Culture

[wizards8507]

IMO, part of this is more millenials are self centered and don't want to do everything the way their parents did. The other part is the whole "get married and have 3-4 kids" plan is a helluva lot more daunting than it was 20 years ago financially.

Average cost of raising a child (before college) is $180k, we're coming off a nasty recession, and the middle class is struggling.

The "cost of raising a child" figures are fear-mongering bullshit.

 

[wizards8507]

We are actually overdue on our next decline.

Especially when you consider that the current recovery, such as it is, is built on phoney baloney interest rates.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

The "cost of raising a child" figures are fear-mongering bullshit.

Based on what?

 

[wizards8507]

Based on what?

They include things like the cost of a home mortgage as if the only reason anyone would ever buy a house is if they had kids.

 

[pkt77242]

The Week's Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry just published an article titled "America's birth rate is now a national emergency":



Anyone interested in "making America great again" ought to consider marrying young, having a large family, and being a devoted spouse and parent.

I generally agree. Marrying young might be my only quibble but that is because I don't know what you mean by marrying young.

I don't even know what to joke about. This is a serious issue. Semi-related: everyone who compares their pets to children should be slapped.

Sadly I see the contracepting mentality everywhere and too few couples who actually want to have more than 1 or 2 children.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

I know a lot of people who use contraception but have many children (they used it to not get pregnant while they were young, to space their children out and then again once they were done having children). My wife and I generally fit this profile (except the first part though we used it to avoid getting pregnant right after marriage). We have 3 children and are expecting our 4th (and last) early next year. While it is anecdotal, I know many people who fit that general profile.

Obviously some people do use it to not have children at all and while I understand why that can bother some people, I think that it might be a good thing because if they are selfish maybe it is best that they don't have children.

 

[pkt77242]

They include things like the cost of a home mortgage as if the only reason anyone would ever buy a house is if they had kids.

Including some of the mortgage might make sense as you usually need a larger house with multiple children then you would need with just two adults.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I generally agree. Marrying young might be my only quibble but that is because I don't know what you mean by marrying young.

Early 20s. Most of my peers are waiting until their early 30s to get married (if they ever do), and then proceeding to have 1-2 children (if they have any at all). The problems that these trends are going to create will make our current political issues look laughably insignificant.

 

[pkt77242]

Early 20s. Most of my peers are waiting until their early 30s to get married (if they ever do), and then proceeding to have 1-2 children (if they have any at all). The problems that these trends are going to create will make our current political issues look laughably insignificant.

I am a fan of mid 20's marrying. I am not sure if I was mature enough at 22ish but by 25 I was more ready (and that is the age at which I got married).

 

[ACamp1900]

I am a fan of mid 20's marrying. I am not sure if I was mature enough at 22ish but by 25 I was more ready (and that is the age at which I got married).

How old were you when you divorced?

 

[pkt77242]

How old were you when you divorced?

Not happening. I don't really believe in divorce except under extreme situations (e.g. Child abuse).

 

[GoIrish41]

Early 20s. Most of my peers are waiting until their early 30s to get married (if they ever do), and then proceeding to have 1-2 children (if they have any at all). The problems that these trends are going to create will make our current political issues look laughably insignificant.

Mind if I ask what you mean here?

 

[Legacy]

How Minorities Have Fared in States With Affirmative Action Bans

Black enrollment at UF takes a hit

Black students are disappearing from the University of Florida campus at an alarming rate, despite efforts by campus recruiters.

Enrollment of black freshmen dropped more than 50 percent between 2007 and 2013, with a high of 910, or 14 percent of 6,441 freshmen in 2007, compared with 395, or 6.2 percent of 6,370 freshmen in 2013, based on a database maintained by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System.

The Missing Black Students at Elite American Universities

 

[drayer54]

How Minorities Have Fared in States With Affirmative Action Bans

Black enrollment at UF takes a hit



The Missing Black Students at Elite American Universities

It seems that Hispanics are on the up and up in most of those instances. I don't see the problem with the most qualified applicants filling up the universities.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

majority-of-canadians-support-prison-for-opponents-of-transgenderism

I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on the linked article. If this trend continues, it's safe to say martyrdom is drawing nigh.

 

[no.1IrishFan]

majority-of-canadians-support-prison-for-opponents-of-transgenderism

I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on the linked article. If this trend continues, it's safe to say martyrdom is drawing nigh.

84% seems like a shockingly high percentage of Canadians. Not saying the data isn't reliable, just surprised.
I didn't know so many of our neighbors to the north would be willing to toss free speech in the garbage.

 

[Legacy]

majority-of-canadians-support-prison-for-opponents-of-transgenderism

I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on the linked article. If this trend continues, it's safe to say martyrdom is drawing nigh.

Also from Church Militant:
CM EXCLUSIVE: IRISH LESBIANS RETURN, GIVEN STANDING OVATION AT CATHOLIC MASS

When they went on Irish radio to complain about Murphy, he became the target of death threats from the Irish Republican Army. "I have been threatened by members of the local Sinn Fein IRA Party not to go into my local town unless I have a 'death wish,'" Murphy had told Church Militant.

 

[IrishBroker]

majority-of-canadians-support-prison-for-opponents-of-transgenderism

I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on the linked article. If this trend continues, it's safe to say martyrdom is drawing nigh.

Insane.

But just as insane are the remarks down here about people who don't agree with the climate change narrative. Some have mentioned jail time (I think it was CA?)

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Also from Church Militant:
CM EXCLUSIVE: IRISH LESBIANS RETURN, GIVEN STANDING OVATION AT CATHOLIC MASS

I'm uncertain what this means in relation to what I posted? You are one of the more mysterious posters. You often post interesting links but don't offer your own take (or rarely do).

I'm interested in your thoughts on either article.

 

[Legacy]

I'm uncertain what this means in relation to what I posted? You are one of the more mysterious posters. You often post interesting links but don't offer your own take (or rarely do).

I'm interested in your thoughts on either article.

I expect that everyone on this board starts off with their own opinions. I post links and not often my opinion, because I feel that respects their choices based on their values and perceptions.

As for the Canadian article, it's worthwhile to review Canada's hate speech laws and court decisions. Hate Speech Laws in Canada

Sections 318, 319, and 320 of the Code forbid hate propaganda.[3] "Hate propaganda" means "any writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide or the communication of which by any person would constitute an offence under section 319."

Section 318 prescribes imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years for anyone who advocates genocide. The Code defines genocide as the destruction of an "identifiable group." The Code defines an "identifiable group" as "any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation."

Section 319 prescribes penalties from a fine to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years for anyone who incites hatred against any identifiable group.

Under section 319, an accused is not guilty: (a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true; (b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text; (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or (d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.

Section 320 allows a judge to confiscate publications which appear to be hate propaganda.

Within that context, the legislator who introduced that bill would seem to want to add hate speech about or to transgenders to those subgroups already covered under their Human Rights Act. With any of those qualifications (see link) that would make alleged hate speech not guilty, it would seem to me that only malicious speech with an intent to incite or harm could be found guilty. The link also lists the decisions in different cases that help define their case law. Cases found guilty of hate speech seem to result in fines or cease and desist orders.
How the author or website determined that 84% of Canadians favor prison for those who speak against transgenders as in the title is beyond me. In fact, the text says:

The non-profit Angus Reid Institute (ARI) released a study on September 7 showing 84 percent of Canadians approve the expansion of the Canadian Human Rights Act to encompass "hate speech" towards transgender Canadians.

That intentional misstatement and the sentences

Canadian Catholic bishops are largely silent on the government's latest moves to regularize transgenderism. A few, however, are speaking out, including Bp. Frederick Henry of the diocese of Calgary. He made headlines in January when he called the government "totalitarian," in reference to new educational guidelines forcing Catholic schools in Alberta to accept LGBT behavior among students.

led me to look at other articles in CM. I ended up with the Irish article, which noted a parishioner, Anthony Murphy,

He received no support from local clergy, his parish priest, Canon Frank McEvoy, even going so far as to call Murphy "homophobic." And Ireland's national police have told Murphy "not to attend Sunday Mass" out of concerns over his safety.

and Murphy said:

The recent homosexual scandal at the seminary in Maynooth and what is happening in Athy are symptomatic of the crisis facing the Church in Ireland. The Church is disintegrating before our eyes and not only do many of our bishops refuse to act but some even appear to want to help the disintegration. It is very clear to me that this is time for the faithful lay people to rise up and say: NOT IN OUR NAME. If our bishops are too timid to fight for Christ then we must.

Those were my conclusions and what I perceived as similar whether in contexts or in the blog's intentions.

Now I return to being mysterious.

 

[wizards8507]

The Culture of Death, on the March in Colorado

Sick stuff.

 

[Black Irish]

majority-of-canadians-support-prison-for-opponents-of-transgenderism

I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on the linked article. If this trend continues, it's safe to say martyrdom is drawing nigh.

From the article:

"Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould introduced Bill C-16 in May, which legislates that any person engaging in public speech condemning or questioning transgender ideology can face up to two years in prison"

So "questioning transgender ideology" would be punishable by jail time? Disturbing but not surprising given Canada's recent history on this type of thing. Just take a look at what conservative writer Mark Steyn dealt with regarding the Canadian Human Rights Commission:

Complaining about Insufficient Complaints :: SteynOnline

Granted, Steyn is unabashedly conservative, but the manner in which the CHRC went about their business should be objectionable to anyone who believes in free speech and open process. Of course, speech has limits. But saying "I don't believe that transgenderism is legitimate" does not rise to the level of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.

 

[Legacy]

Automated Inequality (Harvard Political Review)

Humans have been here before—at least three times before, in fact. At first, it was steam and water power; then came electricity and mass production; and then IT and computerization. Each time, Joseph Schumpeter’s “gale of creative destruction” blustered as rapid advances in technology destroyed some jobs, paved the way for new lines of work, and ultimately provided enhanced productivity and lifestyles for the majority. Researchers predict that over the next decade or so, emerging technological breakthroughs will once again fundamentally alter jobs and manufacturing processes around the world—but this time, the consequences could be drastically different.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Automated Inequality (Harvard Political Review)

Nice article. It's hard to imagine many jobs that aren't susceptible to automation. If we are able to devise a system where the benefits of automation spread through all demographic strata, we'll see an explosion in the arts and lifestyle artists.

If the work hours are reduced, as the article suggests, to 15 or thereabout, it isn't hard to see we'll all be looking for ways to do meaningful work. Hopefully volunteer organizations see participation skyrocket.

Our homes will be our magnum opus where we pour resources and sweat equity into beautifying our surroundings for hosting/games/fellowship.

But if we instead see the money funnel to the top, I foresee a very dystopian society.

 

[Legacy]

They're Neighbors of Mine (ND Magazine)

One night, deep in winter, deep in the Ohio countryside, midway through the 1950s when I was a boy of 10 or so, there came a knocking at our farmhouse door. Glad of an excuse to escape from the scary movie that was playing on our brand-new TV, with its round screen and murky black-and-white picture, I ran to answer the knock.

Opening the door, I found our neighbor from down the road, Mrs. Thompson, with a baby in her arms and her other four children huddled behind her, shivering. The look on Mrs. Thompson’s face was even scarier than the movie. “I need to ask your parents a favor,” she said.

 

[zelezo vlk]

I won't fully implement this, but it's not a bad resolution to spend 2017 enjoying the great works and legacy of Western Culture.

Why I'm Only Listening To And Reading Old Things In 2017

2016 was the year of too much. It offered us a glut of sensational, sordid, stressful content. There was no end to the controversies, the crises, the chaos. (See Dave Barry for details.)

Meanwhile, social media and society kept barraging us with the new: Instagram changed into a fancier-logoed, easier-to-use version of Snapchat. Facebook created a new “marketplace” feature, and introduced us to live video.

The Times bestseller list kept our to-read list on Goodreads stocked to overflowing. Spotify reminded us constantly of all the man-bunned hipster bands we’d not yet listened to. Netflix churned out 100 new television series every month.

And now, frankly, it seems time for a break.

The Year of Too Much Content
The Internet—for many, though not all, of us—creates a glut of content that seems impossible to ignore. Its endless stores of information pull at our attention spans constantly. On the news front, we could browse new articles for ages. In the realm of music, new singles are released every day (if not every hour). New books appear on Amazon daily. Our Facebook feeds are an unending scroll. And with the growth of services such as Amazon and Netflix, there’s no end to the TV we can watch.

Of course, when faced with such an infinite barrage, people begin to grow tired. Some (like myself) will feel pressured and stressed to consume all the things. It’s because we’re mavens: lovers of information. We’re OCD, and hate leaving things half-done. We’re curious, and afraid of what we might be missing.

But eventually, even the most zealous of us will feel over-satiated and exhausted. That’s because no matter how much time we devote to the new, there will be another novelty on the horizon tomorrow. It never stops.

It doesn’t seem surprising, then, that there’s been a backlash against the new this year. Nostalgia has taken center stage: everyone’s collecting vinyl records, shopping at indie bookstores, replenishing his comic book collection, playing board games, and watching old favorite sitcoms like “Friends” and “Full House.”

Some people have decided to unplug entirely: seeking mindfulness and eschewing the temptations of FOMO, they’ve decided to set the smartphones and social media accounts aside, at least for a time.

Why Not Spend a Year Enjoying Old Stuff?
Some call this sort of attitude nostalgic or Luddite. Strains of that are involved, often enough. But it also seems that in a world of infinite choices, many are realizing that they crave limits and tangibility again: a concrete simplicity, a sense of ownership, the ability to say “This is enough.”

At least, that’s how I’m feeling, here at the end of 2016. I want a year to recharge by returning to old favorites, instead of constantly pursuing the new.

So I intend to spend 2017 re-reading, re-watching, and re-listening. It will be a year dedicated to enjoying the treasures of the past—the stories, songs, and shows that I’ve forsaken, and even forgotten, in the glut of newness that’s washed over me these past few years.

2017 will be about reading the classics that formed so much of my intellectual and personal life: from the greatness of Edmund Burke and Alexis de Tocqueville to the dark thoughtfulness of Albert Camus and Frederic Nietzsche. I intend to revisit favorite classics by Jane Austen, J.R.R. Tolkien, Zora Neale Hurston, and John Steinbeck.

I want to revisit all the school books I rushed through: everything from Russell Kirk’s essays to “Paradise Lost” (still ashamed). This is an opportunity to deeply study some of history’s greatest works. To understand them more deeply, and learn from the greatest literary and philosophical masters of all time. I want to dwell for a while on Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” to sink my teeth into Plato’s “Republic,” to ponder the greatness of Dostoevsky’s “Brothers Karamazov.”

There will finally be time to re-watch my favorite movies—from black and white classics like “Casablanca” to Agatha Christie’s murder mysteries. And when I listen to music, I can spend as much time as I want on the wonders of Bach, or revisit my favorite teenage bands like Muse and The National.

Sometimes, It’s Important to Take a Step Back
The point isn’t to eschew new stuff. At the end of the year, I’ll be able to read all the many articles that will be written about “The Best Books of 2017,” and take my pick. Because of the nature of my job, I’ll probably read some of them, despite my overall commitment to old stuff.

But it’s easy, especially in the digital age, to get swept up with every new wave and trend: to forget just how many delights lie in the past. 2017 will be about remembering those delights.

Part of this commitment is about slowing down. 2016 felt especially chaotic—perhaps because of its unpredictability, or perhaps because of the growing monstrosity of the Internet. I’m guessing it’s some combination of the two. The clamor of things to be read and watched and listened to never ended, and it has been wearying trying to keep up.

Additionally, I want to take a longer, deeper look at the lessons of the past. Isaac Newton once said that “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” So much analysis this year went wrong: there were the upsets offered by Brexit and the U.S. presidential election. There were the endless puzzlings over Trump’s voter base, the crisis of postindustrial towns, the opioid crisis our nation faces.

Sometimes, our best predictions are wrong. This year, they were dead wrong. Perhaps one of the best responses we can have is to turn to the best thinkers of the past, and learn from them. We may not be able to change or solve all our dilemmas; but perhaps we will be better equipped to handle them, one at a time.

2017 Can Be an Opportunity to Rediscover Delight
Perhaps most importantly, however, this will be a year of rediscovering delight. 2016 was, it has largely been acknowledged, depressing. It was a dark and disappointing year for many. It has been a tiring year for me.

What I want to find is that joy I used to feel when opening the first page of a book: not to treat it as a means to an end, not to overanalyze it, but rather, to lose myself in the joy of a good read without thought of any “end” other than the story itself.

I want to sink into a song, and delight in it—without thought of whether it’s the next new thing I must share with my friends, without thought of the other endless options I could be uncovering. I want to dwell, here and now, in this moment.

My prediction: I’ll have a lot more fun this year. We’ll see if I’m right.

 

[zelezo vlk]

Perhaps this would be a great opportunity to finally make it through the corpus of Shakespeare:

https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2016/12/a-daily-plan-for-reading-shakespeare

 

[wizards8507]

I won't fully implement this, but it's not a bad resolution to spend 2017 enjoying the great works and legacy of Western Culture.

Why I'm Only Listening To And Reading Old Things In 2017

Too funny. As I clicked on this thread, I had just finished compiling a reading list of the new Star Wars canon for this year. Only 133 comic books and 15 novels.

 

[zelezo vlk]

Too funny. As I clicked on this thread, I had just finished compiling a reading list of the new Star Wars canon for this year. Only 133 comic books and 15 novels.

That is all being released this year? Or stuff from the past couple years that you haven't read yet?

 

[wizards8507]

That is all being released this year? Or stuff from the past couple years that you haven't read yet?

That's all the stuff from the "new canon" since Disney wiped out the EU in 2014. I've already read most of the novels but now I'm moving into the comics.

 

[Bubbles]

I sort of stumbled into the same idea for 2017...just started Moby Dick, Don Quixote, plato's republic, and have a lot of history books on my wishlist. Unfortunately, I think our cultural, collective attention span for some of the really awful shit that has happened in the past has reached its limit and we are staring down (plummeting towards?) repeating some of the worst of it.