jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "
can't be having those greedy kids hoarding all the bedtime stories and using such trivialities to artificially inflate their societal worth... not when poor kids are starving for such stories and winding up as outcasts.
I'll get Bernie sanders on the job.. he's a voice for the little guy.. he can surely bring some equality to the stage here.
Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy
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.You have to allow parents to engage in bedtime stories activities, in fact we encourage them because those are the kinds of interactions between parents and children that do indeed foster and produce these [desired] familial relationship goods.
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.
It costs nothing to read to your child. You don't even have to buy books. Check them out at the library. Oh, but wait - gosh. Taking your kids to the library probably causes a disadvantage to those kids whose parents are too lazy to do even that.
Man, do I hate this "everybody gets a trophy" society that we've evolved into.
Originally Posted by ChomskyOriginally Posted by OrphanSlug