Live data from Hacker News

Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

news.berkeley.edu

131–140 of 172 posts

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't make heads nor tails of this sentence ?> The tricky part is that: being able to (observe, absorb or even articulate) is one thing, but to contextualize is a whole other ball game.

Thanks - I have trouble trying to re-organize expressions like that into something that makes sense. Just doesn't compute.

To be fair, splitting it across two paragraphs doesn't help.

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not working full-time does not necessarily mean working fewer hours. Working 2 29-hour jobs and commuting between them would be vastly more time and energy consuming, yet would show up as “not working full-time”.

Two 29 hour jobs would result in a 58 hour work week, and thus the worker would be considered to work full-time.

I think it's more likely that a lot of poor people have a main job, frequently with a number of hours that prevents them getting all the benefits of a full time job (think 35 hours instead of 40) and then they work extra, on the side, to be able to make ends meet.

So legally they'd only show up as working 15-20-35 hours and in fact they'd work 60 hours a week.

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the insensitivity to it was always a problem. For who? Moral outrage porn addicts?

Alright. I'll bite. Why is it so important to you to continue to use caricature mascots that other people would find offensive over something benign like animals?

inb4 dang shows up telling you not to feed the troll :)

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#134

Kids know. They always know and they understand. My family went through a bankruptcy when I was a kid. We lost the family business. My parents never told me about it, but I knew. The discussions, the fear of coming home to nothing. It's all real. Tell your kids, explain to them. Use the difficult time to build a closer bond with them instead of leaving them in the dark.

I grew up upper class with self-made parents that came from considerably less. As a result they still had the thrifty gene and that really burned a lot of anxiety into me. What helped was them talking to me about it. But I still struggled well into my late teens that I was making my family go poor any time I got some toy or game or clothes or food that I didn’t enjoy fully.

It’s why I am trying hard to find the right balance of communication with my kids. I don’t want them to waste or act spoiled and entitled, but I never want them to think we’re at risk for anything.

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#136
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an inherently male trait, it's something that's done to boys from an early age in some societies. Men are conditioned to behave this way from an early age, and IMO it's a great tragedy.

As a male who identifies with this trait, why? Most emotions seem to just hold you back. Why cry about a situation when you should more likely focus your energy into finding a solution? For me it's not that emotions are so much "swallowed in silence and not talked about"... it's that they're fundamentally not useful. If I'm stressed out or sad or etc about something, that's something to be solved, not something to be…

Because we're not wired like that. Emotions are there, regardless like if we express them or not. We're not fully rational and the sooner we realize that, that the sooner we are at peace.

We need to talk to other people about our problems, bitch, rant, shout, cry, do all sort of emotional things to relieve stress, even if that does objectively nothing to solve our problems.

Even more so since some things just can't be solved. We're not all powerful, at the end of the day.

Not handling emotions is harmful to our mental health (including the rational machinery), to our life expectancy (especially the case for men), and also to our close ones.

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad you posted and took the the time to check it, because intuitively I would agree with the headline, less money = more stress = less talking (probably not for everybody, but most people will talk less when under stress, especially over time). At the limit, this is "my parents couldn't afford proper care for a debilitating diesease" vs they could. There is one group there that would talk more. if you're poor, b…

Why are the poor in the America described in terms of "meth heads"? Being poor is not a moral failure.

Why is there an implied assumption that only americans think being poor is a moral failure?

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're reading his list as an 'and', read the list as an 'or'.

I just picked one, but I noticed this more than once. Either the poor are referred to as "trailer trash", "Walmart monsters" or "meth heads". It is just interesting to see how American culture is so anti being poor that it seeps into your language without you knowing.

All cultures have anti poor sentiments as well as empathetic attitudes towards the poor. What is "interesting" here is prejudice attitudes from people like you towards america.

Also stop calling Americans "interesting." Using a term like this is a deliberate insult on a culture or a person. You are examining the culture like it's a lab rat and commenting on how the behavior is "interesting."

You are not an idiot. People do not talk like this in real life by remarking on how behavior is "interesting" to the subjects face. You and others only use these terms behind the anonymity of a forum. Therefore you are aware this is insulting. Stop.

This is a common tactic used to get around the HN rules. You say "interesting" posing it as an innocent remark. It is not, you are conducting a deliberate and insulting attack on American culture here.

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#139
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a report by a psychologist who said Native American mascots have a negative effect on children of native Americans. This may or may not be the case or may be true in some specific circumstances (Redskins, for example) but may not be true for all, however, many high schools are changing their team names based on this one study/conclusion which was funded by a tribe. Which is fine, but usually when there is a…

Teams didn't change their names because of that tribe-sponsored paper, they changed their names because white people wanted them to change. In 2016, when the main momentum of this started to come out, 9 in 10 Native Americans did not find it offensive [1]. But white people had already decided it was offensive, and white people have much more cultural influence than Native Americans, so in being perceived by white peo…

Wow, just like with GitHub master branch stuff

Re: Word gap: When money’s tight, parents talk less to kids

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or because they’re working multiple jobs/overtime and do all the chores themselves. Well, the data indicate that this is not the case. For households in the bottom two quintiles of income, only 18(!)% of householders work full time in the bottom quintile, and 45% work full time in the next-lowest quintile. source: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/explaining-income-inequality-...

Does that count all jobs, or just jobs the tax man knows about? At least over here (Poland, EU), people officially unemployed often work under the table, sometimes quite a lot, and they cannot afford the word of it to get to any public agency. Such people are unwilling to talk about it to researchers either. (We recently had a public census, and it asked a bunch of sensitive questions around topics like employment. D…

>At least over here (Poland, EU), people officially unemployed often work under the table, sometimes quite a lot, and they cannot afford the word of it to get to any public agency. Such people are unwilling to talk about it to researchers either.

"Job finding office" literally asks you whether you're willing to work "under the table".

I've been asked this question when attempted to find my very first job

Post reply on HN