PDA

View Full Version : School start times



sandsjames
08-28-2014, 12:54 PM
I guess it's too much to ask for parents to have kids go to be at a reasonable time...

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/28/health/school-start-times/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
08-28-2014, 01:42 PM
I guess it's too much to ask for parents to have kids go to be at a reasonable time...

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/28/health/school-start-times/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

I guess going to bed earlier isn't a solution

sandsjames
08-28-2014, 01:51 PM
I guess going to bed earlier isn't a solution

It will probably cause emotional distress if kids have a bedtime.

Until I was 16, I had a 9 O'clock bedtime on school nights. Always got plenty of sleep. And even after I was allowed to stay up, I was always ready to sleep at the usual time.

I imagine now that kids just sit in their bedrooms on the computer or cell phone as long as they want, until they can't stay awake any longer.

Poor parenting is poor.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-28-2014, 05:22 PM
It will probably cause emotional distress if kids have a bedtime.

Until I was 16, I had a 9 O'clock bedtime on school nights. Always got plenty of sleep. And even after I was allowed to stay up, I was always ready to sleep at the usual time.

I imagine now that kids just sit in their bedrooms on the computer or cell phone as long as they want, until they can't stay awake any longer.

Poor parenting is poor.

Oh! How I agree! If only those nutty professors who conducted that study could view the world through the lens of simplistic homespun wisdom.

Yes, poor parenting is poor!

Good parenting is good!

Cold water is cold and hot water is hot!

A strictly adhered to bed time is strictly adhered to.

If you stay up all night on the computer, then you'll be up all night on the computer.

Why can't the kids of today be like the children of yesteryear? Promptly in bed by 21:00 hours, and if they stay up a little later, they engage in some wholesome activity like reading comic books under their covers with a flashlight.

sandsjames
08-28-2014, 05:50 PM
Why can't the kids of today be like the children of yesteryear? Promptly in bed by 21:00 hours, and if they stay up a little later, they engage in some wholesome activity like reading comic books under their covers with a flashlight.

Why can't they be in bed at a reasonable time? Your entire post is full of the usual...but what's one good reason that schools should have to conform to bad parenting by starting later? Personally, if the kids are too tired then it's their own damn fault.

I run into the same thing at our tech school. The students don't have it easy (up at 3:30am to do PT before breakfast...in order to start school at 0630). On many occasions they will get pretty sleepy. When I ask them what time they were in bed, most say 11PM or so. When asked why, it's usually because of video games, etc. I have no sympathy. Sure, getting up early sucks...but when you know you have to be up early you make adjustments.

But this is just more of the same. Trying to cater to those who aren't smart enough to take care of themselves.

Now tell me why I'm wrong...or make your usual retort telling me sarcastically how you agree. Either way, you can't give a good reason why the schools should have to change their time instead of having the parents take responsibility for it.

I guess bed times for kids is a bad thing now...

Stalwart
08-28-2014, 06:08 PM
I would suggest that one 'pro' of later start times for schools (at least high school) would be to allow teenagers to have jobs.

I worked at a restaurant from my sophomore year until I graduated, the restaurant closed at 10 on weekdays, and if you were a closer you likely didn't get off until 1100. Once I got home was when I could work on homework for the day. My school started at 0715 and was out at 1445.

Maybe every parent doesn't want to have their teenagers working, others may not have that option (we did not.). For those that want to/need to work a bit of more 'normally' scheduled day (0900 - 1600 for example.) may make their days a little more manageable.

sandsjames
08-28-2014, 06:15 PM
I would suggest that one 'pro' of later start times for schools (at least high school) would be to allow teenagers to have jobs.

I worked at a restaurant from my sophomore year until I graduated, the restaurant closed at 10 on weekdays, and if you were a closer you likely didn't get off until 1100. Once I got home was when I could work on homework for the day. My school started at 0715 and was out at 1445.

Maybe every parent doesn't want to have their teenagers working, others may not have that option (we did not.). For those that want to/need to work a bit of more 'normally' scheduled day (0900 - 1600 for example.) may make their days a little more manageable.

Sure, but on the other side there are many parents who start work at, say, 0700. Now they have to find daycare for their younger children for 90 minutes a day...and that's not cheap. Of course there are pros and cons...my point is that it's pretty simple to have your kids in be at a reasonable time to get enough sleep.

Otherwise, we're just teaching them that the world will change to conform to their personal needs...and that's helping nobody in the long run.

Stalwart
08-28-2014, 06:25 PM
Sure, but on the other side there are many parents who start work at, say, 0700. Now they have to find daycare for their younger children for 90 minutes a day...and that's not cheap. Of course there are pros and cons...my point is that it's pretty simple to have your kids in be at a reasonable time to get enough sleep.

Otherwise, we're just teaching them that the world will change to conform to their personal needs...and that's helping nobody in the long run.

Which is why I wouldn't think it a feasible idea outside of high school. Most of the businesses, work environments around here are closed when I am driving into work (about 0500).

At least my circle of friends & associates, if they aren't military ... most of them do not start work at 0700, it is usually 0800 or after.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-28-2014, 06:49 PM
Why can't they be in bed at a reasonable time? Your entire post is full of the usual...but what's one good reason that schools should have to conform to bad parenting by starting later? Personally, if the kids are too tired then it's their own damn fault.

I run into the same thing at our tech school. The students don't have it easy (up at 3:30am to do PT before breakfast...in order to start school at 0630). On many occasions they will get pretty sleepy. When I ask them what time they were in bed, most say 11PM or so. When asked why, it's usually because of video games, etc. I have no sympathy. Sure, getting up early sucks...but when you know you have to be up early you make adjustments.

But this is just more of the same. Trying to cater to those who aren't smart enough to take care of themselves.

Now tell me why I'm wrong...or make your usual retort telling me sarcastically how you agree. Either way, you can't give a good reason why the schools should have to change their time instead of having the parents take responsibility for it.

I guess bed times for kids is a bad thing now...

I'm wondering how much of that article you read, because there is a paragraph in it that talks about enforcing bedtime and limiting the use of electronic devices.

Plus, the article largely centered on High School students, who do have more complex and busy schedules than middle schoolers.

A big section of the article talked about the safety advantage of having high schoolers start no earlier than 0830, it eases the morning commute and reduces student traffic accidents. Many high school kids drive cars, and that's a reality.

It is easy to take a one dimensional view of an article's headline and shout "bah humbug" and then proclaim that, "poor parenting is poor."

I suggest using some more of your critical thinking skills if you want to avoid my sarcasm.

garhkal
08-28-2014, 08:35 PM
Why can't they be in bed at a reasonable time? Your entire post is full of the usual...but what's one good reason that schools should have to conform to bad parenting by starting later? Personally, if the kids are too tired then it's their own damn fault.

I run into the same thing at our tech school. The students don't have it easy (up at 3:30am to do PT before breakfast...in order to start school at 0630). On many occasions they will get pretty sleepy. When I ask them what time they were in bed, most say 11PM or so. When asked why, it's usually because of video games, etc. I have no sympathy. Sure, getting up early sucks...but when you know you have to be up early you make adjustments.

But this is just more of the same. Trying to cater to those who aren't smart enough to take care of themselves.

I agree SJ. Why should schools shift over start times to cater to the new generation who can't seem to grasp the fact they need to be in bed by 10pm at the latest for a good night sleep, which means turn the damn phone/laptop/ipod/pad etc OFF.

sandsjames
08-28-2014, 10:12 PM
I'm wondering how much of that article you read, because there is a paragraph in it that talks about enforcing bedtime and limiting the use of electronic devices.

Plus, the article largely centered on High School students, who do have more complex and busy schedules than middle schoolers.

A big section of the article talked about the safety advantage of having high schoolers start no earlier than 0830, it eases the morning commute and reduces student traffic accidents. Many high school kids drive cars, and that's a reality.

It is easy to take a one dimensional view of an article's headline and shout "bah humbug" and then proclaim that, "poor parenting is poor."

I suggest using some more of your critical thinking skills if you want to avoid my sarcasm.

I really don't care about your sarcasm. It's the best you can do.

The point is, if parents did their jobs, kids would get plenty of sleep.

As far as safety...hell...let's just homeschool everyone...safety issue gone. Yes, many high school kids drive cars. So do many young adults who have jobs and get up early every single day.

Do I have an issue with schools starting at 8:30? Not one bit. What I have a problem with is somebody telling them what time they should start in order to fill a gap in poor parenting.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 12:49 AM
I really don't care about your sarcasm. It's the best you can do.

The point is, if parents did their jobs, kids would get plenty of sleep.

As far as safety...hell...let's just homeschool everyone...safety issue gone. Yes, many high school kids drive cars. So do many young adults who have jobs and get up early every single day.

Do I have an issue with schools starting at 8:30? Not one bit. What I have a problem with is somebody telling them what time they should start in order to fill a gap in poor parenting.

Yes...and why do we have murder laws? What is so hard about not killing people?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 01:15 AM
Yes...and why do we have murder laws? What is so hard about not killing people?
Are you serious with that???? Come on now...

Absinthe Anecdote
08-29-2014, 02:00 AM
I really don't care about your sarcasm. It's the best you can do.
Really? You made an incredibly dense and simplistic statement proclaiming, "Poor parenting is poor." And you are wondering why I am poking fun at that?


Do I have an issue with schools starting at 8:30? Not one bit. What I have a problem with is somebody telling them what time they should start in order to fill a gap in poor parenting.

Again, did you even read the article that you linked?

It wasn't suggesting that schools start later as a stop gap measure for bad parenting.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:44 AM
Are you serious with that???? Come on now...

Well, no, not really. But the answer that "just make parents be better parents" is no answer either.

I only glanced over the article...but if their data is accurate on all the good things that result in starting school a little later, what is wrong with that?

Is it because all of the arm-chair parents out there think they could do a better job?

Is there a reason school needs to start so early...other than "it worked for me and I turned out so good"?

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:51 AM
Why should schools shift over start times to cater to the new generation

Wait, did you just ask...why should they cater to the population they are supposed to serve?

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:56 AM
Here's the thing guys...

If the data shows that students do better, arrive safer, and are more healthy with a 1 hour later start time...or evening classes...DO THAT!!! Who cares if it wasn't what you did as a kid, or how your perfect parents raised you as a perfect child. Take a step into the real world for a second...WHY start school at a time that statistically is shown to be worse?

Now, if I were the Superintendent of Schools, I'm not signing on for this one article, it would take more research and understanding...but, since I'm not, and we're only talking this one article, I'm taking it at face value.

Capt Alfredo
08-29-2014, 08:59 AM
How many of you advocating for the status quo hate it when someone enforces stupid rules at work under the rubric of "but that's the way we've always done it!"? I'm guessing most of you. Multiple studies have shown the circadian rhythms of kids are such that a later start time is definitely advantageous. Get thy stick out of the mud!

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 11:30 AM
I only glanced over the article...but if their data is accurate on all the good things that result in starting school a little later, what is wrong with that?

Is it because all of the arm-chair parents out there think they could do a better job?

Is there a reason school needs to start so early...other than "it worked for me and I turned out so good"?My school started at 8:15, so it didn't work, or not work, for me.

This isn't about the school start time. This is simply about another step they want because parents can't be bothered to raise their kids.

And I'm curious what makes them think it will work anyway. That stats they show assume that the kids will go to bed at the same time. If they move the start of school back an hour, the kids who are already staying up later than they need to in order to get enough sleep will just stay up an hour later. Then the only ones impacted will be those who it works out better for to have an earlier start.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 11:31 AM
How many of you advocating for the status quo hate it when someone enforces stupid rules at work under the rubric of "but that's the way we've always done it!"? I'm guessing most of you. Multiple studies have shown the circadian rhythms of kids are such that a later start time is definitely advantageous. Get thy stick out of the mud!

Again, the later start time isn't the issue. The amount of sleep is the issue.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 11:35 AM
I'd bet that statistics show that a later work start gets better production. If you are an NCOIC, or a Commander, you should definitely change your duty hours in order to let your 18 year old airmen get a full nights sleep. Oh, and definitely don't discipline them if they oversleep and come in late because statistics show there is nothing they can do about it.

Capt Alfredo
08-29-2014, 11:56 AM
Again, the later start time isn't the issue. The amount of sleep is the issue.

Right and they'll get more sleep if you let them start later.

Capt Alfredo
08-29-2014, 11:57 AM
I'd bet that statistics show that a later work start gets better production. If you are an NCOIC, or a Commander, you should definitely change your duty hours in order to let your 18 year old airmen get a full nights sleep. Oh, and definitely don't discipline them if they oversleep and come in late because statistics show there is nothing they can do about it.

I've worked in organizations that had flex time and I can tell you I personally got more done coming in late than trying to be early.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 12:22 PM
Right and they'll get more sleep if you let them start later.No, because they'll stay up later...

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
08-29-2014, 01:31 PM
Right and they'll get more sleep if you let them start later.

Or perhaps knowing they don't go in until later in the morning will entice them to go to bed later. It's simple, in that you get to bed at a reasonable hour so you get your 8 hours of sleep. Stay up later because of your video game and Facebook addiction, get less sleep.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-29-2014, 02:19 PM
I see the negative reactions to this article as the standard knee jerk response to the news media. People see a headline that they think is at odds with their values and start screaming about it before they give the article a full read and a measured consideration.

Is going to bed at a reasonable hour part of the equation to getting enough sleep? Yes, and there was a passage in the article that spoke to that. However, that isn't the only factor that advocates of later start times are considering.

Some of the responses to this article remind me of the Grinch up on his mountain top ranting at the inhabitants of Who-ville in the valley down below.

Perhaps, a cantankerous Limbaugh hurling warnings that the country is going to shit because of liberal thinking would be more accurate?

Either way, I encourage you grumpy grinches to read beyond the first few lines of the story before you start shouting that the sky is falling, and that school systems are catering to bad parents.

I saw nothing in the article to indicate that school systems are adopting later start times on a large scale in order to cater to video gamers and lousy parents.

As Captain Alfredo said, "Get thy stick out of the mud!"

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 02:28 PM
I see the negative reactions to this article as the standard knee jerk response to the news media. People see a headline that they think is at odds with their values and start screaming about it before they give the article a full read and a measured consideration.

Is going to bed at a reasonable hour part of the equation to getting enough sleep? Yes, and there was a passage in the article that spoke to that. However, that isn't the only factor that advocates of later start times are considering.

Some of the responses to this article remind me of the Grinch up on his mountain top ranting at the inhabitants of Who-ville in the valley down below.

Perhaps, a cantankerous Limbaugh hurling warnings that the country is going to shit because of liberal thinking would be more accurate?

Either way, I encourage you grumpy grinches to read beyond the first few lines of the story before you start shouting that the sky is falling, and that school systems are catering to bad parents.

I saw nothing in the article to indicate that school systems are adopting later start times on a large scale in order to cater to video gamers and lousy parents.

As Captain Alfredo said, "Get thy stick out of the mud!"

Keep assuming I didn't read the whole thing. That's fine.

And nice of you to bring up liberals and Limbaugh, like this has anything to do with either.

This isn't the schools catering to anyone. This is a suggestion that they should. The suggestion, and the study, is a waste of time. It's like the recent study talking about what percentage of adults wake up in the morning and are groggy, not thinking straight, etc...and it has an official disorder assigned to it because some people become violent in this stage.

I'm just getting tired of studies that are designed to release people from any sense of responsibility.

And as far as the driving statistics for accidents related to driving while tired, I'm sure that will get better when we take all those same high risk drivers and put them on the road closer to rush hour. Seems brilliant.

Oh, how I remember the days when you were away and unable to connect to this site.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:29 PM
And I'm curious what makes them think it will work anyway.

Uh...they studied it?


That stats they show assume that the kids will go to bed at the same time.

How does it do that? I didn't analyze the study, but it seems they looked at actual kids.


If they move the start of school back an hour, the kids who are already staying up later than they need to in order to get enough sleep will just stay up an hour later. Then the only ones impacted will be those who it works out better for to have an earlier start.

You know this for a fact or you're guessing/assuming? Have you studied this?

Hmmm...how should we find out if this is true or not? Hey, I know...let's try it and see what happens...maybe do a study to see if you're correct!

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:32 PM
I'd bet that statistics show that a later work start gets better production. If you are an NCOIC, or a Commander, you should definitely change your duty hours in order to let your 18 year old airmen get a full nights sleep.

I'm trying to find the downside here that you seem to want to be presenting, but I don't see it?

If the stats actually prove that...why not change? Do you have something against data-driven decisions?


Oh, and definitely don't discipline them if they oversleep and come in late because statistics show there is nothing they can do about it.

This isn't part of anything...no one said the kids were going in late or not being disciplined.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:32 PM
No, because they'll stay up later...

Now who's assuming?

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 02:46 PM
The suggestion, and the study, is a waste of time. It's like the recent study talking about what percentage of adults wake up in the morning and are groggy, not thinking straight, etc...and it has an official disorder assigned to it because some people become violent in this stage.

I'm just getting tired of studies that are designed to release people from any sense of responsibility.

How does this study release anyone from a sense of responsibility? Physiology is a real thing...a real science, and performing a study to find out how humans perform best has nothing to do with their sense of responsibility.

It's more like studying athletes to learn that taking a day of rest every week rather practicing every day makes them perform better...I have a feeling to that study you would say "why are we catering to lazy athletes that should just practice every day instead of worrying about resting"


And as far as the driving statistics for accidents related to driving while tired, I'm sure that will get better when we take all those same high risk drivers and put them on the road closer to rush hour. Seems brilliant.

Again...you have an aversion to actually taking data. You already assume you know what will happen.

This is why people study things...to find our if what they think they know is actually true or not.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 02:47 PM
I'm trying to find the downside here that you seem to want to be presenting, but I don't see it?

If the stats actually prove that...why not change? Do you have something against data-driven decisions?I have nothing against data-driven decisions as long as the data is complete and is relevant. I've searched but can't find any data on kids that go to bed at a reasonable time in order to get a full nights sleep having an issue with getting up early and being less productive or more of a risk driving. I see no data about urban vs. rural as far as the accidents. I see no projections of how many more cars would be on the road during rush hour in an urban location and how that would impact driver safety. All I see is one sided data saying that in order to get kids enough sleep, so they can be safer and productive, schools should start later.




This isn't part of anything...no one said the kids were going in late or not being disciplined.This was about teenage troops in a military shop. If you're in a shop that starts at 0630, it's not the fault of the Airman if he/she isn't productive. It would be best for the entire military if the work schedule accommodated the sleep schedule.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 02:52 PM
How does this study release anyone from a sense of responsibility? Physiology is a real thing...a real science, and performing a study to find out how humans perform best has nothing to do with their sense of responsibility. It's taking the responsibility away from parents of ensuring their kids are being taken care of properly.


It's more like studying athletes to learn that taking a day of rest every week rather practicing every day makes them perform better...I have a feeling to that study you would say "why are we catering to lazy athletes that should just practice every day instead of worrying about resting" No, it's like telling the athlete that is just fine working out every day that he has to take a day to rest.


Again...you have an aversion to actually taking data. You already assume you know what will happen. I'd like to think that people studying this and coming out with the data would also consider these things but, from what I can read, they aren't, so all that's left is for me to make assumptions.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 02:57 PM
What the study should have been is "Why aren't kids getting to bed early enough to have the necessary amount of sleep?" Then, if determined that it was unavoidable, do studies on how to fix it.

My favorite quote from the artical. "Most teenagers simply can't fall asleep before 11 p.m. even if they're lying in bed for hours."

How 'bout we look at why, and fix that? Most studies show that computers, TVs, other electronics, cause kids (and everyone) trouble with falling asleep if used late in the evening. Too much to ask to fix that first, I guess.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 03:15 PM
It's taking the responsibility away from parents of ensuring their kids are being taken care of properly.

"Regarding school start times, a small but increasing number of school districts have delayed school start times in response to research about the prevalence of insufficient sleep among adolescents. Students who attended schools with later start times reported later rise times, more total sleep on school nights, less daytime sleepiness, less tardiness, fewer attention/concentration difficulties, and better academic performance compared with children who attended earlier-starting schools."


No, it's like telling the athlete that is just fine working out every day that he has to take a day to rest.

It's not like that at all.

But, you would prefer to tell him that although their is proof the day of rest increases performance he may not take it because it might make him lazy and then he'll want to take 2 days off.


I'd like to think that people studying this and coming out with the data would also consider these things but, from what I can read, they aren't, so all that's left is for me to make assumptions.

I'm guessing you didn't read the technical paper attached to the article...most of it is about electronic devices in the rooms, etc.

The thing is the schools can not enact a policy telling all parents to be better parents so we can still start school at 0730. The school can not enact a policy telling all kids not to have a tablet in their room. The school can not enact a policy telling all kids that the modern lifestyle is not good and they should get up early and milk the cows before school.

The school can start later...and if that proves effective, I don't see any reason not to do ...it's as if you're afraid the kids will do well, and the parents get to be proud of them even though they are bad parents....I don't get it.

Parents are bad, therefore children should be less successful...that's your policy and you're sticking with it?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 03:25 PM
The thing is the schools can not enact a policy telling all parents to be better parents so we can still start school at 0730. The school can not enact a policy telling all kids not to have a tablet in their room. The school can not enact a policy telling all kids that the modern lifestyle is not good and they should get up early and milk the cows before school. Exactly!!!!!! So you just answered your own question about how this is taking responsibility away from the parents.

Though I hate the phrase "modern lifestlye". Basically what that means is that kids get to do whatever they want because the parent isn't going to enforce a lifestyle conducive to school success.


The school can start later...and if that proves effective, I don't see any reason not to do ...it's as if you're afraid the kids will do well, and the parents get to be proud of them even though they are bad parents....I don't get it.

Parents are bad, therefore children should be less successful...that's your policy and you're sticking with it?Wrong wrong wrong. Parents are bad, therefore steps should be taken to improve parenting.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 03:37 PM
Exactly!!!!!! So you just answered your own question about how this is taking responsibility away from the parents.

Though I hate the phrase "modern lifestlye". Basically what that means is that kids get to do whatever they want because the parent isn't going to enforce a lifestyle conducive to school success.


Wrong wrong wrong. Parents are bad, therefore steps should be taken to improve parenting.

What steps...by who?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 03:41 PM
What steps...by who?I don't know. Nobody has ever done a study.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 03:42 PM
I don't know. Nobody has ever done a study.

Do you have a hypothesis upon which to base a study?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 03:53 PM
Do you have a hypothesis upon which to base a study?

Absolutely:

Studies showing that societal pressure has made things tougher for kids today to be successful have led to irresponsible parenting by providing an excuse for parents not to consistenly discipline their child.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 03:56 PM
Absolutely:

Studies showing that societal pressure has made things tougher for kids today to be successful have led to irresponsible parenting by providing an excuse for parents not to consistenly discipline their child.

So...what steps should we consider...by whom...so that we can study whether or not they'll be effective?

CYBERFX1024
08-29-2014, 04:02 PM
I really hate how people want to complain about school start times for their kids and complain about being to early. Well how about you parents stop being lazy and get up at a decent time. Also why not put your kids to bed at a decent time?
When I got custody of my two older children from my x-wife they literally had NO BEDTIME when living with her. So when they came to my house they were in a culture shock with having to deal with a bedtime. Now we (My wife and I) make sure they go bed at 8pm on school nights and 9pm on the weekends. During the summer it was 9pm everyday but now school is in session.

My kids have no problem waking up at 7:15am because they go to bed early.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 04:16 PM
So...what steps should we consider...by whom...so that we can study whether or not they'll be effective?

The step we should consider is to stop telling parents why it's not their fault. Do a study on how kids in the same neighborhoods and backgrounds have differing school grades based on different parenting styles and strictness (non-abusive strictness, of course). My hypothesis is that this study would show that the parents who take more time parenting and less time befriending their children will show much higher grades.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 04:17 PM
I really hate how people want to complain about school start times for their kids and complain about being to early. Well how about you parents stop being lazy and get up at a decent time. Also why not put your kids to bed at a decent time?
When I got custody of my two older children from my x-wife they literally had NO BEDTIME when living with her. So when they came to my house they were in a culture shock with having to deal with a bedtime. Now we (My wife and I) make sure they go bed at 8pm on school nights and 9pm on the weekends. During the summer it was 9pm everyday but now school is in session.

My kids have no problem waking up at 7:15am because they go to bed early.

Don't be talking common sense. Times have changed!!!! Parents can't tell kids what to do anymore. That will only hinder their development as an individual.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-29-2014, 04:21 PM
What steps...by who?

I can certainly imagine the amount of screaming that would occur if anyone even hinted at legislation to enforce mandatory bedtimes.

The amusement level of this thread is inversely proportionate to the depth of the hole he is digging himself into.

Classic!

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
08-29-2014, 04:24 PM
I'm waiting for the "scientific study" that concludes that students learning will improve if they only went to school 3 days per week. Perhaps people should realize that there are studies for just about everything, including studies that "prove" opposite results of similar studies.

As for this so-called research, I can prove to you that going to bed earlier will result in more sleep. Imagine that.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 04:28 PM
I really hate how people want to complain about school start times for their kids and complain about being to early. Well how about you parents stop being lazy and get up at a decent time. Also why not put your kids to bed at a decent time?
When I got custody of my two older children from my x-wife they literally had NO BEDTIME when living with her. So when they came to my house they were in a culture shock with having to deal with a bedtime. Now we (My wife and I) make sure they go bed at 8pm on school nights and 9pm on the weekends. During the summer it was 9pm everyday but now school is in session.

My kids have no problem waking up at 7:15am because they go to bed early.

I'm not sure who this is directed to. If the article was from a parent complaining about the school start time, then your comment would be on target.

The article is about pediatricians who have performed a study that, at least they say, shows that delaying school for one hour will bring about a lot of positives.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 04:29 PM
I can certainly imagine the amount of screaming that would occur if anyone even hinted at legislation to enforce mandatory bedtimes.

The amusement level of this thread is inversely proportionate to the depth of the hole he is digging himself into.

Classic!And there's the typical internet forum answer. State that someone is digging themself into a hole so that it seems like it's happening.

Nobody said anything about mandatory bed times. It's about encouraging society to be parents rather than discouraging it.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 04:30 PM
I'm not sure who this is directed to. If the article was from a parent complaining about the school start time, then your comment would be on target.

The article is about pediatricians who have performed a study that, at least they say, shows that delaying school for one hour will bring about a lot of positives.

You're half right. The article is about a parent, by a parent, complaining about school start times by choosing a specific study that makes it "easier" for her to do her job.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 04:33 PM
The step we should consider is to stop telling parents why it's not their fault.

When did we start? I don't think anyone has said that at all...at least not in this article or study.


Do a study on how kids in the same neighborhoods and backgrounds have differing school grades based on different parenting styles and strictness (non-abusive strictness, of course).

Okay...I would be suprised if this has not already been done.


My hypothesis is that this study would show that the parents who take more time parenting and less time befriending their children will show much higher grades.

I agree with that. I think this is fairly well known. We see this all the time, "they need a parent, not a friend" etc. So, I guess we're done? That's it...that's as best we can do...and if we find something that helps kids do better than should be a parents job we're not allowed to help with it?

Are we really barred from looking at OTHER ways that might help kids be more successful since it's all the parents responsibility anyway?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 04:39 PM
I'm waiting for the "scientific study" that concludes that students learning will improve if they only went to school 3 days per week. Perhaps people should realize that there are studies for just about everything, including studies that "prove" opposite results of similar studies.

As for this so-called research, I can prove to you that going to bed earlier will result in more sleep. Imagine that.

As a tech school instructor, we go through a class that teaches us the "best" way to get information to our students. "Studies" have proven that it's the best way. The only time we actually teach that way is if we have an evaluator sitting behind us. And when we get back to the regular stuff, the students ALWAYS tell us how difficult is was to sit through that hour.

Here's some of the things we are required to do, or not do, when instructing:

Never talk when your back is turned (ie. writing on the board). This is always fun when you're drawing a diagram and there's 2 minutes of complete silence.

Always use the eraser in an UP and DOWN motion, never SIDE to SIDE, because side to side causes your butt to move back and forth, which could be a distraction (I shit you not).

Never tell the student that their answer is wrong. Tell them that they are on the "right track" or it was a "good try" because telling them they are wrong can discourage them from asking further questions.

The list goes on and on.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 04:41 PM
When did we start? I don't think anyone has said that at all...at least not in this article or study.



Okay...I would be suprised if this has not already been done.



I agree with that. I think this is fairly well known. We see this all the time, "they need a parent, not a friend" etc. So, I guess we're done? That's it...that's as best we can do...and if we find something that helps kids do better than should be a parents job we're not allowed to help with it?

Are we really barred from looking at OTHER ways that might help kids be more successful since it's all the parents responsibility anyway?

Have parenting classes in school. Not classes telling them how to parent, but just showing statistics (since statistics are the "be all, end all") on the outcomes of different situations/styles. It took a couple generations to go from a general respect for authority to a general disdain for authority. It won't be a quick fix, but maybe 30 years down the line we'll see an improvement.

And I wouldn't bar anything, except giving parents an excuse not to do their jobs.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 04:56 PM
Have parenting classes in school. Not classes telling them how to parent, but just showing statistics (since statistics are the "be all, end all") on the outcomes of different situations/styles.

okay...but, let's not do it too early in the morning.


It took a couple generations to go from a general respect for authority to a general disdain for authority.

This is horseshit. Old people have been saying this about the younger generation for 1000s of years.


It won't be a quick fix, but maybe 30 years down the line we'll see an improvement.

And I wouldn't bar anything, except giving parents an excuse not to do their jobs.

Everything is the parents job. Now you want to hold a special class to teach them how to be parents...or that being good parents results in better kids? Wasn't that the parents' parents job to teach them that? How did they end up being irresponsible parents anyway? Why didn't their parents raise them better? Now you want the govt. to take over that responsibility?

Setting a time for school that happens to be 9:00 instead of 8:00 does not give parents and excuse for anything...would setting school at 6:00 be better? how about 5:00? What if we did a study of awesome parents with wonderful children and still found out that 9:00 worked best?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 05:12 PM
This is horseshit. Old people have been saying this about the younger generation for 1000s of years. This is not horseshit. Are you honestly going to try to tell me that kids now don't have a much larger sense of entitlement? I'm not claiming it's the first time this has ever happened. It's been an evolution over those thousands of years, but it consistently gets worse.




Everything is the parents job. Now you want to hold a special class to teach them how to be parents...or that being good parents results in better kids? I'm not teaching the class to the parents. I'd recommend teaching the kids...again...not about parenting style, but just by giving them facts about how different styles relate to different results.


Wasn't that the parents' parents job to teach them that? How did they end up being irresponsible parents anyway? Why didn't their parents raise them better? Now you want the govt. to take over that responsibility? Ridiculous...


Setting a time for school that happens to be 9:00 instead of 8:00 does not give parents and excuse for anything...would setting school at 6:00 be better? how about 5:00? What if we did a study of awesome parents with wonderful children and still found out that 9:00 worked best?Before implementing vast changes, messing with everyone's schedule, etc, how about doing studies of those kids that start class at 6 or 7 AM and go to bed at a reasonable time to ensure the recommended amount of sleep. Let's start there. That's doesn't require any changes.

Just to point out, the study wasn't about bed times and wake times, it was about the total hours of sleep. Really it doesn't matter whether you start school at 5am or Noon, as long as you get your 8 1/2 to 9 hours. So why is the first recommendation a sweeping change to the school system?

Absinthe Anecdote
08-29-2014, 06:09 PM
This isn't the schools catering to anyone. This is a suggestion that they should. The suggestion, and the study, is a waste of time.

After much chiding from me, it appears you have finally read the article, because earlier in the thread, you were saying that bothered you that the schools were doing just that.

At one point, you were also claiming that it released parents from their responsibility from getting their kids to bed at a decent hour, which it doesn't.

You might not like me calling you out for being completely off target because you failed to read the article, but in reality, I did you a favor.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-29-2014, 06:26 PM
I have noticed that those who claim the younger generation is, incapable of learning, disrectful of authority, too wild, or apathetic, are usually lousy leaders.

Blaming the younger generation is a way for a crappy parent or leader to dodge responsibility.

It is a horse shit excuse.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 06:27 PM
This is not horseshit. Are you honestly going to try to tell me that kids now don't have a much larger sense of entitlement? I'm not claiming it's the first time this has ever happened. It's been an evolution over those thousands of years, but it consistently gets worse.

I'm telling you kids today are no worse than before.

I'm not sure about this whole "sense of entitlement" you always fall back on?...you have an "sense of entitlement" knowing you can travel 300 miles in car in 6 hours instead of riding a horse for 3 days?

What is wrong with that sense of entitlement? I don't think kids today are any worse than kids before them.


I'm not teaching the class to the parents. I'd recommend teaching the kids...again...not about parenting style, but just by giving them facts about how different styles relate to different results.

Okay, so you want a class to tell the kids that if they're parents are more strict, they will probably turn out better...backed by statistics. And your assumption is that the kids will take this home and tell their parents they should be more strict...or at least when those kids grow they will be more strict parents and in 30 years, everyone will be going to bed early.

That's your plan?


Ridiculous...

Exactly.


Before implementing vast changes, messing with everyone's schedule, etc, how about doing studies of those kids that start class at 6 or 7 AM and go to bed at a reasonable time to ensure the recommended amount of sleep. Let's start there. That's doesn't require any changes.

Okay. So, we have a study that shows that kids who go to bed by 9 pm do better with school. Mail it to the parents, I have no problem with that.


Just to point out, the study wasn't about bed times and wake times, it was about the total hours of sleep. Really it doesn't matter whether you start school at 5am or Noon, as long as you get your 8 1/2 to 9 hours. So why is the first recommendation a sweeping change to the school system?

VAST changes? If you say so.

Because some schools have acted on that information and found success?

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 06:41 PM
Okay, so you want a class to tell the kids that if they're parents are more strict, they will probably turn out better...backed by statistics. And your assumption is that the kids will take this home and tell their parents they should be more strict...or at least when those kids grow they will be more strict parents and in 30 years, everyone will be going to bed early. The second part, yes, that down the road with proper education people could be better parents.







Okay. So, we have a study that shows that kids who go to bed by 9 pm do better with school. Mail it to the parents, I have no problem with that. Holy shit dude...it's not about a bed time. It's not about school starting early or late. It's about parents making sure the kids have what they need to succeed as far as a sense of responsibility.




VAST changes? If you say so.

Because some schools have acted on that information and found success?Vast changes if the entire country went to this schedule. Unless you don't think changing the work schedule of millions of people is vast.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 06:49 PM
The second part, yes, that down the road with proper education people could be better parents.

Holy shit dude...it's not about a bed time. It's not about school starting early or late. It's about parents making sure the kids have what they need to succeed as far as a sense of responsibility.

Vast changes if the entire country went to this schedule. Unless you don't think changing the work schedule of millions of people is vast.

No, I don't consider a one-hour work schedule change to be a vast change. In fact, I do it every week...we report an hour earlier every Friday.

Twice per year the clocks change by an hour...no apocalypse.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 06:53 PM
The second part, yes, that down the road with proper education people could be better parents.

Okay, so you have a 30 year plan to correct this problem because you are so opposed to kids not getting up early enough for you. I don't get it. What is so wrong about 9 am school starts that we need a 30 year plan to correct it?

My kid is in college and she tries not to schedule classes before 10 am...is this a "sense of entitlement" too? What if she is perfectly willing to go to class at 6 am, just prefers not to?


Holy shit dude...it's not about a bed time.

You were the one making it about bed time...this whole problem according to you is bed time.


It's not about school starting early or late. It's about parents making sure the kids have what they need to succeed as far as a sense of responsibility.

No, it's not...that's what you are making it about. It's about a simple change the schools can make to help out their customer...and you are afraid that they will succeed despite have poor parents...or something, I still can't imagine why you have such a hard time with a simple improvement to the schedule.

sandsjames
08-29-2014, 07:06 PM
Okay, so you have a 30 year plan to correct this problem because you are so opposed to kids not getting up early enough for you. I don't get it. What is so wrong about 9 am school starts that we need a 30 year plan to correct it? For Christ's sake, are you just trolling now? I'll say it one last time. It's not about the start time. It's about the fact that it's related to a much bigger issue...parenting responsibility.


My kid is in college and she tries not to schedule classes before 10 am...is this a "sense of entitlement" too? What if she is perfectly willing to go to class at 6 am, just prefers not to? Not a problem...her starting at 10 doesn't impact anyone else.




You were the one making it about bed time...this whole problem according to you is bed time. No...fuck...no...I was making it about parents doing their job and not letting their kids decide what's best.




No, it's not...that's what you are making it about. It's about a simple change the schools can make to help out their customer...and you are afraid that they will succeed despite have poor parents...or something, I still can't imagine why you have such a hard time with a simple improvement to the schedule.And I can't understand why you have a hard time realizing that the problem is not about the school start time.

Anyway, I'm done...have a great weekend.

Measure Man
08-29-2014, 07:21 PM
Anyway, I'm done...have a great weekend.

Cheers!!!!

TJMAC77SP
08-29-2014, 08:22 PM
I just came across this thread and two things came to mind.

1. Given everything going on around the country and world it dawns on me that the MTF has really sunk low.

2. I know now what Yogi Berra meant.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-29-2014, 08:23 PM
I wanted to hear more about the 30 year plan to create better parents and children. It sounds intriguing; Joseph Stalin was famous for implementing five year plans, so I'm guessing that a 30 year plan would have six times the chance of creating a utopian paradise.

I can imagine it, it's easy if I try...

First, I see lots of Walt Disney style bluebirds fluttering around people's heads as they rise from bed each morning at the crack of dawn to prepare for work and school.

Entire flocks of them fetch your clothes from the closet, squeeze toothpaste onto your toothbrush, and bring you a towel as you exit the shower. All while loudly chirping a happy tune.

In the kitchen, there are cartoon squirrels, field mice, and raccoons busily preparing a breakfast of flapjacks, bacon, and sunny-side-up eggs, as a trio of chipmunks pour you a tall glass of orange juice.

Parent and child happily skip off to work and school, respectively, while whistling a jaunty tune.

At night, the parent sends the child to bed, and a wise old owl peers into the bedroom window, ready to give a disapproving hoot, should the youngster activate an electronic device.

A knowledgeable cricket with keen morals hangs around the bedside to discourage masturbation, and any other questionable activity.

Yep, I'm thinking that 30 year plan and all those cartoon animals will be a big hit! Plus, it isn't usurping the basic parental responsibility one bit.

Shaken1976
08-29-2014, 09:33 PM
We have a no electronics in the bedroom rule for the kids. Before they shower all tablets, phones, and video games go into the game room. The kids have no tv in their rooms either. At 9 PM all three are in bed and by 9:15 all are out like lights. They are busy during the day. School, dance, gymnastics, playing outside, or stuff like that are what we do in the evenings. We wake the kids up at 6 AM and they are up and moving with no issue.


I read that older kids do better if they sleep later....that may be true for some kids. It wasn't for me. I did best from 6-2ish....still do.

garhkal
08-29-2014, 11:41 PM
Again, the later start time isn't the issue. The amount of sleep is the issue.

And if start times are moved back an hour or two, how many feel the kids will use that time to get more sleep?


What the study should have been is "Why aren't kids getting to bed early enough to have the necessary amount of sleep?" Then, if determined that it was unavoidable, do studies on how to fix it.

My favorite quote from the artical. "Most teenagers simply can't fall asleep before 11 p.m. even if they're lying in bed for hours."

How 'bout we look at why, and fix that? Most studies show that computers, TVs, other electronics, cause kids (and everyone) trouble with falling asleep if used late in the evening. Too much to ask to fix that first, I guess.

Good point SJ. Why are kids not able to fall asleep prior to 11pm? I know when i grew up, i had no issues with that. Heck it was rare i was not alseep by 10pm. Now days i have problems getting to sleep prior to 2AM. But then i also wake up around noon-1pm.


I really hate how people want to complain about school start times for their kids and complain about being to early. Well how about you parents stop being lazy and get up at a decent time. Also why not put your kids to bed at a decent time?
When I got custody of my two older children from my x-wife they literally had NO BEDTIME when living with her. So when they came to my house they were in a culture shock with having to deal with a bedtime. Now we (My wife and I) make sure they go bed at 8pm on school nights and 9pm on the weekends. During the summer it was 9pm everyday but now school is in session.

My kids have no problem waking up at 7:15am because they go to bed early.

Good for you. When i was active duty, one of the guys i worked with had to take over care for his Sister's 2 kids (8 and 13 yr olds) cause she was incapable of taking care of them herself (due to going to jail for 2 yrs). The 13 yr old cried foul to family services, cause 'our uncle' was mean and actually DID lay down ground rules and enforced them. Something that their mother never seemed to do.
I have heard of similar cases over the years, where one parent IS strict on sleep times/go to bed times/curfews. While the other was not. And the kids raising bloody murder at the strict parent.


I'm telling you kids today are no worse than before.

I'm not sure about this whole "sense of entitlement" you always fall back on?...you have an "sense of entitlement" knowing you can travel 300 miles in car in 6 hours instead of riding a horse for 3 days?

What is wrong with that sense of entitlement? I don't think kids today are any worse than kids before them.

Lets see. When i grew up, i had to WORK for pocket money. I had chores i had to do otherwise i didn't get any game time with my commodore 64. As i grew up and Cel phones started coming out, i had to work to EARN the money to buy one myself.
Take my neighbor. She just got done buying a THIRD phone for her 10 yr old as she lost the first one and broke the 2nd. The 10 yr old has not done a damn thing to earn it, pay for it, but almost demands that parents BUY them one. Adverts for going back to school, seems to show that a parent is NOT doin their kid right, if they DON'T have a laptop or Tablet of their own, as they won't be able to keep up with their friends.

That is what me and SJ see as the 'sense of entitlement'.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-30-2014, 12:06 AM
Lets see. When i grew up, i had to WORK for pocket money. I had chores i had to do otherwise i didn't get any game time with my commodore 64. As i grew up and Cel phones started coming out, i had to work to EARN the money to buy one myself.
Take my neighbor. She just got done buying a THIRD phone for her 10 yr old as she lost the first one and broke the 2nd. The 10 yr old has not done a damn thing to earn it, pay for it, but almost demands that parents BUY them one. Adverts for going back to school, seems to show that a parent is NOT doin their kid right, if they DON'T have a laptop or Tablet of their own, as they won't be able to keep up with their friends.

That is what me and SJ see as the 'sense of entitlement'.

When the heck did you grow up? The Commodore 64 was from 1982, and cell phones didn't become widely popular until the late 1990s.

Unless you are talking about one of those brick sized cell phones that Gordon Gekko carried in the 1987 film, Wall Street, something isn't adding up with your story of being a dutiful and hard working adolescent who had to pay for their cell phone.

Besides, you do realize that as a child of the 1980s or 1990s (whatever it was) there were people who grew up in earlier decades who scoffed at you and called you spoiled.

garhkal
08-30-2014, 05:20 AM
When the heck did you grow up? The Commodore 64 was from 1982, and cell phones didn't become widely popular until the late 1990s.

Unless you are talking about one of those brick sized cell phones that Gordon Gekko carried in the 1987 film, Wall Street, something isn't adding up with your story of being a dutiful and hard working adolescent who had to pay for their cell phone.

Besides, you do realize that as a child of the 1980s or 1990s (whatever it was) there were people who grew up in earlier decades who scoffed at you and called you spoiled.

I had a commodore all the way from 85 through to 91 (still have one but no tape player, floppy drive or working power supply). The Cel phone issue came about in 91 while i was living stateside when they were starting to get a little more common. But the point stands. If i wanted something, other than food/new clothes, i had to go out and work for it. Kids these days seem to get everything they want handed to them.
Its almost like parents are scared of saying NO to them.

Measure Man
08-30-2014, 08:54 AM
And if start times are moved back an hour or two, how many feel the kids will use that time to get more sleep?

I'm sure a lot of people "feel" that way...doesn't mean they are right. That's why people do studies.


Good for you. When i was active duty, one of the guys i worked with had to take over care for his Sister's 2 kids (8 and 13 yr olds) cause she was incapable of taking care of them herself (due to going to jail for 2 yrs). The 13 yr old cried foul to family services, cause 'our uncle' was mean and actually DID lay down ground rules and enforced them. Something that their mother never seemed to do.
I have heard of similar cases over the years, where one parent IS strict on sleep times/go to bed times/curfews. While the other was not. And the kids raising bloody murder at the strict parent.

Lets see. When i grew up, i had to WORK for pocket money. I had chores i had to do otherwise i didn't get any game time with my commodore 64. As i grew up and Cel phones started coming out, i had to work to EARN the money to buy one myself.
Take my neighbor. She just got done buying a THIRD phone for her 10 yr old as she lost the first one and broke the 2nd. The 10 yr old has not done a damn thing to earn it, pay for it, but almost demands that parents BUY them one. Adverts for going back to school, seems to show that a parent is NOT doin their kid right, if they DON'T have a laptop or Tablet of their own, as they won't be able to keep up with their friends.

If you think kids weren't spoiled in the 80s, I disagree wit that.

I don't think it's that the 80s were a time of simple living and hard work...it's because you were a child and only had a very limited view of the world. I promise you, the grown ups in the 80s believed you were a spoiled rotten, entitled little asshole.


That is what me and SJ see as the 'sense of entitlement'.

It's the cycle of life...you guys are just the cranky old men now.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-30-2014, 12:17 PM
I had a commodore all the way from 85 through to 91 (still have one but no tape player, floppy drive or working power supply). The Cel phone issue came about in 91 while i was living stateside when they were starting to get a little more common. But the point stands. If i wanted something, other than food/new clothes, i had to go out and work for it. Kids these days seem to get everything they want handed to them.
Its almost like parents are scared of saying NO to them.

Not to get side tracked on the 1991 cell phone, but I find it fascinating. In 1991, cell phones were still those brick sized models or the ones that were called bag phones. The smaller ones didn't come out until 1997.

You were walking around with one of those shoulder bag phones?

As a teenager walking around in 1991 with a Gordon Gekko Brick, or an equally conspicuous shoulder bag phone, I am positive that older people looked at you and thought, "what a spoiled brat!"

Regardless of the fact that you worked and paid for it yourself.

Unless, you walked around announcing to the public that you paid for it, then they probably thought something else.

Either way, I think it is kind of crappy the way you condemn a whole generation of today's kids just because of your neighbor's kid.

Out of tens of millions of kids out there, you don't think that there are any hardworking kids amongst them?

BENDER56
08-30-2014, 08:30 PM
Lets see. When i grew up, i had to WORK for pocket money. I had chores i had to do otherwise i didn't get any game time with my commodore 64. As i grew up and Cel phones started coming out, i had to work to EARN the money to buy one myself.
Take my neighbor. She just got done buying a THIRD phone for her 10 yr old as she lost the first one and broke the 2nd. The 10 yr old has not done a damn thing to earn it, pay for it, but almost demands that parents BUY them one. Adverts for going back to school, seems to show that a parent is NOT doin their kid right, if they DON'T have a laptop or Tablet of their own, as they won't be able to keep up with their friends.

I hadn't read this thread because I don't give a crap about the subject. But when I noticed it was up to seven pages I thought I might skim through it real quick, even though I know that when a thread gains traction on this forum it's usually just because a few individuals have used it to continue their ongoing pissing contest.

...aaand I wasn't disappointed. Now don't go taking offense at that; y'all can use this forum any way you want to (within the moderators' guidelines, I suppose.) However, I don't have to find y'all's continued sniping interesting, either.



So kids today are more entitled because you, personally, weren't when you were there age?

Well, I guess that proves it. Oh, wait. Except when I was their age, I was completely spoiled by my parents. No joke. I had no chores and my parents pretty much got me anything I wanted -- unless it was outside their budget, I guess. I don't know, I never asked for outrageously expensive stuff. They even bought me cars when I was old enough to drive. Used ones, of course, but still cars. Put me on their insurance and paid for that, too. I did start working when I was a senior in high school, but that was mostly to pay for my newfound partying lifestyle. My parents still mostly supported me until I got married at age 25 -- lived under their roof rent free, ate their food, it was great.

So I guess my anecdotal "proof" cancels out yours, no?

garhkal
08-30-2014, 09:00 PM
Not to get side tracked on the 1991 cell phone, but I find it fascinating. In 1991, cell phones were still those brick sized models or the ones that were called bag phones. The smaller ones didn't come out until 1997.

You were walking around with one of those shoulder bag phones?

Out of tens of millions of kids out there, you don't think that there are any hardworking kids amongst them?

On the phone, no i didn't have a brick, but dearly wanted one, just cause. Couldn't afford it even with me working both a paper route and on a market stall.
As for the hard working kids comment. Sure there are some out there. But based on my POV of what i see, it seems more are spoilt than ever.

Max Power
08-31-2014, 03:16 AM
On the phone, no i didn't have a brick, but dearly wanted one, just cause. Couldn't afford it even with me working both a paper route and on a market stall.
As for the hard working kids comment. Sure there are some out there. But based on my POV of what i see, it seems more are spoilt than ever.

http://global3.memecdn.com/kids-these-days_o_1336281.jpg

Absinthe Anecdote
08-31-2014, 04:29 AM
On the phone, no i didn't have a brick, but dearly wanted one, just cause. Couldn't afford it even with me working both a paper route and on a market stall.
As for the hard working kids comment. Sure there are some out there. But based on my POV of what i see, it seems more are spoilt than ever.

So you didn't buy a cell phone as a teenager in 1991.

What was that stuff you were typing a few posts ago? Was it an embellishment, a little fib, or perhaps a touch of hypoxia from the lofty altitude of your high horse?

garhkal
08-31-2014, 05:41 AM
http://global3.memecdn.com/kids-these-days_o_1336281.jpg

I ain't that old. But i like the pic!


So you didn't buy a cell phone as a teenager in 1991.


I dearly tried to buy one. BUT even working as much as i did, i couldn't earn enough to get one.