It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: DanDanDat
Here's my question for you..
How do you tell the difference between your kid really needing help and your kid needing to learn responsibility in today's world?
Wheres the line drawn?
When you draw the line do you involve yourself in your child's life or do you send them off on their own to solve their problems alone?
originally posted by: schuyler
originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
You might not realize this either, but in most countries of the world poverty is much higher and standards of living are lower. You can't afford to have everyone living alone in most countries.
Furthermore, this was true in America and Europe not too long ago. Around the time of the American colonies, the economic level was such that people living there had the average income, including purchasing price parity, of Africans today.
Thanks for those gems. See my sig.
originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby
who WOULDN'T let their child move back in with them if they needed help? (I do not have a grown child for the record, but if I did I would obviously help them if they needed it.)
Obviously. That's a fairly comfortable position for you to take. That's called "having no dog in this fight" but weighing in anyway at no cost. You SAY you'd do that, but what if you had to, and you did not have an extra couple of grand to feed them? You're being pretty cavalier with my money. The issue is not just providing needed help. The issue is a lifestyle choice not based on need, but based on attitude. I see a lack of ambition, a lack of wanting to tackle the issues because it's just easier to live with Mom & Dad. In other words, is that "help" necessary, or is it just the path of least resistance? Is this the result of nefarious NWO conditioning or is it simply bad choices? Did you take out student loans to get a B.A. in English only to turn up your nose at a job with McDonalds? Like John Wayne said. "Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid."
The parents did their job. They raised the kids. They didn't think they'd have to raise the kids until age 50 and jeopardize their own retirement to do so. That's what the original article was addressing. It doesn't really matter what some "other" cultures do or did. An "extended family" situation is probably more common than not, anthropologically speaking, but that's not the way it is here.
What I see is kids making stupid choices where the parents have been careful and frugal. Then the kids turn around and see the parents are doing okay and expect the parents to bail them out. So the parents wind up losing their own position to bail the kids. And the kids have learned nothing.