[John_Galt]

Quote:

Churches subsidize a lot of the private schools and tuition is 9k/year. The public schools that aren't in the city are great (memphis and the surrounding counties are excellent examples here. The city schools are 1/10 shit holes and the counties are 9/10)

Exactly.

For all the decrying feminism that goes on around here, a surprising number of men buy into the "Sex and the City" lifestyle they proclaim to hate.

Stranger still, the irony is completely lost on them

WAKE UP!

[John_Galt]

(12-09-2016 02:08 AM)Kona Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 11:28 PM)John_Galt Wrote:  

Kids don't need a fucking iPad. Hell, I barely use the two I own.

Yeah the schools require that the kids have iPads. The public school kids get them for free. Maybe you could donate yours?

I think its best that my neiece attend the private school at our family's expensive so she gets a better education and is constantly around and associating with a higher caliber of people.

If we sent her to the public school (Google Hawaii public schools) the quality just isn't there anymore. On top) f that, the average cost of public education is 12k a year per kid anyway.

So when you say its a waste of money going the private route, are you saying that about all schools?

We should just take the free option even though its shitty, because its free, and you get a free iPad?

Aloha!

You're making an argument using false principles.

First off, you don't have to live in Hawaii. So let's get that straight.

Secondly, no kid needs an iPad. Period.

The school may "require" one, but you don't have to send your kids to those schools. You choose to. Again, no one forces you to live in Hawaii.

Regarding the "higher caliber of people". I went to a small-town private school for a year when I was in 8th grade. Do you know what kind of people were there? A bunch of goody-two shoes "Christian" kids. They were pussies. That school had the most pretentious imbeciles I ever had the displeasure of associating with. I was kicked out for saying my step-mother is a bitch. That's how disconnected they were.

Sure, at the public high school there were a lot of "diverse" poor kids, and some were bad characters. But such is life.

People give WAY too much credit to "education".

School is how kids get a SOCIAL education.

Most of your intelligence is already developed by the time you get to school anyways. I've never met a kid who was dumb at 5 and smart at 15.

Also, many of you confuse cause and effect.

The kids in the ghetto aren't failures because of their schools. They are failures because of their families and environment at home.

Poverty breeds poverty, and shitty families breed shitty kids.

Trust me, as a guy who has grown up with rich kids and poor ones, there are shitty kids on both sides of the monetary scale.

It's not the money or lack thereof that makes a kid turn out a failure. It's the parenting and the genetics.

Stop looking at money as the solution to all your problems. I can promise you, it won't make your kids smarter, more successful, or happier. Only you can do that.

[Dr. Howard]

(12-09-2016 02:48 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

[quote] (12-09-2016 02:08 AM)Kona Wrote:  

Kids don't need a fucking iPad. Hell, I barely use the two I own.

Yeah the schools require that the kids have iPads. The public school kids get them for free. Maybe you could donate yours?

....

Trust me, as a guy who has grown up with rich kids and poor ones, there are shitty kids on both sides of the monetary scale.

It's not the money or lack thereof that makes a kid turn out a failure. It's the parenting and the genetics.

Stop looking at money as the solution to all your problems. I can promise you, it won't make your kids smarter, more successful, or happier. Only you can do that.

I'm pretty sure that Kona is the official ambassador of Hawaii in addition to living there. He's to Hawaii like Bill Clinton is to Arkansas, or Mike Ditka is to Illinois or "the situation" is to New Jersey.

[John_Galt]

Oh, well in that case, Konas a fucking beast and he should keep doing what he's doing.

Still, everything in life is a compromise. Nothing is free. He wants to be Ambassador to Hawaii, he gives up other opportunities (such as decent schools that don't cost Trumps salary).

[brick tamland]

(12-08-2016 11:17 PM)BossOfBosses Wrote:  

Look, all you dudes saying this is "genocide". Is it minorities fault white people are refusing to reproduce? I don't get it honestly. Put up or shut up as they say. Nobody is stopping white people. Calling this "genocide" is idiotic.

Somehow you have missed the point. There is a master plan somewhere. The trend is not coincidental.
There is a reason white Americans are having fewer children. "Disincentives" for white Americans having children were deliberately created over the years.
Meanwhile many non-whites and immigrants from the low and the bottom socio-economic stratum feel no inhibitions about having large families, despite their often relatively precarious situations. The poverty line itself doesn't discourage them.

The next talking point will be what happens starting in the year 2044?

[Kona]

(12-09-2016 02:48 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

First off, you don't have to live in Hawaii. So let's get that straight.

Yes I do. How would my grandma get around?

My whole family is here. Our roots are here. We are connected to this place. We aren't going to move somewhere else we don't like so our kids can get a higher quality handout from the government. We'll give our kids the best we can, on our own, right here at home.

I think its very important to pass this sense of pride of where we are from on to the kids. They then go on to make it better just like their ancestors did.

I guess you don't have that connections n to where you live, and there for we're never going to agree on this one.

(12-09-2016 02:48 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

Poverty breeds poverty, and shitty families breed shitty kids.

Right. This is why we want to send our kids to the best school possible. There's no ebt card kids at my neices place. You can't pay the tuition, you go to the public school. The kids get more out of the private school because it isn't free. 20k is a lot of money, and already at five my nice is starting to get that. She knows to work harder, and will learn it mor in the future, because someone's paying for it.

(12-09-2016 02:48 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

I was kicked out for saying my step-mother is a bitch. That's how disconnected they were.

I'm not really following how that makes the school disconnected? But have a nice day.

EDIT: POST NUMBER 2500!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Aloha!

[John_Galt]

(12-09-2016 03:33 AM)Kona Wrote:  

Yes I do. How would my grandma get around?

My whole family is here. Our roots are here. We are connected to this place. We aren't going to move somewhere else we don't like so our kids can get a higher quality handout from the government. We'll give our kids the best we can, on our own, right here at home.

I think its very important to pass this sense of pride of where we are from on to the kids. They then go on to make it better just like their ancestors did.

I guess you don't have that connections n to where you live, and there for we're never going to agree on this one.

My bad Kona. That came across as if I was telling you personally, you don't have to live in Hawaii (but for the record: You don't). It wasn't meant that way. I meant that as a general argument to the forum.

But you're right, I don't have any roots where I am. But even if I did, my direct family (wife and kids) would take precedence over my extended family. That's my personal view.

(12-09-2016 02:48 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

Poverty breeds poverty, and shitty families breed shitty kids.

Quote:

Right. This is why we want to send our kids to the best school possible. There's no ebt card kids at my neices place. You can't pay the tuition, you go to the public school. The kids get more out of the private school because it isn't free. 20k is a lot of money, and already at five my nice is starting to get that. She knows to work harder, and will learn it mor in the future, because someone's paying for it.

Really doesn't address what I said. You are her family, not her classmates.

(12-09-2016 02:48 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

I was kicked out for saying my step-mother is a bitch. That's how disconnected they were.

Quote:

I'm not really following how that makes the school disconnected?

The school wasn't disconnected. The kids were. They were so far removed from reality, of how the real world operated outside the walls of that school, that this offense was considered banishable.

This type of attitude is fine if your kids never step foot out of the gated community, but eventually they're going to move out into the real world, and if they haven't seen the shit that the lower class members of society do, they are going to be in for a RUDE awakening once they finally see the real world.

You can only shelter kids for so long. Eventually, they have to leave the nest. That's my point.

[Atlanta Man]

(12-09-2016 03:27 AM)brick tamland Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 11:17 PM)BossOfBosses Wrote:  

Look, all you dudes saying this is "genocide". Is it minorities fault white people are refusing to reproduce? I don't get it honestly. Put up or shut up as they say. Nobody is stopping white people. Calling this "genocide" is idiotic.

Somehow you have missed the point. There is a master plan somewhere. The trend is not coincidental.
There is a reason white Americans are having fewer children. "Disincentives" for white Americans having children were deliberately created over the years.
Meanwhile many non-whites and immigrants from the low and the bottom socio-economic stratum feel no inhibitions about having large families, despite their often relatively precarious situations. The poverty line itself doesn't discourage them.

The next talking point will be what happens starting in the year 2044?

I hang around primarily upper middle class white, Jewish and Cuban people in Miami. They plan their child birth and manage their finances around their child rearing. Most of them drive normal sedans, dress conservatively, and avoid debt like the plague. They focus their income on living in better neighborhoods, buying property they can rent for long term income (and borrow against the equity to invest in more property),putting their children into competitive schools, and low risk low yield bonds.

I know hood people and "$30,000 a year millionaires" in Miami and Atlanta. They get thots pregnant , don't plan for shit, buy dumb shit on credit, wear designer bullshit, and spend all their money attempting to look rich while dead broke.These people are just irresponsible in every aspect of their life including family planning.

Birth control should be free for all women and encouraged among young poor low socioeconomic classes. This should be done until Maury Povich never has to ask "Who is the Father?" ever again.

[Genghis Khan]

I have to concur very strongly with John_Galt. I've gone back and forth from public to private schools. so I might be in a unique position to evaluate the two side-by-side.

Elementary school - public school, inner city, poor white kids and immigrants. Straight up grimy, war zone refugee kids with mental problems, kids who were part of gangs
High school - private school, elite, some of the richest people in the country (got really lucky here)
College - public state school, farmers' kids were common
Grad school - Ivy (and I interacted heavily with the undergrads, know them extremely well)

The one thing all good kids had: good genetics (high IQ) and solid parents/community.

No doubt on average the kids in the private schools were smarter than the public school kids. Pure IQ, private school kids win hands-down. On the flipside, no amount of private school can fix stupid (low IQ). Additionally, money cannot make up for a shitty parenting style. I've also seen plenty of kids with rich medical doctors as parents be complete fuckups and losers.

In contrast, my parents weren't well-educated. Not even close. Dad never finished high school. Couldn't help me with my homework. We grew up poor. But one thing they did do - be quality parents: provide a safe and stable home, be there for me every day of the week, emphasize the importance of education, take me to the library on weekends. The deep curiosity my parents fostered in me at an early age has done more for me than any $20K private school education could.

In terms of well-being, the public school kids win hands down. I understand the lure of a great school district. But more often than not, those kids grow up feeling deeply insecure. This manifests itself into a fake persona (everyone pretending like life is easy when in reality they're overworked), complete mental breakdown in college (Tim Ferriss almost committed suicide at Princeton after getting rejected from McKinsey - http://fourhourworkweek.com/2015/05/06/h...suicide/), and an almost robotic desire to pursue 'prestigious' jobs (80hour work weeks at elite finance, tech and consulting firms).

The greatest irony - these kids end up financially successful, settle down in a great school district and have their kids repeat the process. Why? So their grandkids can repeat the process and on and on it goes. In more extreme cases, it comes to bite you in the ass when your kids blows your head off to get your money:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ather.html

The greatest sadness - these kids would have been done fine and been much happier in a different life. And it really is sad: drug use is high, so are rates of suicide (look at Tim Ferriss for an example). There are tons of articles about high school kids committing suicide in areas such as Palo Alto. All that Silicon Valley dough can't bring back a dead kid. Cornell supposedly had to gate their bridges so kids would stop jumping from them into the gorges beneath.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arch...es/413140/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornell_gorge_suicides

People talk about contacts and connections as if they're always a good thing. They CAN be a good thing if the kid has a solid foundation (need solid parenting). However having such a network can backfire badly. Maybe not consciously, but subconsciously seeing all your friends make $100K+ will affect your own choices. Paul Sullivan wrote a book called The Thin Green Line - in which he talks about how people working in finance would buy $3M houses on a $400K salary. They all got fucked over when the economy collapsed in 2008. Do you know why they bought a $3M house they could not afford? Because all their friends (this great precious network) had $3M houses. This despite the fact that you would expect people who work in finance to make better financial decisions in their personal lives.

And that's only the money aspect. The status/prestige aspect is even more insidious. At least you can hide how much you make. You can't hide where you got your first job, whether you made VP or Partner by the age of 30, whether you got into Harvard Business School or had a book published. But hey, at least you made connections, right? Never mind you're spending $500 on a bar tab every weekend drinking your sorrows away because you're a 'failure in life'.

Why do we want our kids to be financially successful? On a fundamental level, we simply want our kids to be happy in life. In modern society, we have confounded financial success with satisfaction in life. Be rich and you'll never have to worry again. But the really insidious truth is the Faustian bargain you have to make to go the private elite high school -> Ivy League -> top med school/tech/consulting/finance gig route. For many people I know, the wheel of pain will never stop turning, no matter the success level. As Roosh aptly put it in his recent philosophical musings, this continuous goal achieving leads nowhere.

The biggest shock to me came when I started attending an Ivy League school. I was so excited to meet these superstar kids. I had expected them to have their entire lives sorted out. Surely these kids must have amazing lives. It was weird to finally realize that their lives actually sucked pretty hard. I have several Ivy League friends confide in me that they'd wish they'd gone to a state school instead.

I won't stop my children from attending top universities (if they get accepted). But I'm not going out of my way to ensure they get into Ivy League schools. The harsh reality is that you cannot teach your kids how life really works in a safe environment: my parents were poor, I grew up poor. It taught me a strong work ethic, strong moral values and the importance of family/community and education. If I live in a rich area where many things are a given, sure I can tell my kids how I grew up poor, but they'll never really understand it. It's like telling a guy who's never interacted with women what the Red Pill is all about. Intellectually he can get it, but he won't understand it on a visceral level until he goes through a few women. Similarly, I don't need to pretend to be poor - but by putting my kids in a nice elite suburb I rob them of the opportunity to understand the world as it really is.

Do you guys know why so many kids at elite universities gobble up the SJW bullshit? It's because they have no real life reference to compare that leftist crap ideology with. When everyone you know has been successful, it's easy to get convinced that the only reason people could be doing bad is because of oppression by the white man. When you've never interacted with a blue collar worker, it's easy to get convinced the only reason people could support Trump is because they're racist. This is the path you set your kids on when all they've ever known are private schools and highly successful people.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(12-09-2016 03:52 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

Birth control should be free for all women and encouraged among young poor low socioeconomic classes. This should be done until Maury Povich never has to ask "Who is the Father?" ever again.

My anti-abortion stance faded away after years of exposure to "the ghetto" through work and where I live. By "the ghetto" I am covering all races here (lived a while in rural Vermont).

Middle and upper middle class people really don't understand how different the people who are stuck in perpetual poverty are from them **. The conventional wisdom is the poor are just people without opportunity and resources. In reality, the perpetual poor have serious issues with intelligence, executive function, and future time orientation. Some of what I have come across:

1. Functionally illiterate adults. Unable to read above a 4th grade level.
2. Unable to do the most basic math (i.e. adding fractions), so they can't even read a tape measure.
3. Substance abuse is the norm. I have been on construction crews where the contractor pays the guys on a Monday. Why? Because if he pays them on Friday, they get fucked up all weekend, don't show up for work on Monday, and then starve to death until payday. He payed them on Monday so they were too busy with work to get high.
4. You get paid, but you spend everything instead of leaving aside $5 so you can afford take public transportation to the job site the next day.

I had the 'joy' of listening to a coworker schedule an abortion over the phone with the nonchalance of scheduling to one's teeth cleaned. She already had two kids whom I met. Both could be described as 'challenged' mental development wide. This woman was not an atypical case.

** If you are not lacking in intelligence, executive function, or future time orientation.. you will leave poverty.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(12-09-2016 01:24 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Getting into good schools is going to change dramatically under a Trump admin.

I hope so. What I send to the public school in the form of property taxes and income taxes, I could setup a kick-ass science lab (chemistry & physics) and offset the cost to hire private tutors for some of the subjects.

I pay over $30k in property taxes just for the schools every year. The sad thing is, it only covers 15% of the school costs. The rest is made up by the State via income and sales taxes.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(12-08-2016 11:51 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

Atlanta Man is 100% right that the educational and social environment your children are in from age 0-12 will have an enormous, and likely determinative impact on them. To be frank, you're a complete fucking idiot if you choose to send your kid to the average public school these days. A responsible father would do everything in his power to ensure the best environment to raise his children in. And the problem is that securing a good environment in 2016 is multiple times more expensive than it was when most of us were growing up. More and more people are being squeezed out of the middle class, and their kids are paying the price by receiving a godawful public school education, with teachers who don't give a shit and peer groups composed of "students" who care even less.

I have a public grade school two blocks from my apartment. It is one of the "better" public schools. The state aptitude test results are atrocious, with less than half the kids able to read at their grade level and less than a third when it comes to math. The facility is just glorified babysitting.

There is also the indoctrination that goes on that I want my kids to have no part in. I go into these schools for community meetings and the posters and the assignments posted on the walls reflect hard left ideological nonsense.

The private schools aren't much better when it comes to ideology. We had one here that decided mid year that all the kids would be eating Vegan meals. Parents are not allowed to pack their kids a lunch.

[LikeABaller]

This is not just Americas problem, its the worlds problem. White households have higher incomes, as income rises birthrates fall. Same phenomenon is happening in Germany,Switzerland,Denmark,Japan, Sweden etc etc.

The exception to the rule is very rich people, they tend to have a lot of kids. The most poor and the most rich tend to have high birth rates while middle class and upper middle class are on the much lower side. I think this is due to the fact that once the human reaches a certain standard of living, they don't wanna lose it. Imagine the upper middle class guy having 3 kids, it would be very hard of him to send each one of those kids to a 50k/year
school. He can only afford to send one, hence thats why he only has one kid. With 3 kids that upper middle class guy will probably fall into the middle class category, he wants to retain his status he doesn't want to drift down.
This is basically a class struggle.
Only the very rich can easily have as many kids as they want without giving up their standard of living or class.

Imagine an upper middle class family with 250k/year combined income
3 people = 80k/year income per head. Imagine there are 3 kids.
It will go down to 50k/year. Oops, that a huge change in that income bracket. It will impact standard of living. No more shopping from Nordstroms baby.No more weekend trips to Aspen.

Take a rich family with 5m/year income
3 people? 1.5m/year per head
5 people? 1m/year per head
Big deal... Still rich.

Take a poor family with 30k/year income
3 people? 10k/year per head.
5 people? 6k/year per head
Big deal... Still shit.

Why the poor have many kids? Because they have nothing to lose, with one kid they live in shit, with 4-5 kids it won't make any difference hence they don't care....

[Atlanta Man]

Why did John_Galt get the ban hammer?

[Samseau]

(12-09-2016 01:31 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 12:06 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 11:51 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

No one is talking about iPads when they say how expensive it is to have kids now. They're talking about the exorbitant costs it takes to simply avoid having your children sitting in a classroom at age 8 where half of the other children will have criminal records by the time they're 18.

This is only true if you accept the false paradigmn that you need a job to be successful, and that good jobs only exist in cities.

Both of these are false.

You don't need a job to be successful. As Enigma pointed out, you can easily make 50k+ a year with no formal education. Furthermore, you can do it and live anywhere you want.

Move out of the cities like LA, Chicago, and NYC, and suddenly your "right zip code" problem simply disappears. Bonus: Housing costs plummet as well.

Cities are great if you're single and looking for new pussy. If you're married with kids, the appeal is greatly diminished.

This "you need to be rich to raise kids in a respectable environment" argument is

There is an entire country outside these sardine cans. Stop confining yourself to 5% of the US.

I have children and I'm with Galt here. I live in the suburban south, and I work for myself.

You can live comfortably here on $30k a year. I consider my family well off in terms of resources, housing and schooling and that only requires a $50k before tax budget.

There are even these rural fiber optic grants that were given out a few years ago and you can live in these tiny towns that build their own 1 gig up/1 gig down networks that are cheaper and more reliable than what they have in the cities.

Churches subsidize a lot of the private schools and tuition is 9k/year. The public schools that aren't in the city are great (memphis and the surrounding counties are excellent examples here. The city schools are 1/10 shit holes and the counties are 9/10)

Get an HSA for health insurance and pay cash for minor things. Medical operations give huge discounts for timely cash payers. I mean 30 to 60% off a bill, and we pay $95 to visit the family doctor.

Family life compared to single life is exceptionally steady and boring, sort of like being a farmer. I think that people get trapped in this idea that it needs to be exciting or that they have to spend this shit ton of money on their kids to "win" at it.

Last, unless your wife is a doctor, or the library porn girl and is making serious money she should be staying at home and being a mom, especially in an expensive city. Here are the sunk costs that she has to out earn in order to have a career:
- $20k private school for kids
- $16K in vehicle depreciation, maintenance and fuel
- $5k in work lunches and starbucks
- $??? in work clothing
Thats $41k in expenses for her to work. So if she makes 60k, then your net is $19k from her job...right..wrong! She has to pay tax on that 60k. So its more like 40k after taxes and social insurance...so you're paying 1k out of pocket for her to work. Oh and her 60k in income also bumps your income into a higher tax bracket when its added together.

Do the math, and don't buy into the insanity.

Good luck finding that White unicorn willing to raise a family on 30K in the middle of nowhere. For every girl who puts up with that, there are 10 who will refuse. And that one White girl who is willing to do so is most likely hideous.

The problem isn't the money. The problem isn't affording "good schools," contrary to what most people think in this thread. Your White ancestors bred on farms making 1/100th of what most people make today, having 5-10 kids per generation (with only half surviving). Why aren't White women like that today? This is the real question you should be asking.

The same thing happened at the end of the Roman empire - women refusing to have kids and instead chasing alphas and money. Roman men were disgusted with their women. Abortion was rampant. Divorce was rampant. Families were small. And when the White Romans died off, the entire world fell into a dark age so severe people forgot math, reading, and most technology. People couldn't even make arches, let alone roads and aqueducts. Took centuries for things to recover. A city the size of Rome did not occur again until 19th century London.

[LikeABaller]

(12-09-2016 10:09 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 01:31 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 12:06 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 11:51 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

No one is talking about iPads when they say how expensive it is to have kids now. They're talking about the exorbitant costs it takes to simply avoid having your children sitting in a classroom at age 8 where half of the other children will have criminal records by the time they're 18.

This is only true if you accept the false paradigmn that you need a job to be successful, and that good jobs only exist in cities.

Both of these are false.

You don't need a job to be successful. As Enigma pointed out, you can easily make 50k+ a year with no formal education. Furthermore, you can do it and live anywhere you want.

Move out of the cities like LA, Chicago, and NYC, and suddenly your "right zip code" problem simply disappears. Bonus: Housing costs plummet as well.

Cities are great if you're single and looking for new pussy. If you're married with kids, the appeal is greatly diminished.

This "you need to be rich to raise kids in a respectable environment" argument is

There is an entire country outside these sardine cans. Stop confining yourself to 5% of the US.

I have children and I'm with Galt here. I live in the suburban south, and I work for myself.

You can live comfortably here on $30k a year. I consider my family well off in terms of resources, housing and schooling and that only requires a $50k before tax budget.

There are even these rural fiber optic grants that were given out a few years ago and you can live in these tiny towns that build their own 1 gig up/1 gig down networks that are cheaper and more reliable than what they have in the cities.

Churches subsidize a lot of the private schools and tuition is 9k/year. The public schools that aren't in the city are great (memphis and the surrounding counties are excellent examples here. The city schools are 1/10 shit holes and the counties are 9/10)

Get an HSA for health insurance and pay cash for minor things. Medical operations give huge discounts for timely cash payers. I mean 30 to 60% off a bill, and we pay $95 to visit the family doctor.

Family life compared to single life is exceptionally steady and boring, sort of like being a farmer. I think that people get trapped in this idea that it needs to be exciting or that they have to spend this shit ton of money on their kids to "win" at it.

Last, unless your wife is a doctor, or the library porn girl and is making serious money she should be staying at home and being a mom, especially in an expensive city. Here are the sunk costs that she has to out earn in order to have a career:
- $20k private school for kids
- $16K in vehicle depreciation, maintenance and fuel
- $5k in work lunches and starbucks
- $??? in work clothing
Thats $41k in expenses for her to work. So if she makes 60k, then your net is $19k from her job...right..wrong! She has to pay tax on that 60k. So its more like 40k after taxes and social insurance...so you're paying 1k out of pocket for her to work. Oh and her 60k in income also bumps your income into a higher tax bracket when its added together.

Do the math, and don't buy into the insanity.

Good luck finding that White unicorn willing to raise a family on 30K in the middle of nowhere. For every girl who puts up with that, there are 10 who will refuse. And that one White girl who is willing to do so is most likely hideous.

The problem isn't the money. The problem isn't affording "good schools," contrary to what most people think in this thread. Your White ancestors bred on farms making 1/100th of what most people make today, having 5-10 kids per generation (with only half surviving). Why aren't White women like that today? This is the real question you should be asking.

The same thing happened at the end of the Roman empire - women refusing to have kids and instead chasing alphas and money. Roman men were disgusted with their women. Abortion was rampant. Divorce was rampant. Families were small. And when the White Romans died off, the entire world fell into a dark age so severe people forgot math, reading, and most technology. People couldn't even make arches, let alone roads and aqueducts. Took centuries for things to recover. A city the size of Rome did not occur again until 19th century London.

I don't think it has anything to do with being white. Even Asians/Blacks who earn more are on the lower side when it comes to birth rates.

South Korea has a negative birth rate.
Japan has a negative birth rate.
Singapore has a negative birth rate.

These are all high income countries.

If there was a high income African country I'm sure they would of had a low birth rate too but there is no such country.

The only high income countries with high birthrates are non secular islamic states like Saudi Arabia/Qatar. They're on a different level. And even in those islamic countries, the upper income families tend to have less kids compared to low and middle.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(12-08-2016 03:47 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

I understand your issues. My sister and her husband paid 1.1 million for their house in Maryland and the public schools in that neighborhood are fucking amazing. Small classes , pristine campus, dedicated teachers, zero violence, and sky high test scores.

My brother had to do the same. Thankfully, Florida at the time had less expensive real estate than Maryland (where he was living before). The house still kills him though... the HOA has specific demands on the type of roofing to be used, which jacks up the new roof cost to $50k+. My brother is trying to figure out how to pay for it. I feel his pain.. I did a tear off a year and a half ago that set me back $23k.

He had to move into this area. There is a set of super-smart genes that run in the male side of the family (my uncle had the gift). It skipped my brother and I, but landed on one of my brother's kids. He can't go to a normal public school (he is about 13 and taking college level courses now in math and science).

Luckily for my brother, the demographics in the area clustered a lot of kids like my nephew within the school district. My nephew ended up in a magnet school with a bunch of kids at or near the same level as he is. Before that, he was really struggling in normal public school because he just didn't fit in.

No such school would exist if he was in a more affordable area.

[Samseau]

(12-09-2016 10:15 AM)LikeABaller Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 10:09 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 01:31 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

(12-09-2016 12:06 AM)John_Galt Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 11:51 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

No one is talking about iPads when they say how expensive it is to have kids now. They're talking about the exorbitant costs it takes to simply avoid having your children sitting in a classroom at age 8 where half of the other children will have criminal records by the time they're 18.

This is only true if you accept the false paradigmn that you need a job to be successful, and that good jobs only exist in cities.

Both of these are false.

You don't need a job to be successful. As Enigma pointed out, you can easily make 50k+ a year with no formal education. Furthermore, you can do it and live anywhere you want.

Move out of the cities like LA, Chicago, and NYC, and suddenly your "right zip code" problem simply disappears. Bonus: Housing costs plummet as well.

Cities are great if you're single and looking for new pussy. If you're married with kids, the appeal is greatly diminished.

This "you need to be rich to raise kids in a respectable environment" argument is

There is an entire country outside these sardine cans. Stop confining yourself to 5% of the US.

I have children and I'm with Galt here. I live in the suburban south, and I work for myself.

You can live comfortably here on $30k a year. I consider my family well off in terms of resources, housing and schooling and that only requires a $50k before tax budget.

There are even these rural fiber optic grants that were given out a few years ago and you can live in these tiny towns that build their own 1 gig up/1 gig down networks that are cheaper and more reliable than what they have in the cities.

Churches subsidize a lot of the private schools and tuition is 9k/year. The public schools that aren't in the city are great (memphis and the surrounding counties are excellent examples here. The city schools are 1/10 shit holes and the counties are 9/10)

Get an HSA for health insurance and pay cash for minor things. Medical operations give huge discounts for timely cash payers. I mean 30 to 60% off a bill, and we pay $95 to visit the family doctor.

Family life compared to single life is exceptionally steady and boring, sort of like being a farmer. I think that people get trapped in this idea that it needs to be exciting or that they have to spend this shit ton of money on their kids to "win" at it.

Last, unless your wife is a doctor, or the library porn girl and is making serious money she should be staying at home and being a mom, especially in an expensive city. Here are the sunk costs that she has to out earn in order to have a career:
- $20k private school for kids
- $16K in vehicle depreciation, maintenance and fuel
- $5k in work lunches and starbucks
- $??? in work clothing
Thats $41k in expenses for her to work. So if she makes 60k, then your net is $19k from her job...right..wrong! She has to pay tax on that 60k. So its more like 40k after taxes and social insurance...so you're paying 1k out of pocket for her to work. Oh and her 60k in income also bumps your income into a higher tax bracket when its added together.

Do the math, and don't buy into the insanity.

Good luck finding that White unicorn willing to raise a family on 30K in the middle of nowhere. For every girl who puts up with that, there are 10 who will refuse. And that one White girl who is willing to do so is most likely hideous.

The problem isn't the money. The problem isn't affording "good schools," contrary to what most people think in this thread. Your White ancestors bred on farms making 1/100th of what most people make today, having 5-10 kids per generation (with only half surviving). Why aren't White women like that today? This is the real question you should be asking.

The same thing happened at the end of the Roman empire - women refusing to have kids and instead chasing alphas and money. Roman men were disgusted with their women. Abortion was rampant. Divorce was rampant. Families were small. And when the White Romans died off, the entire world fell into a dark age so severe people forgot math, reading, and most technology. People couldn't even make arches, let alone roads and aqueducts. Took centuries for things to recover. A city the size of Rome did not occur again until 19th century London.

I don't think it has anything to do with being white. Even Asians/Blacks who earn more are on the lower side when it comes to birth rates.

South Korea has a negative birth rate.
Japan has a negative birth rate.
Singapore has a negative birth rate.

These are all high income countries.

While it is true that high income appears to corrupt women regardless of race, keep in mind these countries have strong borders and limit immigration. They are in no danger of being replaced, and yet, perhaps they are on the way out too. Once they fall in number enough 50-100 years from now, some other stronger power will just invade and conquer.

My point with White women was not that Whites as a race are unique, but that it's clearly something with the women causing the decline more than anything else, and the fact the pattern exists across races only reinforces this point.

There is clearly something going on besides immigration and welfare, and Roosh's "suicide switch" he referred to at the start of this thread seems like the right idea but too simplistic. What exactly is the mechanism that corrupts women over time? It is the most important question to answer.

[LikeABaller]

Another factor I've missed is Women Participation in the workforce. I think there is 1:1 correlation between lower birth rates and women participation in the work force. Any graph guru here who could plot a graph about this?

50 years ago dual earner households were very rare, now its the norm. In islamic countries it is still very rare thanks to the Quran It's like a domino theory, women participation goes up, so does the median household income and then plummets the birth rate.

50 years ago the only responsibility of women was to pop up kids and take care of the house, but now they have careers and it's not easy to do both of things at the same time. Being a housewife is a huge responsibility on its own.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(12-09-2016 10:15 AM)LikeABaller Wrote:  

I don't think it has anything to do with being white. Even Asians/Blacks who earn more are on the lower side when it comes to birth rates.

South Korea has a negative birth rate.
Japan has a negative birth rate.
Singapore has a negative birth rate.

These are all high income countries.

If there was a high income African country I'm sure they would of had a low birth rate too but there is no such country.

The only high income countries with high birthrates are non secular islamic states like Saudi Arabia/Qatar. They're on a different level. And even in those islamic countries, the upper income families tend to have less kids compared to low and middle.

What you wrote is 100% true. High income people tend to have fewer children due to the time and $$ investment requirements. I also think a lot of the blame is due to socialism. When you get into higher income, the tax rate goes up dramatically (found this out when I got a new job and my wife got a big raise). Losing 40%+ of your income to taxes puts a damper on wanting a big family. This is especially true if you only got into the higher income bracket later in life and you need to seriously put money away for retirement. Living off your children is not an option (it is really unfair to the kids).

The exception here in the USA are Orthodox Jews (secular Jews are well below replacement rate) and Mormons. When I was in Coney Island a few years back, I counted the number of kids with each couple (some big Jewish function going on at the time). The highest count I hit was 12. The Hasids are now moving into my city en mass (Brooklyn in too crowded). They are scooping up all the real estate they can get their hands on in an area that once was 100% black. I think in about 5 more years, the area will be majority Orthodox Jew.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(12-09-2016 09:57 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

Why did John_Galt get the ban hammer?

He was a prodigious poster. Maybe his writing style pissed off a mod?

[TravelerKai]

Some very good points in this thread. While Galt was being disrespectful he had a couple of decent points. He still fails to understand competition from a fundamental standpoint.

A kid that has never seen an iPad, yet alone a powerful computer, is a kid that will be way behind growing up. I have a cousin that was super smart (like genius level) early on before she hit 10. Now she is struggling majorly in school. Curious about it, I checked her out for a few hours and quizzed her on a litany of things. What stood out the most was that her mother completely cut off all forms of electronic device use. I'm still not exactly sure why (might have been money, but maybe something else) but she could not use a smartphone, a tablet, or even a computer.

My daughter is almost 2 and a half, and can work her way through an ipad, without deleting all the apps now. She knows which apps are hers, and can browse through lists. She can even Chromecast. My cousin could not do any of that at 10.

All that math and reading is great early on, but at some point, technology is important to understand how to use. The sooner the better. How many people here has met a college graduate that could not a simple spreadsheet on the job? My father bought a computer in 88 or 89, I forget exactly, but that thing changed my entire life.

A plumber troubleshooting a pipe issue for me recently was using a HD video cable snake and was teaching me the ins and outs of it, and how he uses it to do his job everyday. Sure you can say, oh that's just a simple camera on a wire. Big fucking deal Kai. Thing is, you still have to understand what you are looking at. That tool also had all kinds of instrumentation in it. Temperature, depth, sonar tools, etc. It was not super straight forward.

I didn't ask him how he got all the training he got, but I met some master plumbers before when I was younger, and those guys are very educated and make well into the 6 figures usually, because the job gets alot harder and more complex. A simple wrench just isn't good enough to get bigger jobs done.

Everyone needs to learn technology. Your children are not going to compete with other Americans, regardless of what Trump does or says. They need to be able to compete globally. Koreans, Indians, Chinese, Africans, and a few others are salivating at your child's opportunities, and they will not hesitate to take their lunch. Always prepare for the worse. Trump is only one person.

They will come into the country legally and there is not very much you are going to do to stop that.

How can we adapt and thrive? By taking pages out of their books and combining it with what we already know, that works well, that they usually fail on.

1. Use home schooling and after school tutors.
2. Sign them up early for college prep testing camps.
3. Use seminars and training centers that teach kids how to actually study and retain knowledge.
4. Make them use technology for everyday things. Make them use Evernote or OneNote, make them create a chart or spreadsheet to track something.

Indians and other Asians here commonly send their kids to the public schools here. They just usually make sure it is not a violent one. Then those same kids get tutored after school in college level stuff. Those same kids walk among the rest like lions among lambs, competing only against other Asians for highest GPA for Valedictorian.

Those same kids are almost always a sure fire entry into any college in Texas, as long as they have some kind of personality on the application part. Sometimes they don't even need that.

I know an Indian father that gave me some good tips. He rented a tiny apartment in the neighborhood of millionaires, so his kid could out compete the white kids there for a top 10% rank. (It helps you get into college easier in Texas). Like Atlanta Man said, you can write that off to some extent.

He also told me to sign up my kids for the free college prep courses the city offers every year.

His son is a bio mechanical engineering major at one of the top universities in Texas now. Before the first semester there, even made him take a few basics at the local community college and transfer those credits over.

His whole mantra was to not let off and stay on those kids. Is he a Tiger Dad? Kinda, but he still let his kid hang out and have a social life, because he has one too.

Those are powerful mindsets and strategies to have. Unlike other robotic Indians, his kid will be a major contender once he is done with school. That's the sweet spot to aim for.

Who is to say we cannot raise kids smart enough to gain entry into a school like Stanford (liberal hellhole I know, it's an example), be athletic and in good shape, and have great sociable personalities? That father's son is who your kids will have to compete with. He is a citizen, he's smart, he's Christian, he's cool, and has no accent.

If your kid wants to major in Women's studies or basket weaving, who's fault is that? May not be the kid's fault at all. Now that we are "woke" we should know better on where to steer them. No matter what Satanic shit was on my university's campus, or even outside it, my Christian upbringing helped guard my heart. I eventually figured it out but I dread how awful I would still be if I did not learn the Bible as well as I did back then. I bet I would still be with my exwife and living through pure hell. Probably worse stuff than that, like dead because I loved to fight.

In the end, you cannot protect them forever, especially free minds and free will, but you could at least put them into a position where they can come back and still win.

Make no mistake. Samseau is right about white women. They turned their backs on Christ and his plan/design for their lives and are making them and their men pay the price. It isn't really a white problem. This could happen to any group with too much leisure and luxury (Baby Boomers especially). Blacks and Latinos are well on their way to the same fate, if not already actually. Their birthrate will drop like a rock soon enough if conditions continue. The culture here is just toxic if you do not diligently raise them right.

The Jews are not the only historic reference, to show the effects of degeneracy (Sodom and Gommorah). Athens(the Greeks) and the Romans have fiddles to play in these songs as well. It should not be an uncomfortable discussion, because it is a purely human thing to want to devolve into these destructive behaviors, when getting away from what you were designed to accomplish. If the shunning of God continues, he will simply just find someone else to do his work. He doesn't need anyone white. He doesn't need anyone at all. He will work with the faithful that keep his ways (values).

[Huey]

R.I.P John_Galt
9/2016 - 12/2016

[philosophical_recovery]

JG got the banhammer?

Called it: thread-10914...pid1430288

[Enigma]

Damn, people had to cry to the mods instead of just calling John_Galt out for what they didn't like.