TLDR: People will always behave relative to the era in which they are born.
TLDR: People will always behave relative to the era in which they are born.
A strong moral center and stable families.
We need the country to retake the moral attitudes of roughly 1950. We have to weed out a lot of degeneracy. Even then it will take time for things to get as good as they were. We also have to remember the power of violence, We have become far to timid as a people.
The former is a term with no meaning, and the latter isn't actually true in any appreciable sense.
So I'm betting you're white?We need the country to retake the moral attitudes of roughly 1950.
Go ask African-American seniors about how awesome the '50s and '60s were, for them.
There are not.
Actually look at single parents and how poorly children from none nuclear families preform compared to their peers on average.
Your denial is part of the problem sadly.
- - - Updated - - -
Again my point on families is sadly powerfully true though you can bury your head in sand I can't force you to accept reality.
Have you ever asked them? Or is this the famous I speak for all minorities speech but you can't?
There are more of every type of family now than there was in the racist, segregationist, 1950s. You are the one in denial, which is why you have to speak in empty bullshit platitudes because your belief system is devoid of any empirical evidence, just your wittle fweelings.
No, you're using unquantifiable terms and trying to make a quantified argument based upon them, which fundamentally cannot work.
I've spoken to people who grew up in that era, yes. And I wasn't suggesting I was "speaking for" anyone.Have you ever asked them? Or is this the famous I speak for all minorities speech but you can't?
In pretty much every quantifiable manner, the world of today is objectively better than it was in the 1950s.
There are more types and each one has been proven to be worse for children then the nuclear family...
- - - Updated - - -
No I am not sadly... The nuclear family has been proven time and time again to be superior you just don't like what that signifies.
Not in wages, crime, poverty, and stability.
Who needs those though right?
I have to agree with you. I think there are some similarities between the 'hard times' of our grandparents and teens now. The current economic situation doesn't allow pushing for the highest achievement and risking failure, it's better to get a stable job (though they hardly even exist anymore) so you can survive.
I think the baby boom generation simply lived to such standards that shouldn't even be possible. That's how all this debt was created to begin with. And now they look down on the current generation and wonder why nobody is getting a good job. But the reality is that the current generation is cleaning up the mess of the previous one.
Could this be a returning cycle? Could the next generation that comes after us be more like the baby boom generation? Time will tell.
It's only "better" than single-parent families, because it should be unsurprising that two parents are better than one. Two people are better able to handle the burden of raising the kids.
Two gay parents are just as good as two hetero parents in a nuclear family; http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...peds.2013-0377
Wages have been improving steadily;Not in wages, crime, poverty, and stability.
Who needs those though right?
The issue people have there is that the wage growth is far lower than productivity growth, meaning that the wealthy have been getting an ever-increasing share, not that wages haven't risen since the '50s. They clearly have.
Crime?
While it was at a lower point in the '50s, it's been declining for decades as it is; the last 30 years show we're going in the right direction, on this issue.
Poverty?
Definitely better than the '50s; it's been waffling a bit but the overall trend has been much-improved.
Stability? That's an unquantifiable nonsense term to begin with.
Last edited by Endus; 2016-05-20 at 04:59 PM.
"El Psy Kongroo!" Hearthstone Moderator
Well, it drifted back to that now after I posted it seems, but for that post I meant, all they argued against was the moral center, and then said that there are stable families. That's not disagreeing that stable families are needed, it's just saying "Well, they're already here".
"El Psy Kongroo!" Hearthstone Moderator
The thing is that they are not... While endus could be right. His own article uses "could be" "Maybe" and "appears" A hell of a lot. Beyond that single parents much to the cost of the child has been on a rise especially among certain minorities.
I am not really being debated or rebuffed. More of I am being faced by open denial...
- - - Updated - - -
How? Your study covers 13 years and admits it is inconclusive inside of it...
Not taking a theory as fact especially one with such a extremely limited sample size isn't outlandish....
What facts am I wrong about exactly? You haven't managed to show that point yet...
You may have missed the post where I broke down how incorrect you were about every other claim you'd made, too.
Also, that one study was an example; the research on this is pretty broad and conclusive;
http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/15/5/241.short
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...00302/abstract
While there's something to be said for providing greater support to single parents, outside of single parenthood, there's nothing "bad" about other family forms beyond the nuclear family.
I did edited posts do that. Production was destroyed once we removed high tariffs and removed the value of local labor. I don't see how outlining the problem proves me wrong but its about the level of argument I expect.
Your new articles have the same flaw as your first... A extremely small sample size and a extremely small number of years. I can't discount that same sex parents are better or worse there simply isn't enough data to prove on way or the other.
Production hasn't been "destroyed".
You keep stating things that are just straight-up false.
Oh no, you claimed they were worse. While providing nothing to back that up. You don't get to play this game, now, and not get called out on it.Your new articles have the same flaw as your first... A extremely small sample size and a extremely small number of years. I can't discount that same sex parents are better or worse there simply isn't enough data to prove on way or the other.
Yes, the western culture is incredibly prosperous and beyond any doubt the most advanced, progressive and humane civilization in history. Secular politics, freedom and advanced sciences & technology have become the trademarks of Western culture, while most other cultures haven't really progressed much since biblical times -- not until gaining and embracing modern Western influences, anyway.
In the light of these facts it's incomprehensible that some people are pursuing agendas that more or less directly contradict the progress, question the ideals and behaviour that have made the West prosperous in the first place, or even directly endanger it. The pinnacle of this idiocy is cultural relativism, a naive belief that all cultures and religions would somehow be equal -- regardless of what kind of values they actually promote -- and that we should just "tolerate" all kind of backwardsness and stupidity in order to not to hurt some savage's or narcisstic SJW's feeeeeeelingsss.
(Gtg, returning to this later.)
Last edited by mmocf7a456daa4; 2016-05-20 at 06:19 PM.