Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 880 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 9,180 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,702 |
Quote
addiea raine
So far no one has said anything about "the mother" and the risks associated with such a pregnancy but have said "oh it will be everyone's kid"
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 880 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,702 |
Quote
addiea raine
I honestly have no fucking clue what she's thinking. I was told it was an "oops didn't know I could still get preggers tee hee!" thing (coughbullshitcough). I imagine her kids are not too happy with it as they all have kids of their own. It makes me wonder if she was doing the "I need to feel young again! I'm not a grandma!" thing we see too often. Her mother is not in good health. She's in her late 70's and has heart problems...and was volunteered to help with this. That's what is meant by "this will be everyone's baby".
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 221 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 499 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 28, 2016 | Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 70 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 29, 2016 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 333 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 29, 2016 | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 2,308 |
Quote
freya
What does everyone's kid mean? That when the geezer moo isn't able to be a moo because she is a geezer that all the relatives will be stuck caretaking the kid? Is this a collective pregnancy agreement of some sort? If so, is there an opt out clause?
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 29, 2016 | Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 951 |
Quote
# So what if she dies in childbirth or when the kid is a toadler?
# Her mother is not in good health. She's in her late 70's and has heart problems...and was volunteered to help with this.
# All her kids have kids.
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 29, 2016 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,702 |
Quote
StudioFiftyFour
Quote
freya
What does everyone's kid mean? That when the geezer moo isn't able to be a moo because she is a geezer that all the relatives will be stuck caretaking the kid? Is this a collective pregnancy agreement of some sort? If so, is there an opt out clause?
It means that they're going to keep any positive impact from this event for themselves, meanwhile they will socialize the costs and negative impact to everyone, instead of taking it on themselves.
This means that when it comes to positive attention whoring, this person will absorb all of it. When it comes to the actual work that is involved with a new baby, this person will be "just too old" to handle most of the mind-numbing drudgery that's associated with a new baby.
By comparison, this is done frequently in the public sector. Some community members will want something built. For example, many communities have built public swimming pools.
Now remember, if those who wanted a swimming pool decided to build a private pool, then only those who actually want to use the pool would be responsible for the costs. While this "user pay" system makes the most sense, it is more expensive than pushing the costs on to everyone else.
And so instead, they propose a public pool, and this way everyone must bear the burden. Even those who don't want a pool, are disabled, can't swim, are too old to swim, have no time to swim, or are allergic to the chemicals... ALL of them must pay for it. ALL of them will pay for the guys to dig out the trench, the concrete guys to build the pool, the water, the chlorine, the employees to care for the pool, the annual maintenance of the pool, etc. etc. etc.
And why? Because "it's everyone's pool!" Just like "it's everyone's baby!"
The baby, the pool... both are yours whether you wanted them or not.
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 29, 2016 | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 2,308 |
Quote
freya
Yikes. I never quite thought about it like this but this is a very good comparison. What a sick thing for the family to be saying, everyone will pay for it whether they like it or not. It is as if they're proud to be taxing the public. confused smiley
Quote
freya
I later moved to an area with a public pool, which was paid for by everyone and not in the best shape. About every 5 years there was flood damage which caused it to have to be rebuilt and instead of building it at a higher elevation they refurbished it so it could be destroyed by floods repeatedly. There was also a surcharge for going to the pool. The entire town was divided on the pool that everyone was paying for.
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 30, 2016 | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 1,155 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 30, 2016 | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 234 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 30, 2016 | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 3,839 |
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 30, 2016 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,702 |
Quote
StudioFiftyFour
Quote
freya
Yikes. I never quite thought about it like this but this is a very good comparison. What a sick thing for the family to be saying, everyone will pay for it whether they like it or not. It is as if they're proud to be taxing the public. confused smiley
They will be taxing the public, but mostly they'll be taxing themselves and their own time and energy. Everyone knows at least one family that is very spread out. Mom gets pregnant while teens are in the house, and gleefully announces that, "When the baby comes, everyone is going to have to pitch in here to get all of the work accomplished!"
Whether the older siblings and dad wanted the new baby or not, it makes no difference. Mom will be lauded with praise and attention... and the others will be doing most of the "pitching in" even though they had no desire for a new sibling.Quote
freya
I later moved to an area with a public pool, which was paid for by everyone and not in the best shape. About every 5 years there was flood damage which caused it to have to be rebuilt and instead of building it at a higher elevation they refurbished it so it could be destroyed by floods repeatedly. There was also a surcharge for going to the pool. The entire town was divided on the pool that everyone was paying for.
This doesn't surprise me in the least. Freeloaders vote themselves a pool at everyone else's expense and when it makes perfect sense to shut it down, they just can't imagine living without it... even though it's costing EVERYONE a fortune. And why was that site chosen, anyway? I'd say in large part because it was owned by "the town," and the land was low-bid. Even for those who wanted the pool, if the floods ever did come it's not like they actually owned the pool and had to deal with it. Nope. "The town" owned it. It's very likely no private individual would build a pool in a known flood zone, but government entities answer to no one when these projects begin... however, the chickens come home to roost years later when you've got a flooded municipal project that's owned by "everyone" and NO ONE wants to take any responsibility for it's shortcomings.
... and all the while you've got what amounts to probably the majority of taxpayers, feeling irate because they didn't want a fucking pool in the first place.
Re: Squeeee! 54 and pregnant!!! May 31, 2016 | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 2,308 |
Quote
freya
Yes, this is exactly what happened. And is probably happening all over the place across the US.