The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Health

Health Keeping your body well enough to support your head

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-10-2017, 09:02 PM   #1
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 59,727
Buffet and Gates

In 2006 Warren Buffet donated a huge chunk of his wealth to the Gates foundation, doubling it's size. Ten years later he wrote Gates a letter(and posted it on his website) saying he'd always had profit and loss statements to gage his other investments, but since this investment isn't for profit could they tell him what they have accomplished with this investment. You can see his letter and gates response here.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2017, 09:58 AM   #2
Freaky
Fellow-Commoner
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 10
Most important is really to increase the use of contraceptives. Unfortunately many nation leaders are too d*mb to understand that if the population in some parts of the world doubles every 25 years, that that won't end well, but in hunger and civil wars. What's more, lower birth rates affect all other metrics positively. Contraceptives also empower women and give them the chance to persue a career before having kids, which is something we should all support.

Last edited by Freaky; 10-19-2017 at 10:06 AM.
Freaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2017, 07:18 PM   #3
Clodfobble
UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 18,187
I always thought the "pursue a career first, then have kids" thing was backwards. In your 20s, no one gives a shit what you think. In your 30s, you start to get respect from the other 30- and 40-year-olds simply because you're not one of those awful 20-year-olds. Most people don't even really figure out what they want to do until their 30s anyway, so whatever career foundation they enthusiastically but naively laid in their 20s (like everything else we laid in our 20s, yuk yuk yuk) is often wasted anyway. Then right about the time their career finally starts moving, all of a sudden they're out of commission for 5-10 years? That seems like a much bigger career-killer to me.

Now, if the choice is to have no kids in favor of a career, I can understand that. But if you are trying to do the work/kids balance, it really helps to recognize that pretty much everything you do in your 20s is meaningless anyway, so you might as well spend that time being vomited on and screamed at, while you still have the stamina. Then right about the time they're able to stay at home alone and be autonomous, you've got the age and wisdom for someone to take you seriously in the workplace.

Admittedly, people are often too stupid to make permanent marriage choices in their 20s either, and that's how you end up with divorced women in their 30s entering the workforce for the first time. But guess what? That divorced woman still gets taken more seriously than the 22-year-old upstart intern.
__________________
My book
My spirit animal
Clodfobble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2017, 12:14 AM   #4
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 59,727
Wouldn't an employer's recruiter look more favorably on a woman who worked at any steady employment for 2 or 3 years then dropped out to spawn, than a woman with 0 employment experience?
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2017, 07:21 AM   #5
Clodfobble
UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 18,187
With *absolutely* zero employment experience, sure. But I'm also of the opinion that teens should start working at 16, continue in some capacity during college, and not necessarily be popping babies out the day after graduation.

Let's say you want to be a radio DJ. First you have to be an unpaid intern, then a Production Assistant, then a Producer, then maybe an On-Air Talent. Follow that trajectory without kids, and you're basically 2 years into being an On-Air Talent when you realize, "oh shit, biological clock's ticking." Leave that position, and you'll have to fight hard to get it back, because not every Producer gets to be an On-Air Talent. You've already passed the critical gate.

Meanwhile, if you go off to have kids 1 year into being a Production Assistant, no one will miss you, but you'll still have some reasonable career-themed stuff on your resume when you come back--by which time quite possibly you've already realized, "ooh, actually radio sucks and what I really want to do is teach."

Now, in Scenario A, you drop out of your On-Air Talent job, raise the kids, look up and now you're in your mid-to-late 40s looking for a Talent Job with 1 year of experience (or else looking for a teaching job with a certain amount of non-relevant experience.)

In Scenario B, you've had your kids, you're in your 30s, and you're looking for a Producer job. You only have 1 year of experience as a PA, and others your age have more, or even a few years as a Producer already. But here's the catch. The employment recruiter will look at you and say, "Ah, she's already got kids, now she's in for the long haul," whereas they look at the Producer in her 30s without kids and say, "Ah, she's getting along in years, no kids yet, but not quite past the window for them--she'll be bailing on us in a few years, and also probably making our insurance policy pay for her expensive preemie triplets that she conceives with IVF." Assuming the one who already has kids is talented and interviews well, she is at least as likely to get the Producer job, if not more.

Meanwhile, in the alternate universe where it turns out you want to be a teacher--often that sort of revelation comes not because radio makes you miserable, but because something inspires you late in the game as you come into your 30s and figure out who you are. So now, again, you're either a 30-something who's had her kids, and is ready to throw herself into a new career with both feet, or you're a 30-something who is faced with changing careers and also having babies all at once.

Obviously nothing is one-size-fits-all. And lots of "On-Air Talent" level folks manage to have a kid late in their fertility window and utilize day care and keep working at their job. And that leads to other minefield debates like working mothers with newborns, and how close-siblings-vs-extra-financial-stability make their mark on a kid. I'm just saying that getting your kids out of the way early isn't anything like the career-derailing death sentence people make it out to be.
__________________
My book
My spirit animal
Clodfobble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2017, 07:47 AM   #6
Undertoad
Miserable contrarian
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 28,641
Taking years off work to raise infants? Must be in the 1%.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.