joG
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2013
- Messages
- 43,839
- Reaction score
- 9,655
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
But you don't, I understand?
Yes I would.
Who employs someone to clean their house 40 hrs a week? Where are they living, a 60,000 sq foot pig sty? People usually have a maid come in once a week or every two weeks for a few hours. Unless they are very wealthy...even if they are hiring illegals.
Not the most well-thought out idea that was proposed there. :doh
Btw, it sounds like you are underpaid.
The federal govt will have cameras in your children's bedrooms to make sure you're not reading them any books. In fact they'll hire their own professional readers to send the reading of stories to the children right into their bedrooms via TV. Every child should be read to by a govt reader. :roll: Its only fair, and think of the children.
If you read the actual original article it was Plato's idea in breaking up the family and Aristotle who disagreed the premise. These were ancient philosophers rather than modern left / right politicians in the society that gave us democracy. It would also have been the times where different Greek republics were famed for bringing their kids (nee Soldiers) and citizens up differently.
The article is about two modern philosophers debating the original (2000+ year old idea / argument)
The federal govt will have cameras in your children's bedrooms to make sure you're not reading them any books. In fact they'll hire their own professional readers to send the reading of stories to the children right into their bedrooms via TV. Every child should be read to by a govt reader. :roll: Its only fair, and think of the children.
You really don't know people that employ people full time in their homes or to drive them?
But then you do pay the part time jobbers you have at least the $20 plus social dues and all, I hope.
And this guy is an "academic"!
Not surprisingly, that is not at all what the people are saying. In fact they say the opposite. Really easy to find these things out just by reading the actual source.
The amazing thing is the link to the ABC story is in your post, and yet you have clearly not read it. Why do you insist on letting others do your thinking for you? Hint: here is a quote from the story:
The whole thing is basically two philosophers looking at what they think of as difficult concepts and tradeoffs, you know, philosophically. They do not in any way seem to be advocating policy or anything like that, just looking at the effects of children of family activities.
Actually, it is what the article is saying. It is saying that reading to your child gives them an unfair advantage over the kids who are not read to.
The "philosopher" who is puking up this crap appears to be working off the assumption that social inequality is a bad thing.
I see you avoided all the real problems that has caused no books in poor households. Failed Liberalism.
People living in poverty have access to free books through schools and libraries. The problem isn't that they can't get the books --- it's that some parents don't give a damn about their kids having books at home.
No Cookies | dailytelegraph.com.au
THE ABC has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an “unfair advantage” over less fortunate children.
“Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?” asks a story on the ABC’s website.
“Should parents snuggling up for one last story before lights out be even a little concerned about the advantage they might be conferring?”
The story was followed by a broadcast on the ABC’s Radio National that also tackled the apparently divisive issue of bedtime reading.
“Evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,” British academic Adam Swift told ABC presenter Joe Gelonesi.
Gelonesi responded online: “This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps — in the interests of levelling the playing field — bedtime stories should also be restricted.”
Contacted by The Daily Telegraph, Gelonesi said the bedtime stories angle was highlighted by the ABC “as a way of getting attention”.
Asked if it might be just as easy to level the playing field by encouraging other parents to read bedtime stories, Gelonesi said: “We didn’t discuss that.”
Swift said parents should be mindful of the advantage provided by bedtime reading.
“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.Professor Frank Oberklaid, from the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute said he was bewildered by the idea.
“It’s one of the more bizarre things I’ve heard,” he said. “We should be bringing all kids up to the next level.”
So let me get this straight.
Good parents who take the time to read to their kids when they go to bed should stop, so the lazy, shiftless parents who don't bother, won't have disadvantaged children?
That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time.
Giving kids free books solves both problems--no books and parents not willing or able to get books.
I see no one on either side of the fence supporting this.
You can get books very cheap at yard sales and used bookstores or get them for free from friends, family, and even some charities. Someone that can't pay a quarter for a kids book at a yards sale has serious money problems.
USC and many of our other conservative posters will blame the liberals for anything.
A lot of Americans have serious money problems.
???
Public library=free
And I bet they can still afford the Public Library.A lot of Americans have serious money problems.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?