Hot take, but what else should we expect from a system that purportedly allows unlimited immigration, millions of illegal immigrants that won't assimilate to American culture or a political bloc that caters to said illegals at the expense of American citizens? If the US were to get back to being a high trust society, uncomfortable coversations would have to occur follwoed by uncomftable legislations. That's not going to happen.
On a cycling trip in Europe I met a retired military police officer. He related that at a medical checkup the doctor got excited to discover his MP status. Did you carry a sidearm? Yes? Well some people get medical problems from carrying that weight on their hip and shoulder for decades, so there's a disability category for that. But my cyclist said he had no problems. Nonetheless several months later he noticed he had a bump in his pension for a disability related to the weight carry. If there's an eligibility then you must be fitted into the box. I think a lot of adults take advantage of any possible benefits, medical, or pension claim.
My orthodontist, whom I am paying out of my own pocket, says her second largest intake clientele is retirees coming in for cosmetic work because it is covered on their health plan. There's a why not take it attitude.
It is not bizarre at all. Rather it is the logical result of choosing to obey or enforce some laws while overlooking obedience or enforcement of others. The sanctuary city/ICE kerfuffle being the pertinent illustration at the moment although it is just one of many. This result, coupled with complex regulatory rules given the force of legislation, is very, very foreseeable. The Roman Empire recodified its legal codes when they became inefficient/unworkable.
Yes, Trump claimed his "bone spurs" excused him from the military draft and called those who served in the military "suckers." I have a right-wing, working-class relative who had to leave his job for a serious health problem (kidney failure/chronic dialysis). While collecting working-men's compensation, he worked part-time "under the table." I'm sure he would condemn others for "double dopping," at least before this happened to him, but in his forties his future options ended. Being single, he'll never qualify for a transplant. While double dipping he saved his money for some future security. Still, he took an option he'd condemn others for. The woman you mentioned, Elsa Johnson has endometriosis. I have friends who suffer from this. A very painful and debilitating chronic condition. Often long undiagnosed in sufferers. For such people it creates a dilemma. Do you ask for help or do you tough it out? It's not cynical grifting like Donald Trump's bone spurs. At almost eighty he seems to be hoofing it around pretty good.
I am 65. Diagnosed with blood cancer six years ago. On chemo for the last four years. I am still working and plan to until 70 if my health holds out.
People these days are weak, greedy, exploitive and dishonest claiming disabilities when they are perfectly capable of working. When Social Security was enacted the death benefit to a spouse started at age 65... the then current life expectancy for males.
When in the hell did we develop the common expectancy that we deserve 20-30 years of retirement funding by other people's money?
Sorry about your blood cancer. I have a sister with blood cancer (CLL) for the last 15 years. Fortunately, she doesn't require chemotherapy yet. She's still working into her eighties at the most important job around; raising the next generation; her grandchildren, so her son and daughter-in-law can continue to be employed outside the home. While "Every Mother is a Working Mother" many grandmothers are as well. It's a 24 hour a day job and one on which the future depends. For some, it never ends.
This starts in high school. In the affluent area where I live parents will get their kids tested for ADHD when they’re “not “living up to their abilities” as their evidence. These “abilities” are usually such things as not being able to do well in algebra in the sixth grade or thrive in AP classes; the evidence is almost never what ADHD really looks like: inability to focus, extreme disorganization and task completion
, impulsivity, inappropriate behavior, etc. I have never heard of anyone taking their kid to get an evaluation for ADHD who was told their kid did not have it. It is easy for kids to get prescribed ADHD meds once they have the diagnosis, giving them a major advantage because they can then focus better than other kids.
All of this perverts what these disabilities really look like and takes resources, empathy and understanding away from the kids and families who truly struggle with these disabilities.
Hard times create strong men that create good times. Good times create weak men that create hard times. We are living in a time of weak men... otherwise known as females or feminized males.
We have moved from a patriarchy that demands hard work, self-determination and earned resources... to a matriarchy where everybody demands to be taken care of.
I have had foot/leg issues for many years. There have been periods when I probably could have easily gotten handicapped tags for my car. But, I didn’t actually need them. So I didn’t try to get them.
I do, however, know of people who get the placards (valid if you are handicapped and drive or are commonly driven in more than one vehicle) and then lend them out to anyone who wants an easier time.
What happened to the concepts of honor and honesty? Yes, you are at a disadvantage if you don’t cheat. Is not cheating still wrong?
Twitter/X is replete with those that list their mental disorders in their bios, and I bet the vast majority are far-left leaning who view victimhood as virtue. Not surprised at this finding.
In all ex-commie countries, one can hear stories about how workers worked.
We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us.
Those who do not steal from the state, are taking from their family.
This level of excess compassion for possibly disadvantaged folks has a good term to define it:
Suicidal Empathy.
Life is unfair. Rule of Law says all acts and behaviors are judged equally, with meritocracy rewarding the best performance. Not the best adjusted performance.
It’s unfair that the blind can’t see, the deaf can’t hear, the lame can’t run, the ADHD folk can’t concentrate. Applying the same standards to all, same time on tests, same lottery chances to all, means the unlucky will do worse. Low IQ or other disability is not the fault of the individual, nor usually of society, but rewarding those claiming to have problems guarantees an increase not a decrease, in those problems.
Stanford and all elite colleges should go back to equal treatment of all students, even the unlucky ones. Probably none of that 40% fully deserve to go there, and each is taking the place of, relatively hurting, those rejected at the top of the list who chose not to cheat.
If 0%, no help, seems too cruel, set a 1% quota on disabled, so they compete against each other while the normals compete fairly. Were the 40% reduced to only 1%, so it’s really as tough to get get that 1 in 57 (or whatever) acceptance letter, far fewer would cheat.
The system that rewards cheaters creates cheaters, and the Dem elites in control of Edu orgs are doing it, and knowing that they are doing it.
Things must have changed. When one of my kids got a concussion in high school, we were swarmed with support. We were informed that it was critically important for him to have both cognitive and physical rest until he recovered. His teachers were all supportive. He could not read, work on screens or take written tests until his symptoms cleared. The alternative, I was told, was to risk life-long brain issues.
The same kid attended Stanford and played club sports. When he got a concussion there, the team made sure he was medically cleared before he could return to play - but as far as academic accommodations - they were not especially supportive. The fear was that anyone could claim to have a concussion and therefore game the system - using a fake claim to get out of tests, etc. In 2015, it was more important to make it hard to cheat than to protect a student's lifelong brain health.
“The system is there to be gamed” is simply wrong. Systems exist to create a structure within which people can function. Certainly, there are bad systems, but asserting that a system - established by an institution you seemly find good (otherwise why are you there, and why are you spending huge amounts of money to support it?) - only exists to be exploited says that your moral code finds no value in honesty, cooperation or fairness.
Our transition from a high trust to a low trust society is almost complete. Can it be reversed? Has any society ever reversed it?
Hot take, but what else should we expect from a system that purportedly allows unlimited immigration, millions of illegal immigrants that won't assimilate to American culture or a political bloc that caters to said illegals at the expense of American citizens? If the US were to get back to being a high trust society, uncomfortable coversations would have to occur follwoed by uncomftable legislations. That's not going to happen.
On a cycling trip in Europe I met a retired military police officer. He related that at a medical checkup the doctor got excited to discover his MP status. Did you carry a sidearm? Yes? Well some people get medical problems from carrying that weight on their hip and shoulder for decades, so there's a disability category for that. But my cyclist said he had no problems. Nonetheless several months later he noticed he had a bump in his pension for a disability related to the weight carry. If there's an eligibility then you must be fitted into the box. I think a lot of adults take advantage of any possible benefits, medical, or pension claim.
My orthodontist, whom I am paying out of my own pocket, says her second largest intake clientele is retirees coming in for cosmetic work because it is covered on their health plan. There's a why not take it attitude.
It is not bizarre at all. Rather it is the logical result of choosing to obey or enforce some laws while overlooking obedience or enforcement of others. The sanctuary city/ICE kerfuffle being the pertinent illustration at the moment although it is just one of many. This result, coupled with complex regulatory rules given the force of legislation, is very, very foreseeable. The Roman Empire recodified its legal codes when they became inefficient/unworkable.
Yes, Trump claimed his "bone spurs" excused him from the military draft and called those who served in the military "suckers." I have a right-wing, working-class relative who had to leave his job for a serious health problem (kidney failure/chronic dialysis). While collecting working-men's compensation, he worked part-time "under the table." I'm sure he would condemn others for "double dopping," at least before this happened to him, but in his forties his future options ended. Being single, he'll never qualify for a transplant. While double dipping he saved his money for some future security. Still, he took an option he'd condemn others for. The woman you mentioned, Elsa Johnson has endometriosis. I have friends who suffer from this. A very painful and debilitating chronic condition. Often long undiagnosed in sufferers. For such people it creates a dilemma. Do you ask for help or do you tough it out? It's not cynical grifting like Donald Trump's bone spurs. At almost eighty he seems to be hoofing it around pretty good.
I am 65. Diagnosed with blood cancer six years ago. On chemo for the last four years. I am still working and plan to until 70 if my health holds out.
People these days are weak, greedy, exploitive and dishonest claiming disabilities when they are perfectly capable of working. When Social Security was enacted the death benefit to a spouse started at age 65... the then current life expectancy for males.
When in the hell did we develop the common expectancy that we deserve 20-30 years of retirement funding by other people's money?
Sorry about your blood cancer. I have a sister with blood cancer (CLL) for the last 15 years. Fortunately, she doesn't require chemotherapy yet. She's still working into her eighties at the most important job around; raising the next generation; her grandchildren, so her son and daughter-in-law can continue to be employed outside the home. While "Every Mother is a Working Mother" many grandmothers are as well. It's a 24 hour a day job and one on which the future depends. For some, it never ends.
This starts in high school. In the affluent area where I live parents will get their kids tested for ADHD when they’re “not “living up to their abilities” as their evidence. These “abilities” are usually such things as not being able to do well in algebra in the sixth grade or thrive in AP classes; the evidence is almost never what ADHD really looks like: inability to focus, extreme disorganization and task completion
, impulsivity, inappropriate behavior, etc. I have never heard of anyone taking their kid to get an evaluation for ADHD who was told their kid did not have it. It is easy for kids to get prescribed ADHD meds once they have the diagnosis, giving them a major advantage because they can then focus better than other kids.
All of this perverts what these disabilities really look like and takes resources, empathy and understanding away from the kids and families who truly struggle with these disabilities.
Hard times create strong men that create good times. Good times create weak men that create hard times. We are living in a time of weak men... otherwise known as females or feminized males.
We have moved from a patriarchy that demands hard work, self-determination and earned resources... to a matriarchy where everybody demands to be taken care of.
I have had foot/leg issues for many years. There have been periods when I probably could have easily gotten handicapped tags for my car. But, I didn’t actually need them. So I didn’t try to get them.
I do, however, know of people who get the placards (valid if you are handicapped and drive or are commonly driven in more than one vehicle) and then lend them out to anyone who wants an easier time.
What happened to the concepts of honor and honesty? Yes, you are at a disadvantage if you don’t cheat. Is not cheating still wrong?
Twitter/X is replete with those that list their mental disorders in their bios, and I bet the vast majority are far-left leaning who view victimhood as virtue. Not surprised at this finding.
In all ex-commie countries, one can hear stories about how workers worked.
We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us.
Those who do not steal from the state, are taking from their family.
This level of excess compassion for possibly disadvantaged folks has a good term to define it:
Suicidal Empathy.
Life is unfair. Rule of Law says all acts and behaviors are judged equally, with meritocracy rewarding the best performance. Not the best adjusted performance.
It’s unfair that the blind can’t see, the deaf can’t hear, the lame can’t run, the ADHD folk can’t concentrate. Applying the same standards to all, same time on tests, same lottery chances to all, means the unlucky will do worse. Low IQ or other disability is not the fault of the individual, nor usually of society, but rewarding those claiming to have problems guarantees an increase not a decrease, in those problems.
Stanford and all elite colleges should go back to equal treatment of all students, even the unlucky ones. Probably none of that 40% fully deserve to go there, and each is taking the place of, relatively hurting, those rejected at the top of the list who chose not to cheat.
If 0%, no help, seems too cruel, set a 1% quota on disabled, so they compete against each other while the normals compete fairly. Were the 40% reduced to only 1%, so it’s really as tough to get get that 1 in 57 (or whatever) acceptance letter, far fewer would cheat.
The system that rewards cheaters creates cheaters, and the Dem elites in control of Edu orgs are doing it, and knowing that they are doing it.
Things must have changed. When one of my kids got a concussion in high school, we were swarmed with support. We were informed that it was critically important for him to have both cognitive and physical rest until he recovered. His teachers were all supportive. He could not read, work on screens or take written tests until his symptoms cleared. The alternative, I was told, was to risk life-long brain issues.
The same kid attended Stanford and played club sports. When he got a concussion there, the team made sure he was medically cleared before he could return to play - but as far as academic accommodations - they were not especially supportive. The fear was that anyone could claim to have a concussion and therefore game the system - using a fake claim to get out of tests, etc. In 2015, it was more important to make it hard to cheat than to protect a student's lifelong brain health.
“The system is there to be gamed” is simply wrong. Systems exist to create a structure within which people can function. Certainly, there are bad systems, but asserting that a system - established by an institution you seemly find good (otherwise why are you there, and why are you spending huge amounts of money to support it?) - only exists to be exploited says that your moral code finds no value in honesty, cooperation or fairness.