Kicking me off

cattie

[QUOTE=rotoguys;4990952_ Why don't we go down the route of the woman compensating the employer for the extra costs incurred and loss of productive time? Such a simple answer - save up before deciding to have children and use that money to bring them up instead of expecting the taxpayers, businesses and government to fund the choice. No money/savings = no children![/QUOTE]

Exactly what we used to do in the old days, before the benefits culture took over & people decided that the meaning of a Nanny State was that the state would look after & dote on them with cash handouts, just like a fond old Grandma would.

lovinituk

sophiaw wrote: »

Yes its in my contract that I can't work for another firm so how can I get another job!

No but your other half could get a 7 hour a week job as has been stated several times by others on this thread.

LL30

rotoguys wrote: »

blueberrypie wrote: »

And more likely to "waste" her education by staying at home with her children. QUOTE]

I have always had the belief that women are generally more inclined to do that! It is a proven fact that children fare much better in society if mum stays at home looking after them.

How has she wasted it? It can't be taken off her.

Trying not to bite, but go on then, show me the evidence for that little gem. Oh and do be so kind as to explain the latter part of the sentence please.

blueberrypie

rotoguys wrote: »

blueberrypie wrote: »

And more likely to "waste" her education by staying at home with her children. QUOTE]

I have always had the belief that women are generally more inclined to do that! It is a proven fact that children fare much better in society if mum stays at home looking after them.

How has she wasted it? It can't be taken off her.

Waste: to fail or neglect to use.

If her university place had been given to a male applicant, he would probably be out at work and using that education*. She isn't. In fact she's not even using it to explain the legislation regarding gender discrimination to her own father.

(I would like to make it clear that this follows from rotoguys' reasoning. I am delighted that his daughter had the opportunity to graduate with a law degree - and I am equally delighted that she has been allowed to make the choice to stay at home to raise her children, and I do not view that as "wasting" anything.)

rotoguys

tomjonesrules wrote: »

I see andyandflo is back again ...

???????????????????

cartoon character? who me?

BigAunty

tomjonesrules wrote: »

I see andyandflo is back again ...

Not possible - remember he was found dead at his keyboard by his daughter who fortunately found he was still logged in and sent a message about his sad demise. I can't remember if it was drugs, alcohol, suicide, his numerous health issues or his personality disorder that killed him.

rotoguys

cattie wrote: »

[/COLOR]

Exactly what we used to do in the old days, before the benefits culture took over & people decided that the meaning of a Nanny State was that the state would look after & dote on them with cash handouts, just like a fond old Grandma would.

I'm glad that there is at least one other person on here that sees what has happened with the country.

Mind you it's no different to buying a car or a TV I suppose - I want it now so who is going to lend me the money then?

Thanks for your support

rotoguys

LL30 wrote: »

rotoguys wrote: »

Trying not to bite, but go on then, show me the evidence for that little gem. Oh and do be so kind as to explain the latter part of the sentence please.

I haven't got the time to go round gathering it together, but you are fully aware that it exists.
I have discussed this with a good friend of mine who is the head of a local school.

He states that it is clear in the classroom which child has a parent at home and those that have parents that work full time.
He also reported that those mums that stay at home are more likely to be involved in the child's education during the day (by being involved with the PTA) and in the evening after school with mum being there to talk to them and deal with homework issues.

As for the question about the final sentence, I have no idea what you are getting at.

rotoguys

blueberrypie wrote: »

rotoguys wrote: »

Waste: to fail or neglect to use.

If her university place had been given to a male applicant, he would probably be out at work and using that education*. She isn't. In fact she's not even using it to explain the legislation regarding gender discrimination to her own father.

(I would like to make it clear that this follows from rotoguys' reasoning. I am delighted that his daughter had the opportunity to graduate with a law degree - and I am equally delighted that she has been allowed to make the choice to stay at home to raise her children, and I do not view that as "wasting" anything.)

I am fully aware of the legislation thankyou, but I do not agree with it.

From a practical point of view, any small business is more at risk of financial impact if they employ a female than a male. That is a fact!!

sunnyone

tomjonesrules wrote: »

I see andyandflo is back again ...

It definatily is but how do you know who andyandflo is, never mind the same stories that this AE has already started to trot off like his daughter's qualifications and never using them due to having kids?

You certainly wernt registed here then or for his many AEs either, he has been very quiet since you joined.