Money and the thing with parents

Posted by Sheri Harris on Friday, February 18, 2011 Under: Commentary

We have all been reminded about money. Whether it be by subtle hints, or difficult knocks in life when money becomes the question. Those who have been placed in the awkward situation of redoing their childhood and living the life they did before they were over the legal age limit know that it takes their age group  and beyond to contribute to societies economy. This where parents in doing so have faltered the economy miserably in that now because of the fact that fewer people are working the world has less money to spend. Parents seemed to enjoy this as they watch businesses and companies reduce  and rearrange the structure of their companies resulting from the lack of productivity. This is due because of the vanishing or shrinking population of people under a certain age group.  Strangely enough, if those out of work were to attempt to get into a club or bar they would be given permission, but when that same individual is who is subjected to unemployment struggles to find work and age appropriate living circumstances that person is refused resulting from an older adults perception of how the economy should be in function.

If money is considered a root in evil then why aren't parents who have subjected their offspring to live without put into the same situation?

Parents were given the freedom of do as I say and not as I do. So therefore with the root of evil they were allowed to continue working and maintaining their jobs as they made their children live a life of "yesteryear". As a result the world has regressed. Society as a whole has not evolved at least for the good.  It takes money to buy things in order to live and survive. When parents subject their children to  the regression of yesteryear in attempts to relive and redo a life or time they enjoyed, they also admit to wanting their children to depend on the government and other subsidy's for economic support. When a parent fails to allow their adult children to go out educated and into the workplace to now live their lives as young adults as this is their time to be and grow; then those parents have taken away the vitality of life that will either cause that offspring to grow and mature or not. This of course means that parents would prefer the public assistance or welfare role for their offspring since nothing else was encouraged; other than to stay home and become subjected to becoming a pawn of the government in that one will no longer have control or freedom in how finances recieved are spent.  

Elders have taken away the love of livelihood and by doinmg so they have also contributed to the removal of freedom to spend money the way their children wanted. In that life costs money. It is certain that the elders realized this, but they knew this would have no affect on them personally because they will still recieve their social security and whatever pensions their employers provide for them. Many people born during the 1960's will never have a life or earnings equivalent to their parents not only because the jobs their parents have are not available and the fact that social security is not guaranteed. If those born during the 1960's do not have a pension and social security once they retire then choice is something that parents have sought to be truly eliminated from our lives, even when we are old enough to make our own decisions. The damage has already been done, this due to "those who bring people into this world". Which is sick humor for taking one out as well. No median was reached. Parents like government structure and control for their children, but noticeably they hate it for themselves...

In : Commentary 



null

Money and the thing with parents

Posted by Sheri Harris on Friday, February 18, 2011 Under: Commentary

We have all been reminded about money. Whether it be by subtle hints, or difficult knocks in life when money becomes the question. Those who have been placed in the awkward situation of redoing their childhood and living the life they did before they were over the legal age limit know that it takes their age group  and beyond to contribute to societies economy. This where parents in doing so have faltered the economy miserably in that now because of the fact that fewer people are working the world has less money to spend. Parents seemed to enjoy this as they watch businesses and companies reduce  and rearrange the structure of their companies resulting from the lack of productivity. This is due because of the vanishing or shrinking population of people under a certain age group.  Strangely enough, if those out of work were to attempt to get into a club or bar they would be given permission, but when that same individual is who is subjected to unemployment struggles to find work and age appropriate living circumstances that person is refused resulting from an older adults perception of how the economy should be in function.

If money is considered a root in evil then why aren't parents who have subjected their offspring to live without put into the same situation?

Parents were given the freedom of do as I say and not as I do. So therefore with the root of evil they were allowed to continue working and maintaining their jobs as they made their children live a life of "yesteryear". As a result the world has regressed. Society as a whole has not evolved at least for the good.  It takes money to buy things in order to live and survive. When parents subject their children to  the regression of yesteryear in attempts to relive and redo a life or time they enjoyed, they also admit to wanting their children to depend on the government and other subsidy's for economic support. When a parent fails to allow their adult children to go out educated and into the workplace to now live their lives as young adults as this is their time to be and grow; then those parents have taken away the vitality of life that will either cause that offspring to grow and mature or not. This of course means that parents would prefer the public assistance or welfare role for their offspring since nothing else was encouraged; other than to stay home and become subjected to becoming a pawn of the government in that one will no longer have control or freedom in how finances recieved are spent.  

Elders have taken away the love of livelihood and by doinmg so they have also contributed to the removal of freedom to spend money the way their children wanted. In that life costs money. It is certain that the elders realized this, but they knew this would have no affect on them personally because they will still recieve their social security and whatever pensions their employers provide for them. Many people born during the 1960's will never have a life or earnings equivalent to their parents not only because the jobs their parents have are not available and the fact that social security is not guaranteed. If those born during the 1960's do not have a pension and social security once they retire then choice is something that parents have sought to be truly eliminated from our lives, even when we are old enough to make our own decisions. The damage has already been done, this due to "those who bring people into this world". Which is sick humor for taking one out as well. No median was reached. Parents like government structure and control for their children, but noticeably they hate it for themselves...

In : Commentary 



null

Money and the thing with parents

Posted by Sheri Harris on Friday, February 18, 2011 Under: Commentary

We have all been reminded about money. Whether it be by subtle hints, or difficult knocks in life when money becomes the question. Those who have been placed in the awkward situation of redoing their childhood and living the life they did before they were over the legal age limit know that it takes their age group  and beyond to contribute to societies economy. This where parents in doing so have faltered the economy miserably in that now because of the fact that fewer people are working the world has less money to spend. Parents seemed to enjoy this as they watch businesses and companies reduce  and rearrange the structure of their companies resulting from the lack of productivity. This is due because of the vanishing or shrinking population of people under a certain age group.  Strangely enough, if those out of work were to attempt to get into a club or bar they would be given permission, but when that same individual is who is subjected to unemployment struggles to find work and age appropriate living circumstances that person is refused resulting from an older adults perception of how the economy should be in function.

If money is considered a root in evil then why aren't parents who have subjected their offspring to live without put into the same situation?

Parents were given the freedom of do as I say and not as I do. So therefore with the root of evil they were allowed to continue working and maintaining their jobs as they made their children live a life of "yesteryear". As a result the world has regressed. Society as a whole has not evolved at least for the good.  It takes money to buy things in order to live and survive. When parents subject their children to  the regression of yesteryear in attempts to relive and redo a life or time they enjoyed, they also admit to wanting their children to depend on the government and other subsidy's for economic support. When a parent fails to allow their adult children to go out educated and into the workplace to now live their lives as young adults as this is their time to be and grow; then those parents have taken away the vitality of life that will either cause that offspring to grow and mature or not. This of course means that parents would prefer the public assistance or welfare role for their offspring since nothing else was encouraged; other than to stay home and become subjected to becoming a pawn of the government in that one will no longer have control or freedom in how finances recieved are spent.  

Elders have taken away the love of livelihood and by doinmg so they have also contributed to the removal of freedom to spend money the way their children wanted. In that life costs money. It is certain that the elders realized this, but they knew this would have no affect on them personally because they will still recieve their social security and whatever pensions their employers provide for them. Many people born during the 1960's will never have a life or earnings equivalent to their parents not only because the jobs their parents have are not available and the fact that social security is not guaranteed. If those born during the 1960's do not have a pension and social security once they retire then choice is something that parents have sought to be truly eliminated from our lives, even when we are old enough to make our own decisions. The damage has already been done, this due to "those who bring people into this world". Which is sick humor for taking one out as well. No median was reached. Parents like government structure and control for their children, but noticeably they hate it for themselves...

In : Commentary 



null

Money and the thing with parents

Posted by Sheri Harris on Friday, February 18, 2011 Under: Commentary

We have all been reminded about money. Whether it be by subtle hints, or difficult knocks in life when money becomes the question. Those who have been placed in the awkward situation of redoing their childhood and living the life they did before they were over the legal age limit know that it takes their age group  and beyond to contribute to societies economy. This where parents in doing so have faltered the economy miserably in that now because of the fact that fewer people are working the world has less money to spend. Parents seemed to enjoy this as they watch businesses and companies reduce  and rearrange the structure of their companies resulting from the lack of productivity. This is due because of the vanishing or shrinking population of people under a certain age group.  Strangely enough, if those out of work were to attempt to get into a club or bar they would be given permission, but when that same individual is who is subjected to unemployment struggles to find work and age appropriate living circumstances that person is refused resulting from an older adults perception of how the economy should be in function.

If money is considered a root in evil then why aren't parents who have subjected their offspring to live without put into the same situation?

Parents were given the freedom of do as I say and not as I do. So therefore with the root of evil they were allowed to continue working and maintaining their jobs as they made their children live a life of "yesteryear". As a result the world has regressed. Society as a whole has not evolved at least for the good.  It takes money to buy things in order to live and survive. When parents subject their children to  the regression of yesteryear in attempts to relive and redo a life or time they enjoyed, they also admit to wanting their children to depend on the government and other subsidy's for economic support. When a parent fails to allow their adult children to go out educated and into the workplace to now live their lives as young adults as this is their time to be and grow; then those parents have taken away the vitality of life that will either cause that offspring to grow and mature or not. This of course means that parents would prefer the public assistance or welfare role for their offspring since nothing else was encouraged; other than to stay home and become subjected to becoming a pawn of the government in that one will no longer have control or freedom in how finances recieved are spent.  

Elders have taken away the love of livelihood and by doinmg so they have also contributed to the removal of freedom to spend money the way their children wanted. In that life costs money. It is certain that the elders realized this, but they knew this would have no affect on them personally because they will still recieve their social security and whatever pensions their employers provide for them. Many people born during the 1960's will never have a life or earnings equivalent to their parents not only because the jobs their parents have are not available and the fact that social security is not guaranteed. If those born during the 1960's do not have a pension and social security once they retire then choice is something that parents have sought to be truly eliminated from our lives, even when we are old enough to make our own decisions. The damage has already been done, this due to "those who bring people into this world". Which is sick humor for taking one out as well. No median was reached. Parents like government structure and control for their children, but noticeably they hate it for themselves...

In : Commentary 



null