UO (Unpopular Opinion) Thursday

mrstmoose · October 2015

I seriously have a girl crush on you right now @aamm04!

aamm04 · October 2015

mrstmoose said:
@aamm04 yes to all of them. Don't we also want to do a daily ticker change thread?

That's cool too. I'll also add that we'll add HDBD later on too.

mrstmoose · October 2015

Does a blump count!?

)

m6agua · October 2015

Why don't we add a Ultimate Guide to May 2016. That has all the info about weekly threads, rules, etiquette, links to threads, and whatever else

aamm04 · October 2015

m6agua said:
Why don't we add a Ultimate Guide to May 2016. That has all the info about weekly threads, rules, etiquette, links to threads, and whatever else

It's done :-) we can add to the one I just posted if you'd like.

aamm04 · October 2015

mrstmoose said:
Does a blump count!? )

My blump is real.

dshannah · October 2015

@Nunuu Just to add this to the mix: not everyone wants to have sex. I do, but I'm heterosexual with an every-other-day libido, married to a delightful man who is also Hetero with an every other day libido.

There are lots of people with lower sex drives and loads of people who are asexual and partnered and want children, and there are lots of couples out there with non-complementary sex drives who make it work because sex is not the most important part of their relationships.

Similarly, I'd amend your point about staying at home: every parent should consider staying at home, and decide if it works for them. Not just mothers, and the answer after being considered does not have to be yes!

dshannah · October 2015

@Nunuu I agree about capitalism, but I think a key piece of evidence for it is that there's no good capitalist reason to offer maternity leave!

We should fight for better maternity leave as a way of reforming our capitalism, giving it a conscience and moving it more towards socialism.

And as for women taking themselves out of the workforce to create more jobs for more families: a) I don't trust the menz to get shit done on their lonesome (seriously--the workforce is so much stronger when it's more diverse, and the outcomes are better); and b) shouldn't we be advocating for work being compensated, rather than jobs? (More socialism!).

livelaughlove1127 · October 2015

i cant stand when women over-milk (totally not a word) being pregnant... put your big girl panties on and deal with it B-)

katykatykaty · October 2015

I think it's annoying to have to scroll through 20 pinned posts before getting to the new ones.

Also, in my experience, the people posting the same questions that have been asked a billion times are still going to post them and won't take the time to see if there's a pinned post about it.

Nunuu · October 2015

dshannah said:
@Nunuu I agree about capitalism, but I think a key piece of evidence for it is that there's no good capitalist reason to offer maternity leave!

We should fight for better maternity leave as a way of reforming our capitalism, giving it a conscience and moving it more towards socialism.

And as for women taking themselves out of the workforce to create more jobs for more families: a) I don't trust the menz to get shit done on their lonesome (seriously--the workforce is so much stronger when it's more diverse, and the outcomes are better); and b) shouldn't we be advocating for work being compensated, rather than jobs? (More socialism!).

I agree. Capitalism actually should have zero interest in hiring women from a traditional standpoint. We usually cost more healthcare wise, and we are the ones that are going to become pregnant and possibly take maternity leave. Not to mention we could decide to quit our jobs and stay home after they had cultivated us for so long, and then they'd have to start over.

It's in capitalisms best interest to stick with dudes who are a bit more simple to manage (not from an emotional standpoint, I'm not saying the company would fail if a female CEO got her period, I mean from a financial standpoint like healthcare).

I don't think you can improve capitalism. If we try to regulate it by enforcing more socialist principles like longer/paid maternity leave, then you'd have to take something away from someone else. The big cats up top certainly won't give up their profits, so it's come from wages, rising costs of the product, or taking advantage of the environment to create their product.

I think we have to shift our focus to a different economic paradigm, like socialism, that is going to take the profit motive out and replace it with a people motive.

And lastly, socialism would mean more jobs, not more money. Money should be pretty equally distributed in socialism (not mandated like communism, but stills more fair than in capitalism) and more jobs should be available.

asunna · October 2015

katykatykaty said:

I think it's annoying to have to scroll through 20 pinned posts before getting to the new ones. Also, in my experience, the people posting the same questions that have been asked a billion times are still going to post them and won't take the time to see if there's a pinned post about it.

yup i admin a forum with 600,000 some active users, its the same shit our pinned posts do nothing they still ask the same questions,

gorgeousariel · October 2015

@mrstmoose @yogah @aamm04 @m6agua - organization YES PLEEASE!!

UO: I can't stand Big Bang Theory

JessicaB0627 · October 2015

livelaughlove1127 said:
i cant stand when women over-milk (totally not a word) being pregnant... put your big girl panties on and deal with it B-)

Is it out of the question to think that maybe some women have harder pregnancies than others?

gorgeousariel · October 2015

livelaughlove1127 said:

i cant stand when women over-milk (totally not a word) being pregnant... put your big girl panties on and deal with it B-)

YES!! I was in the bookstore the other day and there was a book called MILK IT. And the whole book was about how to milk your pregnancy. Seemed so ridiculous!

sincerelymom · October 2015

Pinknights said:
I'm over this tiny house movement. People (as a whole) are into jumping on bandwagons.

Agreed. We already had tiny houses anyway- haven't you ever seen a trailer park? And I never get how they do it anyway. They are way cleaner than I am and always super organized. I see pics and they have, like, 1 pot and two books and I'm like... Where is all your stuff? I'm all about cutting the clutter and living "smaller" but a tiny house is just totally unrealistic for me.

sincerelymom · October 2015

Nunuu said:
@skiingstark @kbrands7

Daddy can always stay home. I think women do it better, but I think the ideal situation is to have one parent at home.

Go on income based repayment for student loans. We did this!

Downsize dat mortgage. I have families back home that live 8 people to a one bedroom. We ain't better than them over here in The Western Hemisphere.

We are unwilling to cut luxuries. You may not be able to stay home tomorrow, but you can make decisions that will enable you to.

I work full-time and my husband stays at home/is in school (online). I PROMISE you that he is better suited to the stay-at-home parent role (better cook, more patient, cleaner/more organized) and I am much more suited to the breadwinner role (I have a better degree, have great benefits at my current job, and have more earning potential in my career-path choice). I am not sure why you think women are more suited.

I am just confused about why you think there is a one-size-fits all prescription for what's best for families. Every family is different and has different needs.

livelaughlove1127 · October 2015

Oh I definitely know everyone has different pregnancies. I'm talking about people that take advantage of the situation.. Example: the people that act like they are the only ones that are pregnant or have ever been pregnant.

JessicaB0627 said:

livelaughlove1127 said:
i cant stand when women over-milk (totally not a word) being pregnant... put your big girl panties on and deal with it B-)
Is it out of the question to think that maybe some women have harder pregnancies than others?

mrstmoose · October 2015

@katykatykaty and @NOLA520 I do understand that but it would be nice if TB would take away 3-4 that no one really looks at (tech update, skin issues,etc) to make it less draining to scroll past.

nerdymama15 · October 2015

Been reading the BF debate. The only thing I have to say about it is this. I will be a FTM and if my child is hungry, then I'm going to whip it out (modestly with a cover or whatever) and feed my kid. I don't care where I am at or who is around, my kid will not go hungry just because someone is uncomfortable with it. If someone dares to say something to me while I am BFing my child, they will get a two word response of F-you.

Nunuu · October 2015

@sincerelymom I know a few families in which men are staying at home and providing stable happy homes for their families. I mentioned in a previous post that there are always exceptions to the normative. They are of equal value in my opinion and should be heralded. The most important aspect is that someone is homemaking, not that the woman is doing it.

There is a bevy of biological and social normative reasons why women are more inclined to be better at it.

TheThornBird · October 2015

@Nunuu Happy to see a Muslimah here (and someone as sex-obsessed as me, ha)! We have several Muslim friends and I was a couple credits shy of getting a minor in Islamic studies. Also took a couple years of Arabic, but the only word I remember is chicken

If you don't mind me asking, where are you originally from?

laurenmdrn16 · October 2015

https://www.buzzfeed.com/morganshanahan/stunning-portraits-of-breastfeeding-mothers-throughout-hi#.gblv69lBzr

Seriously. How could anyone see anything wrong with BFing? So beautiful!

nbgmom · October 2015

iamtheoracle said:

Unpopular opinion of an unpopular opinion: I actually like it when people touch my stomach. It makes me feel more pregnant, idk. I thought I would hate it but I don't!

Me too! I don't mind it at all (except for if they did it now, at 8 weeks. "No ma'am, that's just fat")

dshannah · October 2015

@Nunuu I was thinking of that (not-so) old Socialist quote:

"If you’re unemployed it’s not because there isn’t any work.

Just look around: A housing shortage, crime, pollution; we need better schools and parks. Whatever our needs, they all require work. And as long as we have unsatisfied needs, there’s work to be done.

So ask yourself, what kind of world has work but no jobs. It’s a world where work is not related to satisfying our needs, a world where work is only related to satisfying the profit needs of business.

This country was not built by the huge corporations or government bureaucracies. It was built by people who work. And, it is working people who should control the work to be done. Yet, as long as employment is tied to somebody else’s profits, the work won’t get done."

Nunuu · October 2015

@TheThornBird I was born in America but my parents are Afghani. My Arabic is terrible! I know some for the Quran, but I switched to Urdu in my undergrad because I got married and it's my husbands native language. I'm trying to restart my learning now.

And I'm just obsessed with a happy marriage, good sex comes with one I think! Glad to have a Muslim sympathizer on the board haha

Nunuu · October 2015

@dshannah I think there's quite a bit factually incorrect with that quote...

There is not a housing shortage... We have thousand and thousands of empty homes. And... Our country was built by huge corporations. Industrialization coincided with the boom of capitalism. Railroads, electrical grids, plumbing... They all had massive private benefactors.

The reasons we don't have jobs is because the government is starved for money. The richest people and corporations are paying the fewest taxes, when they should be paying the most. We need huge infrastructure overhauls (like roads, bridges, water systems, schools) and taxes should be paying for them. But we have no money and are instead outsourcing it to private companies. Private companies who want it done the cheapest for the lowest dollar (paying poor wages and no benefits to their employees) and the highest profit for the few individuals. Our government is in bed with these corporations who are taking over our prisons (for example) and running our country to third world standards (seriously, look into privately owned prisons and realize that it is profitable for private companies to have more people convicted and to stay there as long as possible)

And private companies and government aren't hiring because it's more cost effective to overwork a few people than to hire more workers. Look at the public education and how desperately we need more teachers. The quote you listed sounds like it from a libertarian organization honestly. It's making the argument that people just are working...

Jesse835235 · October 2015

Nunuu said:

The reasons we don't have jobs is because the government is starved for money. The richest people and corporations are paying the fewest taxes, when they should be paying the most

I'm sorry, but this is entirely not factual. In 2014, the top 1% of earners paid over 45% of the federal income tax. The bottom 60% of earners paid 2%.

This is from a study by a non-partisan group, The Tax Policy Center.

katykatykaty · October 2015

Jesse835235 said:

The reasons we don't have jobs is because the government is starved for money. The richest people and corporations are paying the fewest taxes, when they should be paying the most
I'm sorry, but this is entirely not factual. In 2014, the top 1% of earners paid over 45% of the federal income tax. The bottom 60% of earners paid 2%. This is from a study by a non-partisan group, The Tax Policy Center.

But then there's this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/04/as-the-rich-become-super-rich-they-pay-lower-taxes-for-real/

Jesse835235 · October 2015

katykatykaty said:

Jesse835235 said:

The reasons we don't have jobs is because the government is starved for money. The richest people and corporations are paying the fewest taxes, when they should be paying the most
I'm sorry, but this is entirely not factual. In 2014, the top 1% of earners paid over 45% of the federal income tax. The bottom 60% of earners paid 2%. This is from a study by a non-partisan group, The Tax Policy Center.

But then there's this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/04/as-the-rich-become-super-rich-they-pay-lower-taxes-for-real/

That's a tax rate, not total taxes. So people in the top 0.001% could be paying a lower overall rate, but that doesn't mean they're paying less tax. They're receiving the lower rate because long-term capital gains rates are lower than ordinary income rates to promote investing. Keep in mind, the data was presented in the article was collected in 2012, before long-term capital gains rates have increased for higher earners. Now, if you are in the top bracket (MFJ earning > $464,850 or single earning >$413,200), your rate is 20%. Also, there is the net investment income tax that add an additional 3.8% on investment income that exceeds $250,000 (MFJ). So most of the people referenced as the top 0.001% are paying closer to 23.8% on their investment income.

katykatykaty · October 2015

Jesse835235 said:

katykatykaty said:

Jesse835235 said:

The reasons we don't have jobs is because the government is starved for money. The richest people and corporations are paying the fewest taxes, when they should be paying the most
I'm sorry, but this is entirely not factual. In 2014, the top 1% of earners paid over 45% of the federal income tax. The bottom 60% of earners paid 2%. This is from a study by a non-partisan group, The Tax Policy Center.

But then there's this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/04/as-the-rich-become-super-rich-they-pay-lower-taxes-for-real/

That's a tax rate, not total taxes. So people in the top 0.001% could be paying a lower overall rate, but that doesn't mean they're paying less tax. They're receiving the lower rate because long-term capital gains rates are lower than ordinary income rates to promote investing. Keep in mind, the data was presented in the article was collected in 2012, before long-term capital gains rates have increased for higher earners. Now, if you are in the top bracket (MFJ earning > $464,850 or single earning >$413,200), your rate is 20%. Also, there is the net investment income tax that add an additional 3.8% on investment income that exceeds $250,000 (MFJ). So most of the people referenced as the top 0.001% are paying closer to 23.8% on their investment income.

I actually worked as a tax attorney at a large oil company for a few years, so I understand the difference between tax rates and total taxes. I believe their tax rates should be higher and that their total amount of taxes should be higher as well. I'm pretty sure they'll keep investing either way.

Jesse835235 · October 2015

katykatykaty said:
I actually worked as a tax attorney at a large oil company for a few years, so I understand the difference between tax rates and total taxes. I believe their tax rates should be higher and that their total amount of taxes should be higher as well. I'm pretty sure they'll keep investing either way.

My whole point was that both articles were true. I know plenty of people that have changed their investment activities since the NIIT became effective. I agree that the majority of investors would continue investing though. They'd balk at it, but they'd likely continue...

Nunuu · October 2015

Sorry, I was a bit vague in my statement. True, they may be contributing to a large portion of the taxes paid, their rates are at inequitably disproportionate rates. Since they have the vast majority of the wealth they should be paying the vast majority of taxes. They should be compelled to keep the money circulating one way or another and since they tend to hold on to it... It's disrupts our whole economy. Paying 20% on 400,000 still leaves you with over 320,000 dollars to spend on a year. The next bracket, 15% up to 50,000 is 42,500 leftover. The 15 percent makes a much bigger dent in a salary to them, and it hurts more the more you go down! 20 grand a year at 10% leaves you with 18 grand... I meant that in this graduated sense, the rich are paying a much smaller amount of living when it comes to maintaining a standard of living.

saladflambe · October 2015

You know what's REALLY "Not. That. Hard."??

Minding your own damn business.

lalala2004 · October 2015

Think we can get @BumpAdmin to close this thread now that it's not Thursday? (Again)

urby87 · October 2015

mariaalene said:

The topic is unpopular opinions correct? And that's my and many ppls opinion. It doesn't change the fact that we think breastfeeding in public is offensive and disgusting. My opinion is I don't want to see anyone's tit out or their kid sucking on it. Have some decency
You have a right to your opinion, but you are being vulgar. Which is ironic. First of all, you can't see the breast when the child is latched. Second, the child is eating, not randomly sucking. Third, what happened to you that you are scared of/grossed out by a little boob?
Just conservative that's all. Luckily I live in an an area of similarly conservative women who have enough respect for the public and themselves to cover up.

I can see how maybe it could make you uncomfortable, but offensive and disgusting? That's what breasts were designed to do. It's not a sexual thing to feed your child. As PP mentioned, hardly any breast is even visible when a baby is feeding anyway, but if you don't like it, you certainly don't have to look. Problem solved.

ETA: Whoops, did not realize that comment was as old as it was...

FinePlacentaPie · October 2015

I just dropped in because this thread is 10 pages and some of my favorite people go here.

I have been....enlightened. Lurker out.

aamm04 · October 2015

lalala2004 said:
Think we can get @BumpAdmin to close this thread now that it's not Thursday? (Again)

Probably not. They just want to give out ridiculous warnings for it.

yogahh · October 2015

aamm04 said:

Think we can get @BumpAdmin to close this thread now that it's not Thursday? (Again)
Probably not. They just want to give out ridiculous warnings for it.

@aamm04

BumpAdmin · October 2015

This thread has been closed to new posts due to the change in topic. Continuing to create threads in direct response to this one will be grounds for warning and/or removal from The Bump Community.

Please note that we remove posts that do not follow our guidelines and will issue warnings to users who violate the Terms of Use.

To review our Community guidelines, please visit the The Bump Guidelines pinned at the top of this board. Thank you.

Want a personalized experience?

UO (Unpopular Opinion) Thursday

Re: UO (Unpopular Opinion) Thursday

Choose Another Board

Search Boards