1 2 3
pinchvalve
pinchvalve GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
10/17/11 8:39 a.m.

I was going to do that on my car, but with mom, dad, 2 kids, 2 dogs and 2 cats, I was creating a blind spot!

NGTD
NGTD Dork
10/17/11 12:16 p.m.
Lesley wrote:Whenever I come upon a Subaru wagon, I groan... knowing that it will maintain a speed at least 10-20 below the limit, and usually drift all over the road while doing it.

If you come up behind me, you won't have that happen. Here is what I will be doing this weekend:

ultraclyde
ultraclyde HalfDork
10/17/11 3:38 p.m.

I often see some tanker-sized SUZ whose family collection stretches allllthe way across. Geez, ya schmucks, buy a rubber.

familytruckster
familytruckster Reader
10/17/11 5:24 p.m.
ultraclyde wrote: I often see some tanker-sized SUZ whose family collection stretches allllthe way across. Geez, ya schmucks, buy a rubber.

Yeah, really...Someone hasn't figured out birth control.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/17/11 5:32 p.m.

Some of us HAVE figured out birth control, and CHOOSE big families.

Some of us even LIKE kids!

I realize that may sound strange to some of you.

I actually had surgery to have a vasectomy reversed- just to piss off the "world is over populated" crowd.

aggravator
aggravator New Reader
10/17/11 6:41 p.m.

have you noticed that generally the poor uneducated people have huge family's while the educated people only have one or two kids and these kids are much less likely to become criminals or leaches?

njansenv
njansenv HalfDork
10/17/11 7:06 p.m.

Wow. Trying to pick a fight? At the very least, you sure are living up to your name. Most of the large families I know are quite the opposite....

Brett_Murphy
Brett_Murphy GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
10/17/11 7:21 p.m.

In reply to Lesley:

I don't know what wagons you're following, we haul a$$ around here.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/17/11 7:29 p.m.
aggravator wrote: have you noticed that generally the poor uneducated people have huge family's while the educated people only have one or two kids and these kids are much less likely to become criminals or leaches?

Now there's a ridiculously ethno-centric ultra biased piece of unprovable rubbish opinion.

Completely statistically false.

Oh you mean like the Kennedys, Queen Victoria, Benjamin Franklin, George Foreman, Mark Wahlberg, Celine Dion, Mary Higgins Clark, Justice Antonin Scalia, Queen Anne, Margaret Sanger, Senator Rick Santorum, Mia Farrow, the Von Trapps, the Bush family, Roosevelts, Rockefellers, Johann Sebastian Bach, Danielle Steele, Dolly Parton...

aggravator
aggravator New Reader
10/17/11 8:27 p.m.

stating a few exceptions doesnt mean its false.

how is what i said ethno-centric or biased? i did not mention anything about race.

Yes is an opinion, but is in no way anymore "unprovable rubbish" than your opinion that my statement is false. i know what i see every day when i work with professionals and see every day in the world. that "proves" to me that what I said is true. if Its not there are alot of professional working folk who wont admit they have more than the 2 kids they have pictures of on their desk. or talk about when the issue of kids come up.

I will continue to think that what i said is true until you can prove otherwise (IMO very unlikely) or i see a drastic change in family types during my daily activities.

you really think that its more common for uneducated people to have less than two kids than it is for educated people to have more than 2 kids?

Duke
Duke SuperDork
10/17/11 8:42 p.m.
Will wrote: You talking about those cartoonish family stickers (dad, mom, kids, etc.)?

I used to despise those things - actually, I still do - but they become much more amusing when you think of them as if they were swastikas on the side of a P-51...

gamby
gamby SuperDork
10/17/11 10:06 p.m.
aggravator wrote: stating a few exceptions doesnt mean its false. how is what i said ethno-centric or biased? i did not mention anything about race. Yes is an opinion, but is in no way anymore "unprovable rubbish" than your opinion that my statement is false. i know what i see every day when i work with professionals and see every day in the world. that "proves" to me that what I said is true. if Its not there are alot of professional working folk who wont admit they have more than the 2 kids they have pictures of on their desk. or talk about when the issue of kids come up. I will continue to think that what i said is true until you can prove otherwise (IMO very unlikely) or i see a drastic change in family types during my daily activities. you really think that its more common for uneducated people to have less than two kids than it is for educated people to have more than 2 kids?

I tend to agree w/ this sentiment. Po' folk and family planning don't really seem to coincide too often.

http://library.adoption.com/articles/mothers-educational-level-influences-birth-rate.html

I think the big difference is how soon they start breeding. Thus the glut of fertility drug-induced twins to women in their late-30's. (two sets of my friends have boarded that train). Career/success first, then kids.

Out of all of my friends/relatives around my age, only one has more than 2 kids. He has 5, but he also has a phd.

Grizz
Grizz HalfDork
10/17/11 10:10 p.m.

I wanted to get a bunch and put one guy and a bunch of women on one of my friends cars, seems like he's with a new chick every couple of days.

Matt B
Matt B Dork
10/17/11 10:18 p.m.
Grizz wrote: I wanted to get a bunch and put one guy and a bunch of women on one of my friends cars, seems like he's with a new chick every couple of days.

Either that or part of the "big love" crowd.

bengro
bengro New Reader
10/17/11 10:33 p.m.

I sort of want to get a forester xt manual, get a FMIC, hood with out the scoop, remove the tint, get the base model steel wheels, and then get one of those family stickers on the back and have a pretty awesome sleeper.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/17/11 10:34 p.m.
aggravator wrote: stating a few exceptions doesnt mean its false.

Stating it's true doesn't make it so. Perhaps you can provide a SHRED of evidence?

aggravator wrote: how is what i said ethno-centric or biased? i did not mention anything about race.

Ethnocentric doesn't mean race. Ethnocentrism is the tendency to believe that one's ethnic or cultural group is centrally important, and that all other groups are measured in relation to one's own. You are making ridiculous rash statements based on your own cultural understanding (upper middle class professionals) with no attempt whatsoever of understanding other cultural perspectives. That's ethnocentrism.

aggravator wrote: Yes is an opinion, but is in no way anymore "unprovable rubbish" than your opinion that my statement is false. i know what i see every day when i work with professionals and see every day in the world. that "proves" to me that what I said is true. if Its not there are alot of professional working folk who wont admit they have more than the 2 kids they have pictures of on their desk. or talk about when the issue of kids come up.

You are ruling out entire nations where large families are normal, criminal activity is minimal, and most of the COUNTRY is much smarter and better educated than many of the people you know. How about India? Did you know many European and Scandanavian countries are now offering incentives to encourage larger families?

You statement essentially said this:

poor uneducated= huge families= more likely to be criminals or leaches.

Are you seriously trying to stand on that absurd position?

aggravator wrote: I will continue to think that what i said is true until you can prove otherwise (IMO very unlikely) or i see a drastic change in family types during my daily activities.

You need to get out more. You don't know enough people to come to such conclusions. You are WRONG, and your elitist attitude is very unbecoming.

aggravator wrote: you really think that its more common for uneducated people to have less than two kids than it is for educated people to have more than 2 kids?

I never said that. You didn't either. That is a fairly benign statistical relationship. Your earlier statement equating large families in poverty to criminal behavior and being a "leach" was patently offensive.

You may find this hard to believe, but some large families are rich, some poor families are small, and most poor families are not criminals.

And some of your co-workers with their pretty little pictures of 2 kids on their desk will be convicted of white collar crimes, divorce their wives, and declare bankruptcy so they don't have to pay the people they owe. Talk about being a criminal and a leach.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/17/11 10:39 p.m.
gamby wrote: Out of all of my friends/relatives around my age, only one has more than 2 kids. He has 5, but he also has a phd.

The only thing you are proving to me is that you don't know enough people in the sampling to be able to agree or disagree with anything.

If you knew more large families, you might be better informed to formulate your opinion.

Nobody has shown a statistical correlation between large families and crime. It's hogwash.

Keith
Keith GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
10/17/11 10:39 p.m.
Duke wrote:
Will wrote: You talking about those cartoonish family stickers (dad, mom, kids, etc.)?
I used to despise those things - actually, I still do - but they become much more amusing when you think of them as if they were swastikas on the side of a P-51...

I am totally going to do that now, thank you. SO much more fun.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/17/11 10:49 p.m.

I personally know over 100 families with 5 or more children. Some have 13 or more. One has 18.

I am completely unaware of ANY of them having been convicted of a crime.

That's zero criminals out of more than 500 kids.

Maybe I missed a couple. Still an awfully small percentage.

You may see them as a leach on the planet. I see them as a small army of pretty smart young people who have an enormous capacity to influence positive change. You see them as a liability. I see them as an asset.

Grizz
Grizz HalfDork
10/17/11 10:57 p.m.

I'm poor and I have no children. I've also never been caught so I'm not a criminal

aggravator
aggravator New Reader
10/17/11 11:09 p.m.

ha ha

Grizz
Grizz HalfDork
10/17/11 11:20 p.m.

I'm a high school dropout and I'm not a criminal

gamby
gamby SuperDork
10/17/11 11:35 p.m.
SVreX wrote:
gamby wrote: Out of all of my friends/relatives around my age, only one has more than 2 kids. He has 5, but he also has a phd.
The only thing you are proving to me is that you don't know enough people in the sampling to be able to agree or disagree with anything. If you knew more large families, you might be better informed to formulate your opinion. Nobody has shown a statistical correlation between large families and crime. It's hogwash.

I'm on the "poor people have more kids" side. I said nothing about crime. I agree that crime and education level are very much linked in the big picture.

The last large families I was around were in my grandmother's generation. I know a LOT of people, very few have large families.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/18/11 9:03 a.m.

I am a wealthy man because I have a large family.

It took me a long time to learn that my wealth is not based on my college degrees or my bank account. My wealth is in my children. That was a hard lesson. It took me a lot of years to get past my own "me, me, me" perspective.

FWIW, I also have a pretty good net worth (better than most), and no one in my family has ever been arrested or collected an unemployment or welfare check. Ever.

But I probably make quite a bit less than most people on this board.

92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac SuperDork
10/18/11 9:07 a.m.

Lower education + lower income = more kids. Fact.

http://news.yahoo.com/challenges-loom-world-population-hits-7-billion-040835519.html

1 2 3

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
5rZYzUiLqdzmQK79Vs14d26EEEyR2uTFWvvTkiWNM42mKsCdkAhevzeRfnLwCmku