kids need to experience what life is really like without all the technology, so they can understand how to live life without it. So they can understand how life was like, without it. And quite frankly, I think society would be better off this way anyways, because it would have less kids trying to pretend to be adults online in places they don't belong anyways. Or rather, really shouldn't be in, without some sort of parental supervision. Example: How many Redditors in political subreddits do you think are children? How about Twitter? Should they even be in those places? There are some pretty heavy topics going on there that kids probably shouldn't be partaking in, and should be focusing more on oh, I dunno... Being kids. I know that's probably not something they would like to hear, but I know that, because I didn't much like hearing it either from my parents when I was watching the news as a kid and trying to tell them how to better manage their finances by doing things like stopping fucking smoking. See the parallel? Guess what they told me? Yeah, "Go outside and play."
    • pas 4y ago
      > They sold everything not truly needed, and made it happen. And I think that's the right choice in general. We know many people are too risk-averse (status quo bias, etc). That said uprooting the family and moving to a completely new place won't solve the fundamentals, and definitely won't help with "kid doesn't have friends". (Again, in general, there are obvious exceptions, eg. if kid is bullied moving to a new place at least has a change of helping with that.) > But if more people gave up on trying to live like the Jones, and just did what needs to happen for themselves, then I think that gap would disappear more and more. Yes, agreed, true. Yet at the same time reality is very different :/ > Kids need to experience what life is really like without all the technology Yes, agreed, true 2.0. Yet at the same time what life is really like is that it's full of said technology. Kids need to be prepared for that. > Or rather, really shouldn't be in, without some sort of parental supervision. I think it's already clear that ~90% of people already need some sort of supervision, both in meat and meta and other spaces. It's not about the age IMHO.