I agree with you about Debian being historically user-unfriendly, but I would call your attention to the following points:
1. Debian was always meant for production servers, not for desktops. Why do you think stable releases took so long? Because upgrading production servers all the time is a negative. You do fully regression test your upgrades, don't you? Hmm?
2. Debian has gotten a lot more user-friendly over time. I mean, dselect? Come the fuck, on. But over time, they gave us aptitude, synaptic, gnome-apt, debian-installer, etc.
How much of this was inspired by the "competition" from Ubuntu? I dunno. A lot of it predates Ubuntu, but I'm sure the fact that there was someone out there improving usability didn't hurt.
As for correcting the error, you can offer to do it for free and you will be turned down, because that is a matter of honour. The person who did it wrong would be having their mistake pointed out, and would thus lose face. This is much less palatable than sticking with an incorrect sign.
Ahh, yes. That whole Southeast Asian "losing face" thing.
I wonder what having his cheapskate error exposed to 500,000+ slashdot readers did to his "saved face"?
The most plausible reason for Spanish speakers to have avoided the Chevy Nova is the same reason that English speakers did: the car was a certified piece of shit.
I'm just not sure what it would take for you to realize Pappe is nothing short of a complete and utter crackpot--unless you are on an agenda, yourself. So tell me, are you?
And these type of edicts from up on high tend to really bite you in the behind over time. You wind up with hundreds upon hundreds of stored procedures, and nobody knows which ones are even in use any longer. One project will wind up requesting a change that affects another project, and it basically excludes any O/R mapping tools. It's just one huge mess.
Your best bet is to insist that your developers are just a little clued in. How hard is it to say, "As long as your queries always have an indexed field in the where clause, and your joins are all on the primary key, fire away. Anything other than that needs DBA approval." Or some other reasonable policy depending on how much data are in the database.
My ex's isn't as distant as one might think... She broke up with me because I was 'to good for her', but she wants me around often enough that I still know what's going on.
Interesting. It turns out that I, too, dated a girl for a few years, and she, too, broke up with me because I was 'too good for her'. With the benefit of 15 years of hindsight, I think that the real issue was that she just wasn't that into me, and that she only said I was 'too good for her' to make me feel better (it didn't).
But back onto the topic at hand, it would be difficult to know why the timeouts aren't working without seeing the dynamic first hand, but here are a few guesses: 1. Excessive time between infraction and punishment. Kids aren't just "mini adults" and need to see the cause and effect happen quickly. Once they're older, they'll understand that they lost the car this weekend because they stayed out after curfew last weekend without permission. But before age 12 or so, they really need instant er.. gratification.;) See my example before. If one of my kids would act up, he or she would be in timeout in less than a minute.
2. Excessive escalation between infraction and punishment. Notice in my example a few posts back, I never negotiated, lectured, or otherwise engaged the kid in any discussion about the infraction. All the kid needed to know was that what he or she is doing is wrong and is not going to be tolerated. Black and white for the little ones. It sounds like your ex offers way too much discussion about the infraction. This only invites whining, yelling, distraction, and escalation.
3. Exhaustion causes inability to stick to discipline scheme. She's a single mom of two kids. That's exhausting. The kids can wear her down to manipulate her, and they know it.
4. No enforcement of rules in her absence. If the rules only apply when mommy's in the room, that sets a really bad example.
Frankly, I'm not sure why she'd even bother with a timeout after she engaged her child in a screaming match. A child throwing a tantrum is part of growing up. Does your ex feel it adds to her authority by throwing tantrums of her own? If she wants adult respect, she might as well try acting like an adult.
Thanks for helping me with Step 1. I really appreciate the time and effort you put into that research. I'm sure it must have been very difficult for you.
Have you not heard about the UK, where a judge has upheld the notion that a Muslim family dispute ought to be covered by Sharia, in addition to the normal UK legal system?
How is that any different from the Jewish Beth din courts that have operated in New York City (and other parts of the US?) for decades and done much the same thing? I really don't see a problem with this as long as these "courts" don't have the rule of law and as long as nobody can be compelled against their will to resolve a dispute in them.
Looking up what a Beth Din is, it looks like they are in the business of arbitrating financial disputes and ruling on religious matters.
For the arbitration function, it would seem that both parties in the dispute would have to agree to binding arbitration by the Beth Din. This is no different in my mind to agreeing to binding arbitration by any other private arbitration service.
For the religious rulings, obviously it would not be a function of government courts to rule on religious matters. Separation of church and state, and all.
But I think this is different from Sharia Law. Sharia Law is the one where they cut off your hands if you are accused of stealing. For less serious crimes, I believe flogging or caning is the cruel and unusual punishment of choice. Obviously it would not be acceptable in an enlightened country to have groups of people setting up their own courts and cutting off each other's limbs as punishment for this or the other crime.
From the Beth Din webpage, I did not notice any caning, flogging, or amputation services provided by their arbitrators. Please correct me if I am wrong on this point.
I guess I'm from a fairly long line of people where a quick bit of discipline enforced by rigid punishments worked. Always.
I'm glad it worked for you. Like I said before, I'm not one of these people who feels that corporal punishment is automatically child abuse. I don't use it because I don't know how to make it work, and I don't know how to make it teach what I want taught.
My ex uses time out and similar things... she can't get her kid to stay in their room or even a corner unless she's standing their keeping him form leaving.
How old are the kids? How long are the timeouts? How long did it take between the infraction and the timeout?
Not that you care since she's your ex, but if the kids are already trained that mommy will give up after enough persistence, it's going to be hard to impose any discipline on them at all.
I think you are a good example of how someone's parenting style is inherited from his or her own parents.:) Like I said, I have never seen a corporal punishment modeled in a way that satisfies me, so I do not use it. I'm glad it worked for your parents.
Going to your room doesn't help when you can't keep the kid from coming back out as soon as you leave them there... 'timeout' is the funniest thing I've ever seen
You know, it's funny you should mention that, because before I tried it, I thought a timeout was the stupidest thing ever. When my oldest was 2, she was a serious pill. Every little thing elicited an inconsolable tantrum (they don't call 'em the terrible 2s for nothing).
My wife and I suspended our skepticism and tried it out, and hell if it did not work wonders. Every kid is different, and what worked for my kids may not work for other kids, but here's how the above situation would have played out in my family. 1. I tell the kid to stop yelling indoors 2. Kid keeps yelling (of course) 3. I say, "That's 1."
At this point, he or she (we used the same system for all kids) is reminded that yelling indoors is not permitted. Was that enough to stop the yelling? Sometimes, but usually not, so...
4. Kid keeps yelling 5. "That's 2."
At this point, a timeout is imminent, and the kid knows it. Unless he or she is really in a bad mood, the behavior that I was trying to end is usually over. Realize that only about 10-15 seconds have elapsed so far. In the instances when the behavior did not stop (perhaps 10-15% of the time)...
6. Kid yells some more, maybe yells at me. 7. "That's 3. Take a timeout."
At this point, the kid goes to his or her room for a timeout (if at home), or to some other suitable timeout location (if not at home). The time from infraction to punishment is 30 seconds or less. The punishment is simple, consistent, and immediate. But I'm sure you're wondering if a timeout can actually be instructional.
I had that same concern, but hell if after a timeout, the kid isn't the most pleasant, clam, and changed kid you've ever seen. The yelling is done, the kid is calm and ready to listen. The first time I saw it in action, I wondered if it was the same kid I had left alone just 2 minutes earlier.
Even more important was that any misbehavior was going to stop in under a minute, either willingly (the usual case), or via timeout. That control gave me the confidence as a parent to handle the situation without any escalation. That meant no frustration, no anger, no confusion regarding how to handle the recalcitrant child, and no hitting. Having a good system is just as important for the parent as for the child.
This experience is why I have difficulty seeing how corporal punishment would be effective for the majority of children (yes, my objection to corporal punishment is not that I don't believe in hitting kids, it's that I don't believe it would actually work). First of all, I find it hard to believe that delayed punishment is going to deter any child under age 6. A kid above age 11 or so is going to know that once a whuppin' is already going to happen later, what is the incentive for good behavior? And how does it work for older kids? Do you beat a 16-year-old? How would the child survive in the world after age 18 with no one to beat them?
Granted, you don't give a 16 year old a timeout, either--you take away the car. But by then, hopefully you've taught them right from wrong. If your 16-year-old son is still whining to get his way and pulling his sister's hair, then you've not really done your job as a parent, now have you?
But as humans we simply don't respect someone who can't back up a command. Going to your room doesn't help when you can't keep the kid from coming back out as soon as you leave them there
Oh, when I say timeout, a timeout is happening. There is no question of backing it up. And
I'm going to guess that you don't have any kids, because it turns out parents pretty much only hang out with other parents. The reasons? Well, our schedules mesh better, but probably the bigger reason is that parents drone on and on about their kids, and it drives non-parents completely bonkers (and rightfully so).
Believe me, I understand well that "randomly swatting your kids around" is not a discipline system. The problem is, I have never seen corporal punishment modeled in a manner that gets positive results. I'm sure someone out there is using it effectively, but I have never witnessed it.
The way I normally see "corporal punishment" being practiced is this: 1. Parent asks kid to either do something or stop doing something. 2. Kid ignores parent 3. Parent raises voice 4. Kid ignores parent 5. Parent gets in kid's face and uses his or her full, given name (middle name included), and makes an idle threat 6. Kid yells at parent 7. Parent is confused at why kid is ignoring him or her, and is embarrassed that the kid is totally controlling the situation. Parent yells and threatens idly some more. 8. Kid yells back at parent 9. Parent is really pissed off and embarrassed at being defied by a 4 year old. Parent needs to hit something, so he or she grabs the child and starts smacking. 10. Kid runs off crying--but will repeat the same episode tomorrow.
What kids really need is structure, not beatings. They see the world in black and white (gradually less so as they get older), and if you don't make their world black and white for them, they get confused and act out. Kids crave routine, and get confused and act out when their worldview is a moving target. Also, kids learn by making mistakes--do you really want to be kicking the shit out of them every time they make a mistake? Any effective discipline system needs to address these issues.
The best discipline systems are simple, systematic (consistent), instructional, and swift. For example, every time the kid whines, the kid needs to understand that whining is not permitted, the punishment should be the same as the last time he whined, and it needs to happen immediately. As you can see, the above 10-step discipline system addresses none of these requirements.
I suppose you could say that if the kid whines, you don't go through the 10 steps of escalation--you just spank, and that would be simple, systematic, and swift. But is it really instructional? If every time the kid makes a mistake he gets hit immediately? What kind of a child will you be raising, then?
That most parents don't understand what discipline is or how to use it only suggests more to me that we need state mandated parent training, probably once a year until their kids are 18.
I have to say that when my first kid was a baby, my earliest lament was that these kids don't come with instruction manuals. But as I've gotten older, I've realized that once the kids are born, it's a little late.
Would state-mandated parent training really help this? In 2000, I took a training on Rational Rose. Later that year, when I tried to make my first sequence diagram, I realized that I didn't know thing #1 about where to even begin. It was as though I didn't take that week-long training at all. It wasn't until I found a more experienced software architect to mentor me that I was able to use the tool effectively.
Likewise, I think that most parents model their own parents' style. I know I do, and most of my friends do, as well. Speaking of state-sponsored training, do you drive like they taught you to in driver's ed? Hands at 10 and 2, Shadow99_1.;)
I say this as a parent: if paddling your kids is part of your regular discipline scheme, you are probably doing something wrong. I'm not saying corporal punishment needs to be completely off the table, but it really should be the nuclear option.
Most of the time when I see other parents hitting their kids, it is more as therapy for a confused and frustrated parent, than a well-conceived lesson for the kid. When you get upset and hit your kids, what does that teach the kid? That when you're upset at someone, you hit them.
I think a lot of parents fail to realize just how much their kids idolize them and learn from them. Judging by the messages they send, anyhow.
Really? If you can afford $75/month, you can afford it with taxes.
Who said anything about what I can afford? I could afford $75 or even a lot more than that, but I choose a plan that is only $40/mo pretax because that is what I want to spend. What I can afford has nothing to do with it.
I can see their point for not wanting to give out numbers on this, because of the variables involved. Plus, if they try to quote you a "with taxes cost" then you might try to hold them to that figure.
Yet somehow they manage to generate a bill each month that has my balance computed to the penny.
Why can't my wireless carrier say, "As of 7/1/2008, this plan would cost you $xx.xx inclusive of all taxes and surcharges. That number is subject to change with changes in telecommunication regulations."?
In Australia, the price quoted has to be the price that is paid by the consumer
In most of the world with high sales tax (sorry, VAT/GST), the pretax price is just not even close to the final price paid. It would just be nonsensical to quote a pre-tax price.
For instance, let's say you were going to visit Denmark where the VAT is 25%. Why would you quote a price of 75 Euros when the final price is going to be 100 Euros? It's just not even close.
In the US, it's a legitimate question of whether to display pretax or post-tax pricing. For instance, where I live sales tax is 2%. A $75 item will cost $76.50 when rung up. Annoying? Perhaps, but it at least the price tag makes some approximation of what the final price will be.
Personally, I'd prefer the price posted to be the price paid, but I still like that the tax is itemized on the receipt. In the US, we hate taxes, so it's important to remind people when they are being taxed.
Perhaps US people just need to get out more and experience a wider variety of accents...
You know, I've been to a lot of places, and I've never had such difficulty communicating anywhere as I experienced in the UK. When, exactly, did you people forget how to speak English? While visiting, I experienced the most atrocious grammar (adjectives modifying verbs, etc.) and impenetrable pronunciation imaginable.
Ordinarily, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest to have a bit of a language barrier in a foreign country. In fact, I've grown quite fond of "point and pray" meals--but in the UK, this is simply not an option because the food is so universally lousy. You're really taking your health and well-being into your own hands if you rely on "point and pray" in a place where what constitutes "edible food" is so misunderstood.
Now that you've gotten me started, maybe you could settle a bit of curiosity. Is the world-famous British lack of dental health caused by poor oral hygiene, lack of available dental care, or years of eating British food?
taxes are so high in a place like Norway, they have a lot more government-provided services, stuff that we have to pay out the wazoo for in the U.S. Heath care is an obvious one.
I'm pretty sure health care is the only one. And how expensive is your health care, really? Mine is about $500/mo for the entire family including copays, etc., and I don't consider my health plan to be any good at all. So my out of pocket health care expense is only $6k/year, but if I had to pay 50% taxes (that 50% underestimates the tax liability by a huge amount, by the way... look at their VAT to see why!) that would cost me way more than $6k. So I'm quite happy with the US system.
Incidentally, the richest people here in America don't actually pay 35%. The dirty little secret that rich people don't want you to know because you'd probably vote it out of existence is that the tax rate on the wealthy is closer to 15%, which is much lower than you or I likely pay. (What's your marginal income tax rate?)
This is a 100% Class-A bullshit argument. Who cares what anyone's marginal rate is? I'd happily let you set my marginal rate as high as you want--but only if I get to set my effective rate!;)
So let's look at the effective tax rates. Look at yours. What is it? Probably under 10%. For a wealthy person, it's going to be much higher thanks to the AMT. Even if you just want to look at marginal rates, you have to realize that the AMT marginal rate for capital gains is 22% and most deductions are disallowed under AMT.
Find a wealthy person and ask that person what his or her effective income tax rate is. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that effective rate is lower.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you about Debian being historically user-unfriendly, but I would call your attention to the following points:
1. Debian was always meant for production servers, not for desktops. Why do you think stable releases took so long? Because upgrading production servers all the time is a negative. You do fully regression test your upgrades, don't you? Hmm?
2. Debian has gotten a lot more user-friendly over time. I mean, dselect? Come the fuck, on. But over time, they gave us aptitude, synaptic, gnome-apt, debian-installer, etc.
How much of this was inspired by the "competition" from Ubuntu? I dunno. A lot of it predates Ubuntu, but I'm sure the fact that there was someone out there improving usability didn't hurt.
As for correcting the error, you can offer to do it for free and you will be turned down, because that is a matter of honour. The person who did it wrong would be having their mistake pointed out, and would thus lose face. This is much less palatable than sticking with an incorrect sign.
Ahh, yes. That whole Southeast Asian "losing face" thing.
I wonder what having his cheapskate error exposed to 500,000+ slashdot readers did to his "saved face"?
Oh, and if you live in San Diego and you come to a car dealership where they give you a "Leash Agreement" instead of a Lease one, tell them I said hi!
Given the terms of most car leases, I'd say "Leash Agreement" is an exercise in Truth in Advertising.
The most plausible reason for Spanish speakers to have avoided the Chevy Nova is the same reason that English speakers did: the car was a certified piece of shit.
Which trick?
Really, Pappe just twists around facts to draw wild-ass conclusions. When that isn't enough, he really does just rely on complete fiction to further his agenda.
I'm just not sure what it would take for you to realize Pappe is nothing short of a complete and utter crackpot--unless you are on an agenda, yourself. So tell me, are you?
I would call Pappe a very good source.
Well, the man is definitely on an agenda, and that agenda is something other than to seek the truth.
Are you, yourself, on an agenda?
Read "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe (an Israeli jew... mentionning it so that you can't dismiss him as a muslim, anti-semite, etc)
Just so you know, Ilan Pappe freely admits that he just makes shit up to support his objective.
If you want to cite Israeli sources and not sound like you're on an agenda, you might cite someone more mainstream.
Is the boogie-man of terrorism that intimidating?
I take it you don't live in Sderot.
And these type of edicts from up on high tend to really bite you in the behind over time. You wind up with hundreds upon hundreds of stored procedures, and nobody knows which ones are even in use any longer. One project will wind up requesting a change that affects another project, and it basically excludes any O/R mapping tools. It's just one huge mess.
Your best bet is to insist that your developers are just a little clued in. How hard is it to say, "As long as your queries always have an indexed field in the where clause, and your joins are all on the primary key, fire away. Anything other than that needs DBA approval." Or some other reasonable policy depending on how much data are in the database.
My ex's isn't as distant as one might think... She broke up with me because I was 'to good for her', but she wants me around often enough that I still know what's going on.
Interesting. It turns out that I, too, dated a girl for a few years, and she, too, broke up with me because I was 'too good for her'. With the benefit of 15 years of hindsight, I think that the real issue was that she just wasn't that into me, and that she only said I was 'too good for her' to make me feel better (it didn't).
But back onto the topic at hand, it would be difficult to know why the timeouts aren't working without seeing the dynamic first hand, but here are a few guesses: ;) See my example before. If one of my kids would act up, he or she would be in timeout in less than a minute.
1. Excessive time between infraction and punishment. Kids aren't just "mini adults" and need to see the cause and effect happen quickly. Once they're older, they'll understand that they lost the car this weekend because they stayed out after curfew last weekend without permission. But before age 12 or so, they really need instant er.. gratification.
2. Excessive escalation between infraction and punishment. Notice in my example a few posts back, I never negotiated, lectured, or otherwise engaged the kid in any discussion about the infraction. All the kid needed to know was that what he or she is doing is wrong and is not going to be tolerated. Black and white for the little ones. It sounds like your ex offers way too much discussion about the infraction. This only invites whining, yelling, distraction, and escalation.
3. Exhaustion causes inability to stick to discipline scheme. She's a single mom of two kids. That's exhausting. The kids can wear her down to manipulate her, and they know it.
4. No enforcement of rules in her absence. If the rules only apply when mommy's in the room, that sets a really bad example.
Frankly, I'm not sure why she'd even bother with a timeout after she engaged her child in a screaming match. A child throwing a tantrum is part of growing up. Does your ex feel it adds to her authority by throwing tantrums of her own? If she wants adult respect, she might as well try acting like an adult.
Unfortunately, parenting is not easy.
Thanks for helping me with Step 1. I really appreciate the time and effort you put into that research. I'm sure it must have been very difficult for you.
Step 2: ??
Have you not heard about the UK, where a judge has upheld the notion that a Muslim family dispute ought to be covered by Sharia, in addition to the normal UK legal system?
How is that any different from the Jewish Beth din courts that have operated in New York City (and other parts of the US?) for decades and done much the same thing? I really don't see a problem with this as long as these "courts" don't have the rule of law and as long as nobody can be compelled against their will to resolve a dispute in them.
Looking up what a Beth Din is, it looks like they are in the business of arbitrating financial disputes and ruling on religious matters.
For the arbitration function, it would seem that both parties in the dispute would have to agree to binding arbitration by the Beth Din. This is no different in my mind to agreeing to binding arbitration by any other private arbitration service.
For the religious rulings, obviously it would not be a function of government courts to rule on religious matters. Separation of church and state, and all.
But I think this is different from Sharia Law. Sharia Law is the one where they cut off your hands if you are accused of stealing. For less serious crimes, I believe flogging or caning is the cruel and unusual punishment of choice. Obviously it would not be acceptable in an enlightened country to have groups of people setting up their own courts and cutting off each other's limbs as punishment for this or the other crime.
From the Beth Din webpage, I did not notice any caning, flogging, or amputation services provided by their arbitrators. Please correct me if I am wrong on this point.
The only acceptable response to this policy (aka abuse) is to ban it legally and remove its supporters from the government.
I'll get right on that.
Step 1: ??
I guess I'm from a fairly long line of people where a quick bit of discipline enforced by rigid punishments worked. Always.
I'm glad it worked for you. Like I said before, I'm not one of these people who feels that corporal punishment is automatically child abuse. I don't use it because I don't know how to make it work, and I don't know how to make it teach what I want taught.
My ex uses time out and similar things... she can't get her kid to stay in their room or even a corner unless she's standing their keeping him form leaving.
How old are the kids? How long are the timeouts? How long did it take between the infraction and the timeout?
Not that you care since she's your ex, but if the kids are already trained that mommy will give up after enough persistence, it's going to be hard to impose any discipline on them at all.
I think you are a good example of how someone's parenting style is inherited from his or her own parents. :) Like I said, I have never seen a corporal punishment modeled in a way that satisfies me, so I do not use it. I'm glad it worked for your parents.
Going to your room doesn't help when you can't keep the kid from coming back out as soon as you leave them there... 'timeout' is the funniest thing I've ever seen
You know, it's funny you should mention that, because before I tried it, I thought a timeout was the stupidest thing ever. When my oldest was 2, she was a serious pill. Every little thing elicited an inconsolable tantrum (they don't call 'em the terrible 2s for nothing).
My wife and I suspended our skepticism and tried it out, and hell if it did not work wonders. Every kid is different, and what worked for my kids may not work for other kids, but here's how the above situation would have played out in my family.
1. I tell the kid to stop yelling indoors
2. Kid keeps yelling (of course)
3. I say, "That's 1."
At this point, he or she (we used the same system for all kids) is reminded that yelling indoors is not permitted. Was that enough to stop the yelling? Sometimes, but usually not, so...
4. Kid keeps yelling
5. "That's 2."
At this point, a timeout is imminent, and the kid knows it. Unless he or she is really in a bad mood, the behavior that I was trying to end is usually over. Realize that only about 10-15 seconds have elapsed so far. In the instances when the behavior did not stop (perhaps 10-15% of the time)...
6. Kid yells some more, maybe yells at me.
7. "That's 3. Take a timeout."
At this point, the kid goes to his or her room for a timeout (if at home), or to some other suitable timeout location (if not at home). The time from infraction to punishment is 30 seconds or less. The punishment is simple, consistent, and immediate. But I'm sure you're wondering if a timeout can actually be instructional.
I had that same concern, but hell if after a timeout, the kid isn't the most pleasant, clam, and changed kid you've ever seen. The yelling is done, the kid is calm and ready to listen. The first time I saw it in action, I wondered if it was the same kid I had left alone just 2 minutes earlier.
Even more important was that any misbehavior was going to stop in under a minute, either willingly (the usual case), or via timeout. That control gave me the confidence as a parent to handle the situation without any escalation. That meant no frustration, no anger, no confusion regarding how to handle the recalcitrant child, and no hitting. Having a good system is just as important for the parent as for the child.
This experience is why I have difficulty seeing how corporal punishment would be effective for the majority of children (yes, my objection to corporal punishment is not that I don't believe in hitting kids, it's that I don't believe it would actually work). First of all, I find it hard to believe that delayed punishment is going to deter any child under age 6. A kid above age 11 or so is going to know that once a whuppin' is already going to happen later, what is the incentive for good behavior? And how does it work for older kids? Do you beat a 16-year-old? How would the child survive in the world after age 18 with no one to beat them?
Granted, you don't give a 16 year old a timeout, either--you take away the car. But by then, hopefully you've taught them right from wrong. If your 16-year-old son is still whining to get his way and pulling his sister's hair, then you've not really done your job as a parent, now have you?
But as humans we simply don't respect someone who can't back up a command. Going to your room doesn't help when you can't keep the kid from coming back out as soon as you leave them there
Oh, when I say timeout, a timeout is happening. There is no question of backing it up. And
I'm going to guess that you don't have any kids, because it turns out parents pretty much only hang out with other parents. The reasons? Well, our schedules mesh better, but probably the bigger reason is that parents drone on and on about their kids, and it drives non-parents completely bonkers (and rightfully so).
Believe me, I understand well that "randomly swatting your kids around" is not a discipline system. The problem is, I have never seen corporal punishment modeled in a manner that gets positive results. I'm sure someone out there is using it effectively, but I have never witnessed it.
The way I normally see "corporal punishment" being practiced is this:
1. Parent asks kid to either do something or stop doing something.
2. Kid ignores parent
3. Parent raises voice
4. Kid ignores parent
5. Parent gets in kid's face and uses his or her full, given name (middle name included), and makes an idle threat
6. Kid yells at parent
7. Parent is confused at why kid is ignoring him or her, and is embarrassed that the kid is totally controlling the situation. Parent yells and threatens idly some more.
8. Kid yells back at parent
9. Parent is really pissed off and embarrassed at being defied by a 4 year old. Parent needs to hit something, so he or she grabs the child and starts smacking.
10. Kid runs off crying--but will repeat the same episode tomorrow.
What kids really need is structure, not beatings. They see the world in black and white (gradually less so as they get older), and if you don't make their world black and white for them, they get confused and act out. Kids crave routine, and get confused and act out when their worldview is a moving target. Also, kids learn by making mistakes--do you really want to be kicking the shit out of them every time they make a mistake? Any effective discipline system needs to address these issues.
The best discipline systems are simple, systematic (consistent), instructional, and swift. For example, every time the kid whines, the kid needs to understand that whining is not permitted, the punishment should be the same as the last time he whined, and it needs to happen immediately. As you can see, the above 10-step discipline system addresses none of these requirements.
I suppose you could say that if the kid whines, you don't go through the 10 steps of escalation--you just spank, and that would be simple, systematic, and swift. But is it really instructional? If every time the kid makes a mistake he gets hit immediately? What kind of a child will you be raising, then?
That most parents don't understand what discipline is or how to use it only suggests more to me that we need state mandated parent training, probably once a year until their kids are 18.
I have to say that when my first kid was a baby, my earliest lament was that these kids don't come with instruction manuals. But as I've gotten older, I've realized that once the kids are born, it's a little late.
Would state-mandated parent training really help this? In 2000, I took a training on Rational Rose. Later that year, when I tried to make my first sequence diagram, I realized that I didn't know thing #1 about where to even begin. It was as though I didn't take that week-long training at all. It wasn't until I found a more experienced software architect to mentor me that I was able to use the tool effectively.
Likewise, I think that most parents model their own parents' style. I know I do, and most of my friends do, as well. Speaking of state-sponsored training, do you drive like they taught you to in driver's ed? Hands at 10 and 2, Shadow99_1. ;)
Do all of your peers suffer from a 10% student participation rate? If not, perhaps you should take on a mentor to learn what you are doing wrong.
I mean, geez. It sounds like you could do better just showing Friends reruns all day long.
I say this as a parent: if paddling your kids is part of your regular discipline scheme, you are probably doing something wrong. I'm not saying corporal punishment needs to be completely off the table, but it really should be the nuclear option.
Most of the time when I see other parents hitting their kids, it is more as therapy for a confused and frustrated parent, than a well-conceived lesson for the kid. When you get upset and hit your kids, what does that teach the kid? That when you're upset at someone, you hit them.
I think a lot of parents fail to realize just how much their kids idolize them and learn from them. Judging by the messages they send, anyhow.
All students require motivation to learn. Most students are not self-motivated.
Stop right there and go find an actual kid to talk to.
Kids are learning machines. If a kid says, "I hate school," that to me says nothing about the kid, and everything about the school.
Really? If you can afford $75/month, you can afford it with taxes.
Who said anything about what I can afford? I could afford $75 or even a lot more than that, but I choose a plan that is only $40/mo pretax because that is what I want to spend. What I can afford has nothing to do with it.
I can see their point for not wanting to give out numbers on this, because of the variables involved. Plus, if they try to quote you a "with taxes cost" then you might try to hold them to that figure.
Yet somehow they manage to generate a bill each month that has my balance computed to the penny.
Why can't my wireless carrier say, "As of 7/1/2008, this plan would cost you $xx.xx inclusive of all taxes and surcharges. That number is subject to change with changes in telecommunication regulations."?
In Australia, the price quoted has to be the price that is paid by the consumer
In most of the world with high sales tax (sorry, VAT/GST), the pretax price is just not even close to the final price paid. It would just be nonsensical to quote a pre-tax price.
For instance, let's say you were going to visit Denmark where the VAT is 25%. Why would you quote a price of 75 Euros when the final price is going to be 100 Euros? It's just not even close.
In the US, it's a legitimate question of whether to display pretax or post-tax pricing. For instance, where I live sales tax is 2%. A $75 item will cost $76.50 when rung up. Annoying? Perhaps, but it at least the price tag makes some approximation of what the final price will be.
Personally, I'd prefer the price posted to be the price paid, but I still like that the tax is itemized on the receipt. In the US, we hate taxes, so it's important to remind people when they are being taxed.
Perhaps US people just need to get out more and experience a wider variety of accents...
You know, I've been to a lot of places, and I've never had such difficulty communicating anywhere as I experienced in the UK. When, exactly, did you people forget how to speak English? While visiting, I experienced the most atrocious grammar (adjectives modifying verbs, etc.) and impenetrable pronunciation imaginable.
Ordinarily, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest to have a bit of a language barrier in a foreign country. In fact, I've grown quite fond of "point and pray" meals--but in the UK, this is simply not an option because the food is so universally lousy. You're really taking your health and well-being into your own hands if you rely on "point and pray" in a place where what constitutes "edible food" is so misunderstood.
Now that you've gotten me started, maybe you could settle a bit of curiosity. Is the world-famous British lack of dental health caused by poor oral hygiene, lack of available dental care, or years of eating British food?
I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that effective rate is lower.
That should read "I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that your effective rate is lower."
taxes are so high in a place like Norway, they have a lot more government-provided services, stuff that we have to pay out the wazoo for in the U.S. Heath care is an obvious one.
I'm pretty sure health care is the only one. And how expensive is your health care, really? Mine is about $500/mo for the entire family including copays, etc., and I don't consider my health plan to be any good at all. So my out of pocket health care expense is only $6k/year, but if I had to pay 50% taxes (that 50% underestimates the tax liability by a huge amount, by the way... look at their VAT to see why!) that would cost me way more than $6k. So I'm quite happy with the US system.
Incidentally, the richest people here in America don't actually pay 35%. The dirty little secret that rich people don't want you to know because you'd probably vote it out of existence is that the tax rate on the wealthy is closer to 15%, which is much lower than you or I likely pay. (What's your marginal income tax rate?)
This is a 100% Class-A bullshit argument. Who cares what anyone's marginal rate is? I'd happily let you set my marginal rate as high as you want--but only if I get to set my effective rate! ;)
So let's look at the effective tax rates. Look at yours. What is it? Probably under 10%. For a wealthy person, it's going to be much higher thanks to the AMT. Even if you just want to look at marginal rates, you have to realize that the AMT marginal rate for capital gains is 22% and most deductions are disallowed under AMT.
Find a wealthy person and ask that person what his or her effective income tax rate is. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that effective rate is lower.
Virgin Mobile. NO extra fees. At all. Why they say 10$, they mean 10$. Just add sales tax.
Thanks for that.