ncoday Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 We can argue contributory factors till the cows come home, suffice to say yes chocolates in themselves don't kill you but certain help with the race to obesity and early mortality. Yes the school is teaching a healthy diet, what you eat outside of school wasn't dictated to the parents. Not sure where this idea that people looking out for your wellbeing are dictating how you live, seems like common sense but I suspect a deep ingrained irrational fear of government (save for when you actually need them and then they are ok). Simply put, I don't trust the government at all. I have never had reason to trust the government regardless of whether it is a repulican or democrat in office. Too often we are foregoing personal responsibility for governmental regulation. Here is an example: How is it that a young person is old enough at 18 to fight and die for our country, but not old enough to: - Drink Alcohol in most areas. {Have to be at least 21 in most areas | Yes, I know there are some places that allow drinking at 18 in the US, but they are very few} - Be elected President {Have to be at least 35} - Purchase a privately owned handgun {Have to be at least 21} I am sure there are others, but cannot think of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memphis Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Simply put, I don't trust the government at all. I have never had reason to trust the government regardless of whether it is a repulican or democrat in office. Too often we are foregoing personal responsibility for governmental regulation. Here is an example: How is it that a young person is old enough at 18 to fight and die for our country, but not old enough to: - Drink Alcohol in most areas. {Have to be at least 21 in most areas | Yes, I know there are some places that allow drinking at 18 in the US, but they are very few} - Be elected President {Have to be at least 35} - Purchase a privately owned handgun {Have to be at least 21} I am sure there are others, but cannot think of them. Their is a difference between not trusting certain decisions the government makes or questioning their actions, and being so paranoid that you think everything the "gubment" does is out to get me. How about this, explain exactly what ulterior motive the government would have in promoting a healthy diet outside of the obvious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Depicus Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Simply put, I don't trust the government at all. I have never had reason to trust the government regardless of whether it is a repulican or democrat in office. Too often we are foregoing personal responsibility for governmental regulation. It's wise not to trust the government, having worked for them the levels of incompetence are truly stunning. However one teacher is not the government. If you want to get mad at idiotic teachers http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-31035847 makes you wonder how they ever got their job in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncoday Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 It's wise not to trust the government, having worked for them the levels of incompetence are truly stunning. However one teacher is not the government. If you want to get mad at idiotic teachers http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-31035847 makes you wonder how they ever got their job in the first place. It may be different in other places, but here in Oregon they are. Teachers at public schools are employed by the local government and participate in the state government pension plan. Granted, they are not federal level government employees, but also when I say I don't trust the government, that is not restricted to just the federal level, state and local governments are included. Here is an example of the utmost stupidity, teachers defending another teacher who molested a student: http://nypost.com/2013/09/13/school-attendance-drops-after-teachers-defend-child-molester/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memphis Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 It may be different in other places, but here in Oregon they are. Teachers at public schools are employed by the local government and participate in the state government pension plan. Granted, they are not federal level government employees, but also when I say I don't trust the government, that is not restricted to just the federal level, state and local governments are included. Here is an example of the utmost stupidity, teachers defending another teacher who molested a student: http://nypost.com/2013/09/13/school-attendance-drops-after-teachers-defend-child-molester/ You can't point to that one incident as a basis for your irrational paranoia What would be better is to show a mtive the goverent would have that causes you to distrust them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 You can't point to that one incident as a basis for your irrational paranoia What would be better is to show a mtive the goverent would have that causes you to distrust them. Too many incidents to list - read the frackin' news. The only "motives" are gross incompetence, and many levels of governments need to please public labor unions instead of the general citizenry. As a result of these government screws up most of what it touches. Big Dig, Obamacare, so much fraud prosecutors can't keep up (Detroit, Chicago, NY state, ad infinitum) are all symptoms of the same core disease. There are exceptions like core of the interstate highway system, which is decades old, but the K-12 public school system in a large portion of the US isn't one of them. Look where US students place vs. the world, if you dare. So are our colleges and universities in terms of bang per buck and failure rates. Their costs are insanely out of control, their priorities questionable and their quota-driven candidate selection systems guarantee failure for the unqualified that are accepted while turning away qualified students that don't fit the PC driven criteria. And that's the short version. Being fundamentally suspicious of governments motives and competency isn't paranoia, it's a survival skill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Depicus Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Too many incidents to list -... Being fundamentally suspicious of governments motives and competency isn't paranoia, it's a survival skill. While I don't disagree with you, yet Americans keep voting them in time and time again. Can you blame the pigs when you keep filling the trough ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 That's why many of us are so riled up - and the sheeple are only beginning to get it. Some propose term limits, but their effectiveness is inconsistant. We've done that in Michigan's legislature. What you end up with is a lot of inexperienced legislators who lean too hard on, and tend to follow the advice of, unelected staffers and other outsiders. Its trading one problem for another. It also turns out good legislators who you WANT to stick around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmeunit Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 I'm going to guess because you are American that your grasp of the English language is somewhat below par, now you see how insulting people in a debate gets us nowhere and for you information I won it in 1997 and again in 2004. Ok to get back to the question, you are a good parent if you let your child choose their lunch but you are a bad parent if your child dictates what she has for lunch, I'm aware there is only subtle difference but that makes all the difference. Now I'm not sure where you get that this girl was making good decisions, I'm guessing if you lived of KFC then processed meat and chocolate are perhaps an improvement or maybe I just don't understand the American diet, maybe you have gone so extreme that chocolate is now one of your healthy options. When did I insult anyone? Also, it was explained that one bar was for her, so I hardly see how one bar is bad for someone when you have NO IDEA what she eats the rest of the time. And she also doesn't dictate what she eats. Compromising sometimes, is not dictating. Maybe you should look at your own language? Jim K 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmrd Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Maybe it was her cheat day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncoday Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 You can't point to that one incident as a basis for your irrational paranoia What would be better is to show a mtive the goverent would have that causes you to distrust them. Actually, I believe the other way. The government should give me a reason to trust them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Zagadka Subscriber² Posted February 1, 2015 Subscriber² Share Posted February 1, 2015 "... she's a very independent second grader," he told ABC News. Not going to get into the rest of this, but that is just... that isn't how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmeunit Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Not going to get into the rest of this, but that is just... that isn't how it works. Not that this is the case, but if there are kids that graduate college in there early teens, I don't see how you can say this with certainly. I know that's an extreme example, but you have no idea how this kid is raised or how she takes on responsibility. I have personally known a second grader that was more well-behaved and acted more "adult" that most adults I know. Very well-spoken and intelligent as well. I can't say that he knew the proper way to eat as I never tracked his meals, but I wouldn't put it past him to be able to chose what he eats. Jim K 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Our youngest, 15 now, was 8 going on 25. Ditto our grandson. Smart as razors, mature beyond their years and both taking college credit courses before middle school. You never can tell. Jim K 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Depicus Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Our youngest, 15 now, was 8 going on 25. Ditto our grandson. Smart as razors, mature beyond their years and both taking college credit courses before middle school. You never can tell. Sadly we all see our own children with rose tinted classes, many a mass murderers mother has wept that her "boy" would never do something like that. A good test of whether a child can be "a very independent second grader" would be to let her live on her own and see how she got on. As much as we would like to think 8 year old children are independent and adult smart, they are not, however clever we think they might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compl3x Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Nobody can really be objective when it comes to evaluating their own kids, and you can't blame them, they are their kids. It's why so many parents get agitated and upset when they are told their kid is having problems or falling behind; they don't want to hear it. Kids are rarely as smart or mature or creative or talented as their parents insist they are. Depicus 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts