Behold the wholly sanitized childhood, without skinned knees or the occasional C in history. "Kids need to feel badly sometimes," says child psychologist David Elkind, professor at Tufts University. "We learn through experience and we learn through bad experiences. Through failure we learn how to cope."Messing up, however, even in the playground, is wildly out of style. Although error and experimentation are the true mothers of success, parents are taking pains to remove failure from the equation.
"Life is planned out for us," says Elise Kramer, a Cornell University junior. "But we don't know what to want." As Elkind puts it, "Parents and schools are no longer geared toward child development, they're geared to academic achievement."
No one doubts that there are significant economic forces pushing parents to invest so heavily in their children's outcome from an early age. But taking all the discomfort, disappointment and even the play out of development, especially while increasing pressure for success, turns out to be misguided by just about 180 degrees. With few challenges all their own, kids are unable to forge their creative adaptations to the normal vicissitudes of life. That not only makes them risk-averse, it makes them psychologically fragile, riddled with anxiety. In the process they're robbed of identity, meaning and a sense of accomplishment, to say nothing of a shot at real happiness. Forget, too, about perseverance, not simply a moral virtue but a necessary life skill. These turn out to be the spreading psychic fault lines of 21st-century youth. Whether we want to or not, we're on our way to creating a nation of wimps.
Read the whole thing.
This same sort of mentality continues into adulthood, when certain factions in our government try to take over the role of parents and continue trying to protect Americans from failure. These are the people who support things like the minimum wage and other social entitlement programs.
Safety nets encourage risky behavior. When there are no consequences to failure we tend to act more irresponsibly. While I have no problem with subsidizing safety nets for those who truly cannot provide for themselves (the truly disabled, mentally handicapped, etc.), I will never been in favor of protecting people who are capable of providing for themselves from the consequences of their own actions.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 66
A political rival of George Bush once described Bush as someone who was born on third base but thought he'd hit a triple.
And in the case of Rob Port, there's a similarity. Port lives in a state that boasts about having 35% of its citizenry underemployed. How did Rob Port get his job? Did he study and go to school? Did he work his way up in an industry? No, his dad owns the business.
I guess that is one of the hazards of a liberal political legacy.
Living in Minnesota, one encounters many North Dakotans who rather than whining about their fate simply pulled up stakes and came down to the Twin Cities.
We are the better for them.
Perhaps that is precisely Rob's point, look at the homeless.
On a weekly basis one cannot help coming across multiple references to that icon of the social justice movement, "the homeless". What is much more rare is encountering any kind of judgement about the social and personal choices that lead to homelessness or the motivations to change one's behavior to overcome homelessness.
The majority of homelessness can be broken down into three major categories.
- The mentally ill who were turned out of social institutions in the early 1970's as a part of a failed social experiment and several dysfunctional court rulings.
- The chemically dependent.
- People whose lives decended into chaos because of violence, endulgence and a failure to discipline themselves.
The first category can rightfully be blamed on the misguided policies of social welfare agencies and the stubborn refusal to admit a mistake.
The blame for the second and third categories lies in the inability of society to judge and to demand that people change their lives for the better. In this the homeless shelters often provide an enabling role as Rob suggests.
It is given in addiction treatment that people need to "bottom out" and admit they have a problem. By providing a safety net that requires nothing of people, the social welfare industry is doing nothing but maintaining a need for its own services.
The secret to a middle-class existance is as follows:
- Graduate from High School.
- Acquire a skill.
- Put off having children until marriage.
- Show up on time every day.
Society should help those who physically or mentally cannot follow those simple rules, all others should not be encouraged to further maintain a dysfunctional lifestyle.
Compassion is not only feeling for another, it is also having the discipline to do what is right for that person despite one's sympathies.
Wow! This is an extremely interesting comment coming from one of the folks who's willingly surrendered civil rights, freedoms, and constitutional law in exchange for a false sense of security from their "daddy government!" "Daddy Bush" steps up and declares that he and ONLY he can keep them warm and safe from the big, bad boogieman, and instantly, they snap into line, hand over their freedoms with a smile, and begin to demonize any who still hold enough integrity and American ideals to resist.
Meanwhile, education and social assistance programs, like universal healthcare, are not "expenses," but rather, investments, similar to highways, bridges, communications and energy grids, and public safety entities.
An educated society produces far more economic output for their country than it ever costs to develop.
An efficient highway system produces far more economically than it ever costs to build or maintain.
Effective communications and electrical systems produce far more economically than they ever cost to build or maintain.
Efficient and effective healthcare costs far less to society than one that allows nearly 1/5 of the population to go uncovered.
See, this is the crux of the biscuit, as far as the drastic failures of "conservative" economics. It's always extremely short-sighted. They have no ability to see anything longterm, including the horrific, negative effects that their reckless "Borrow and spend" policies have on society down the road.
To them, it's cost effective to reduce spending on education and pour more money into prison systems, even though it's a direct cause and effect. You withhold on education, you're going to have more crime. Period. That is a fact.
To them, if you weren't born with millions in your bank account, you deserve to suffer and die in the streets. There can be no provision to provide for the "general welfare of society" as the constitution mandates, because those without born wealth and privledge simply don't deserve to live.
This is the rightwing calling card. Trample the downtrodden. Never, ever provide one shred of assistance for anyone who really needs it, because all of that is saved for the already wealthy.
This battle has been waged politically ever since the creation of this nation. There have ALWAYS been those who are literally obsessed with the notion that only the elite aristocrats should ever rule, and that all opportunity should be granted to them, not to the general population. If you don't have it, you weren't meant to have it. Sick, isn't it?
The only real results I see from 30 years of social spending are the millions of Poverty Warriors who are retiring in their early 50's on full pensions plus social security while the majority of the unwashed masses must work to age 67 and retire on no pension.
I look at what has happened in Minnesota where these "caring" people gutted the state with a $9 Billion pension shortfall by doubling their payout when the stock market hit 1200 then failing to adjust it downward when the market declined.
The poor, the school kids, the recipients of MinnCare will be paying for the greed of this Enron size scandal for decades to come.
I guess "the compassionate" are primarily compassionate about their own power and privilege.
We certainly don't believe your figures, Greg. You have a tendency to lie.
The fact is that since the early 1960's, we've spent less than $1T on welfare and AFDC.
I would guess that the economic production resulting from rescuing people from the grasp of poverty and turning them into productive, gainfully employed citizens, would be large enough to far outweigh the costs.
Quite unlike the hundreds of billions that we've piddled down the grand missile defense toilet.
"One would think that after spending between $9 to $12 Trillion (depending on whose figures you believe) that the results should be glaringly obvious."
So, is is $1 trillion, $9 trillion, or $12 trillion? And, how do you feel about your precious republicans driving us $9 trillion into debt in order to lavish Paris Hilton with tax welfare check handouts? How productive is THAT?
"The only real results I see from 30 years of social spending are the millions of Poverty Warriors who are retiring in their early 50's on full pensions plus social security while the majority of the unwashed masses must work to age 67 and retire on no pension."
That's because you're a republican, that thus are myopic when it comes to economics. To you, everything that benefits the whole of society is an expense, rather than an investment, while dumping massive piles of cash into a bottomless pit that serves war profiteers and multi-millionaires is "sound economic policy."
"I look at what has happened in Minnesota where these "caring" people gutted the state with a $9 Billion pension shortfall by doubling their payout when the stock market hit 1200 then failing to adjust it downward when the market declined."
Yet another perfect example of why deregulation hurts us all. Thanks for pointing that out.
"The poor, the school kids, the recipients of MinnCare will be paying for the greed of this Enron size scandal for decades to come."
You got that right. Thanks neocons.
""I guess "the compassionate" are primarily compassionate about their own power and privilege. "
Man, talk about a schizophrenic post. You started out sounding like you were to the right of Hitler, and ended up sounding like Michael Moore. How're the meds?
Screw the poor, destroy the middle class, plunder the national treasury, trample the downtrodden, and hand it all over to the millionaires. Nothing else matters to them. They have no scope of what public investment in infrastructure and general welfare means, nor do they have any concept of just how critical it is to a nation's economic output.
Publicly funded education is evil, because it allows those without means to become educated and to someday acquire means.
Publicly funded and maintained energy systems are evil because it doesn't allow rampant, widescale corruption and fleecing.
Public oversight of private investments are evil for the same reason as above.
Public transportation is evil because it allows those without means to travel to work to acquire means.
Public radio and TV are evil because they offer a view of the world that wasn't bought and paid for by warmongering corporations.
These people are the veritable personification of the term "Capitalism is the predatory phase of human development." They exist solely to pilfer public funds and stuff them into the pockets of the very few insanely wealthy, and whatever harm, death, and destruction comes as a result is merely "collatoral damage" that is fully acceptable and expected to them.
After all, growing up with all that wealth and privelege is just turning them into wimps!
So Rob, is it true you are working for your daddy's business? Well, stop being a wimp and cut your umbilical cord, man!
Stop being a such a pussy and go find a job that doesn't require incestuous nepotism to get. Or start your own business and stop sucking daddy's teats to earn a living.
Uh Clark, we have paid the money, where is the result you claimed we would have? Again, if the return of investment for social programs is so obvious, it should be a simple matter for you to demonstrate it.
Begin now.
Uh Clark, that little Enron sized scandal was caused by Education Minnesota, the local Democratic Party Cash Cow, changing the rules. Education Minnesota, the Teacher's Union in Minnesota has more lobbyists than any other entitty.
In light of this $9 Billion theft, wax on about how the conservatives are so greedy and liberals are so noble.
Stephanie, you are being quite rude and thoughtless. You have absolutely no idea what Rob's circumstances are other than what Jade Gold claims.
Jade Gold tends to make things up to support her arguments.
Regardless, even if Rob is working in a family business, you hardly know his circumstances. I know quite a few people who have put their ambitions on hold for the good of others to work in a family business.
For a person who purports to hail from the compassionate side, let's try practicing compassion.
I'm using his own freakin' logic here. Do you think I really believe that? But he apparently does, so he ought to practice what he preaches. Otherwise, he's a hypocrite.
People with silver spoons in their mouths in the form of families with businesses have no business judging those who came from less fortunate circumstances, by the way.
If his father does indeed have a business, and let's Rob work in it, he's a hell of a lot luckier than those inner city kids who grew up without a dad and just had the local drug business to join.
Compassion means understanding that you are lucky in your circumstances and trying to put yourself into the shoes of those less fortunate than you. Apparently Rob is unable to do that.
What difference does it make whether a person is a trust baby, if what they say is correct?
On the other extreme, no matter how screwed up one's parents, or one's neighborhood, or one's school, nothing rationalizes making poor choices.
We can all fully understand that it is easy for advantaged people to criticize others and that it is difficult for those growing up in lousy circumstances to push against the tide of their lives.
The maddenly brutal flaw in the liberal philosophy is that it lets people off the hook for their own behavior and dwells on class jealousies to justify allowing people to wallow in failure rather than motivating them for success.
Ultimately, the liberal philosophy steals empowerment from people who need it the most. By shifting responsibility for one's life away from the individual and onto society, liberalism takes control of people's lives away from them.
Rob is speaking of empowerment, I would think a compassionate person would endorse rather than oppose such a notion.
First off, what he says is not correct.
Second, people who grow up with privelege have advantages that other people do not.
Let's just look at George W Bush, for example. Here's a man, who under his own power, would have NEVER made it to president.
He was a party animal, possibly a coke addict, and failed at every business he put his hand to.
He became president because his daddy was president, and because he had money and rich friends.
People like that, who get their hand-outs from a built-in class system that keeps the rich rich - as opposed to welfare - have no business criticizing people who need welfare to make it through.
Bush would not have survived growing up in a ghetto.
THEN maybe I'll respect what he has to say. Until then, I think he's full of it.
Who gives a rip about rich people? Why the obsession with them?
If we are compassionate people we need to be concerned with empowering people to control their own lives rather than instilling them with excuses and jealousies.
The secret to the middle-class is:
- Graduate from High School.
- Acquire a skill.
- Put off having children until marriage.
- Show up on time every day.
It is really not that hard, but all too many people have not cracked that code. The challenge is to transmitt the code and not get distracted by any other agenda.
It is really pretty simple.
You do not "empower" people with "compassion" by accusing them of being lazy and taking advantage of the welfare system, as most of you conservatives do.
Compassion is not owing allegence to social programs. Compassion is NOT about doing for others, compassion is about doing right by others.
Really?
I believe it was your Bill Clinton who finally owned up to the problem of multi-generational welfare dependency.
I also believe that it was a very liberal Daniel Patrick Moynihan who predicted the catastrophy of welfare dependency in a white house paper for Lyndon Johnson titled Of Family And Nation.
Maybe, just maybe, you got it all wrong.
Maybe, what you care about more is your right to call yourself compassionate rather than doing what is right by others.
Were this true--and it is not--does it matter?
Several comments earlier, you castigated the underemployed of North Dakota for not moving to other states where employment conditions might be more favorable.
Now, you tell us people are indentured servants to the family business?
How contradictory.
Of course, that's not Rob Port's situation at all. He's in a state which has experienced a decline in population over the last 20 years. Most ND college students leave the state after graduation due to a lack of employment opportunities in-state.
As I noted earlier, ND's Repug Governor brags that 35% of his state's workforce is under-employed.
Now, if we look at Rob Port--what experience does he have? What education does he have? Well, he started college but dropped out. His work experience appears to be pretty much confined to working for daddy.
And if this is true, then Rob is being a PUSSY.
He has some nerve to be yelling at the government for acting like a parent to grown-ups, when apparently he still needs his daddy around to give him a job.
Just calling him out on the hypocrisy there.
She attempts to do with a smear what she cannot do by reasoned argument.
Why bother with her, you always come away in need of a shower after wrestling with a pig.
Look at yourself Stephanie.
You are howling and smearing people and not asking a gossip to substantiate her claim.
Jade knows that Rob, as a matter of policy, does not comment on these threads. She takes that as her cue to say anything she wants.
Disgusting!
Has it occured to you that when Rob does stand up for himself, he may do so in a court of law?
Before you go blathering too much about what he does and does not do, you better damned well make sure his family business is not law with a specialty in libel.
Okay?
- Acquire a skill.
- Put off having children until marriage.
- Show up on time every day.
Greg's "secret" doesn't necessarily work.
Sticking to North Dakota--consider farming. It's a skill and most farmers work extremely hard and show up every day---yet they may well fail.
You are howling and smearing people and not asking a gossip to substantiate her claim.
Jade knows that Rob, as a matter of policy, does not comment on these thread. She takes that as her cue to say anything she wants.
Addressing the last point first--Rob Port is free to comment on any thread he wishes. He has, on occasion, done so. His "policy" is a choice. The reason Rob Port doesn't generally comment here is because he knows his articles will be disputed--unlike his blog where he only allows those comments which agree with him. Rob Port doesn't do very well in defending his views.
Second, the fact is Rob Port's info is available on his blog.
Really?
Odd, the Twin Cities is full of former North Dakota farm kids who have graduated from high school, waited for marriage before having children, and who show up everyday, on-time.
As a matter of fact, midwesterners are high demand in places like Washington DC. They are known for their work ethic.
Failing at a particular job or a particular circumstance is not the same thing as failing in life.
Oooooh, a threat!
If you have specific proof of Rob's employment, provide us a link or we will simply have to conclude that this is yet another in your long, long, long list of lies and smears.
To be sure. The welfare rolls are also filled with the same.
The laws are rather specific regarding personal libel. The laws of common courtesy are in many ways stricter.
Is this your way of backpedalling?
How are you so convinced that there has been zero return on that investment? Surely, if it's that obvious, it should be a simple matter for you to demonstrate it, right?
"Begin now."
My, aren't we the arrogant little prick? Put up or shut up yourself. YOU'RE the one railing against social programs that were designed to put an end to poverty. Let's see YOUR numbers. You don't even know how much was spent, let alone how much of a return we may have gotten. Let's see, we've had $1 trillion, $9 trillion, $12 trillion, and finally $9 billion. Can we get a zillion?
"Uh Clark, that little Enron sized scandal was caused by Education Minnesota, the local Democratic Party Cash Cow, changing the rules. Education Minnesota, the Teacher's Union in Minnesota has more lobbyists than any other entitty."
Uh, Mr Wizard, that little bit o' fraud was brought to you courtesy of none other than republican deregulation. Deal with it. And, get used to it, because it won't be the last you see.
"In light of this $9 Billion theft, wax on about how the conservatives are so greedy and liberals are so noble. "
What $9 billion theft, pray tell? Just exactly who stole it, and what proof is there that it was, in fact, stolen, and not put to any good use?
HEHEHE!
North Dakota farmers on welfare in the Twin Cities? What a joke!!
You have yet to substantiate your smear.
Minnesota Public Radio: Pension shortfall report sparks exchange at Capitol
Those Minnesota pension plans are worth more than Bill Gates, so the next time you feel like howling about "Republican Corporations" just remember the Democrats who owns them.
Excuse me, Mr. Ignorant, but state pension funds from all over the country have been ravaged by the republican poilcies that allowed ENRON and other corporate fleecing debacles to occur. Nice deflection attempt...fortunately, some of us are paying attention.
You just don't get it do you?
These pension funds OWNED ENRON. They more responsible than anyone else for who sits on the boards and who the CEO's are.
Aside from that you are deflecting the main issue here, let me repeat it.
If one were to accept your meager attempt to deflect the greed and privilege of this present scandal by mention of corporate failure, would it not be logical to suggest that perhaps the teachers and civil servants reverse the raises they granted themselves during the stock bubble?
Clark, you are really out of your league and it shows. You are a very young and very naive person and to watch you flounder is embarrassing.
Right. The pension funds were in charge of the corruption that destroyed that company. Alrighty then, conspiracy man. Just remember, republicans NEVER, EVER do anything wrong, so whenever it APPEARS that they did, ALWAYS blame democrats, regardless of how silly you may look in doing so.
Does it ever seem odd to you that you spend far more time defending your rather ludicrous positions and making ridiculously baseless claims than actually discussing anything truly substantive? That should be a sign to you, I would think. And, of course, your last statement is a screaming symbol of insecurity. I guess you didn't notice that either, huh?
- Graduate from High School.
- Acquire a skill.
- Put off having children until marriage.
- Show up on time every day."
Interesting, but not actually true today. Graduating from High School is unlikely to be sufficient to claw your way up to the middle class. Acquiring a skill is not necessarily going to do you much good either -- I sat on the board of a Technical Center out here -- believe me the kids graduating in machining, etc. were skilled but they are not going to pole vault into the middle class as a result. Putting off having kids period would be the best advice for most of those living in poverty who want to climb out, and those close to climbing out should definitely never have more than two. Whether the kids appear within wedlock or out of wedlock is probably not very determinative as to whether they are able to climb into the middle class -- its more important whether the pair who made them or who have adopted them stay together than whether they are married or not. I do agree, however, that showing up for work on time is important. The amazing statistic, however, for Red Staters is that if they checked on what kids were now doing better on average than the rest is that the parents are gay couples. Lol -- cracks me up.
Which is my opinion, and perfectly legal.
"OH MY GOD, YOU SUGGESTED THAT SOMEONE ON GATHER WORKS FOR THEIR FATHER!!! YOU SLANDERER!!!"
Funny. Too funny.
The first definition is roughly $36,000 for a family of four. The second definition begins the range at $35,000.
$35,000 is a single $17.50/hour job, or two $8.66 jobs.
As for technical school, now there is a soft-spot in my heart. I would hope than graduates from a technical school could earn $9/hr after a few years of work in their trade.
Determining the potential of poverty for any given child is correlated most with the question: "Does the child live with their biological father?".
This single variable is more powerful than race, class, gender or parent's income.
No.
There's another factor Greg missed as he was pulling fabrications from his nether regions--location.
Let's use Greg's bogus numbers for the time being. Do you seriously believe a family of four living on $36K in NYC is middle class? Or in LA or SF or even Minneapolis?
A family of 4 living on that much in Pitchfork, Nebraska isn't middle class.
I can only do it because I don't have a kid to feed, and the office space (second bedroom) is business expense.
The numbers I cited came from the following quotation found on Wikipedia which is as good a definition as any.
The median Minneapolis income is $49,319.00 source which would place a $35,000 income slightly below the required 80% figure of $39,451 to qualify for the middle class.
On the other hand, wage are higher in Minneapolis which suggests it is easier to earn a middle-class income here.
Again, this bi-polar world thing.
Is it absolutely necessary to view Republicans as the incarnation of evil and the Left as the embodiment of all thing good?
I would hope that in the process of bringing out things like the Minnesota Pension Scandal and the inability to quantify the return on the multi-trillion dollar "investment" in the War On Poverty that you would slowly begin to develop critical thinking and political as well as personal maturity.
...that apparently, you subcribe to, since you continually express how wrong the liberals are.
Screw the poor, destroy the middle class, plunder the national treasury, trample the downtrodden, and hand it all over to the millionaires. Nothing else matters to them. They have no scope of what public investment in infrastructure and general welfare means, nor do they have any concept of just how critical it is to a nation's economic output.
Now that is first rate political rhetoric. Thanks Clark.
Pointing out those areas where Liberalism fails is nothing akin to the pathology that exists around here toward Republicans and Conservatives.
On those two subjects, there is clear evidence that a goodly portion of Gather.com has driven itself into mental illness.
Why do you even waste your time with this?
You know you are correct as most Americans do.
It is like a bunch of school yard bullies trying to beat on the smart kid.
Let them enjoy their hate and blame everyone else for everything that's wrong and their personal unhappiness.
Before you go blathering too much about what he does and does not do, you better damned well make sure his family business is not law with a specialty in libel.
Okay?"
~~
threatening someone with libel on behalf of someone else has got to be a new low in cyber-geekness.
I had a vacation day and it was too hot to do anything outside.
Occasionally an interesting discussion breaks out, some of the posters like John are rational, but as for the buzzing flies like Jade, Clark, Stephanie, Martin and Sandy, they share an IQ point between them which wouldn't be so obvious if they possessed even the maturity of a teen.
is it really that small?
Yes, by all means, when you cannot craft a meaningful statement to defend your indefensible, extremists stances, lash out at those who you feel inferior to. Sorta desperate, isn't it?
worth repeating.
~~
as long as we're trading insults this morning...
"He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know." honest abe
mr. maturity still refuses to address me directly. going on eight months or more now.
still love it!
TOO FUNNY!
Enjoy children.
I see them everyday and they do quite well.
They may be on the bottom rung of the middle-class but they have enough money to make modest home payments, keep a couple of used cars going and eat quite well.
This sort of lifestyle thrives in our rural areas where the cost of housing and taxes are lower than in the cities.
In suburban Minneapolis, it is not unusual to see lawn signs by the curb of industrial parks advertising $13/hr NO Experience......two of these jobs would yield a $52,572 annual income.