Duggars by the Dozen - General Discussion Part 16

[Coconut Flan]

Duggar talk. 

Part 1: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=19312

Part 2: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=19818

Part 3: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20491

Part 4: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20933

Part 5: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=21259

Part 6: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=21558

Part 7: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=21962

Part 8: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=22725

Part 9: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=24170

Part 10: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=25198

Part 11: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=25811

Part 12: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=26219&start=20#p957780

Part 13: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=26435

Part 14: http://www.freejinger.org/topic/24305-duggars-by-the-dozen-general-discussion-14/?page=1

Part 15: http://www.freejinger.org/topic/24833-duggars-by-the-dozen-general-discussion-part-15/

[roddma]

Talking of Duggar income, i just thought of why JIm Bob 'hires' his kids/in-laws after reading about self-employed taxes on our writing site forum. It may explain why Boob keeps them at arms' reach-their 'income' could count as a tax write off for him. He could pay them enough to write off the taxes, and keep them under the tax threshold so they won't have to pay taxes. I hope that makes sense. Im a freelance writer, so say I hired someone to maintain my PC I could pay them enough to deduct their salary from my taxes and to prevent them from paying taxes. It's win-win.

[EmCatlyn]

4 hours ago, roddma said:

Talking of Duggar income, i just thought of why JIm Bob 'hires' his kids/in-laws after reading about self-employed taxes on our writing site forum. It may explain why Boob keeps them at arms' reach-their 'income' could count as a tax write off for him. He could pay them enough to write off the taxes, and keep them under the tax threshold so they won't have to pay taxes. I hope that makes sense. Im a freelance writer, so say I hired someone to maintain my PC I could pay them enough to deduct their salary from my taxes and to prevent them from paying taxes. It's win-win.

I'm sure the tax "saving" is partly how he explains/justifies it, though the set up has the added advantage of reinforcing his patriarchal status.  

[patsymae]

If someone's already posted about this, I missed it so sorry. Duggan blog has an open letter to Anna from the "wise" Lori Alexander--a veritable clusterfuck of assholes have joined forces.

It's all the more appalling because of its passive aggressiveness-assuring Anna it isn't her fault that Josh strayed--his sin and nothing she can do about it--while stressing the godliness of wifely submission.

 

I'm thinking poor Anna never had a chance.

[SassyPants]

I so want JB to be found guilty of some sort of tax fraud/evasion. He is just presents as such an opportunistic shyster.

[CherylV]

I don't like how that letter seemed to be guilting her into staying  as an example to other people. Awful.

[EmCatlyn]

5 hours ago, patsymae said:

If someone's already posted about this, I missed it so sorry. Duggan blog has an open letter to Anna from the "wise" Lori Alexander--a veritable clusterfuck of assholes have joined forces.

It's all the more appalling because of its passive aggressiveness-assuring Anna it isn't her fault that Josh strayed--his sin and nothing she can do about it--while stressing the godliness of wifely submission.

 

I'm thinking poor Anna never had a chance.

The letter has been quoted and is being discussed in the Anna and M Kids thread.  I don't find it "passive aggressive" that the letter reassures Anna that she is not to blame while also stressing wifely submission.  I think that reassuring Anna that she is not to blame and that it is not her responsibility to "save" Josh is the only good thing about the letter. It tells Anna that she is a good wife with a bad husband instead of suggesting that he would be a better husband if she were different. Anna may need the reassurance.

However, I characterized the letter as "obnoxious" (see other thread) because among other things the letter is encouraging Anna (and other women in her situation) to be passive aggressive.  It is telling women that they must accept their suffering and that if they show love and forgiveness, their "Christian example" may turn their husbands' thoughts back to Christ.  The idea is that if you "turn the other cheek" noticeably enough, you may shame others into doing what they "should."

This kind of ostentatious Christianity is the worst form of passive aggression. ("Love the sinner, but hate the sin," sounds like a good idea until you are the "sinner" who is on the receiving end.  Ask any gay person who is regularly reminded, out of "love" that his/her lifestyle is anathema to "God."). Smug people are never attractive, and this letter is not only smug but it is implicitly urging Anna to be smug by saying that her only legitimate comfort is to remind herself that she is the conduit of Jesus's love for Josh.  Anna does not need to hear that.

I think that the message that she shouldn't leave or divorce Josh and that Anna should always show him respect and submission because he is her husband is just confirming what Anna herself believes.  Praising her and encouraging her to be an "example" is steering her in the wrong direction. It will not make her a better person It might make her smug and more intolerant because when you are rewarded for suppressing your feelings, you may think that your sacrifice makes you better than those who act according to their own feelings.

[Valerie3kids]

7 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I so want JB to be found guilty of some sort of tax fraud/evasion. He is just presents as such an opportunistic shyster.

I have thought this many many times. He just has too much going on and hands in too many pots to be doing it all above board. Or those are my feelings. Plus, I don't trust the man as far as I can throw him. The cheesey smile, the rudeness to those who are different from him etc. I just feel he firmly believes he is one step above the rest of us so if he skirts a couple of  corners who is smart enough to figure it out? No one as we are all subservient in his eyes.

[Rubyroo]

I often wonder if JB has been reported to the IRS to be looked into. You have to fill out a form and fax it in but I think you have to put down your info too and I'm not doing that haha

[Pixiedust1960]

I have always thought JB was creepy. The boys rub me the wrong way. Sadly the Dugger kids think everything is normal  

[Mothership]

JB has always felt that he was above civil law.  After all, the law of God (that is, how he interprets it) is bigger and much more important.  How else would he have justified Joshgate #1 (aka those youthful indiscretions).

Sadly, we may never see JB pay for his ego driven decisions, but we will likely see the next generation pay for it, as they have been taught that skirting the law can be justified.

[CreationMuseumSeasonPass]

Pickles is reporting on her Facebook that TLC was filming the Duggars at a lumberyard last week. No. Just no.

[EmCatlyn]

21 minutes ago, CreationMuseumSeasonPass said:

Pickles is reporting on her Facebook that TLC was filming the Duggars at a lumberyard last week. No. Just no.

They were boring before the scandals.  They are boring now,. 

I wonder if the lumberyard was connected to their favorite hardware store and if this is going to be a major sponsor.

[CreationMuseumSeasonPass]

Getting ready to build that doghouse for Josh when he comes back from fake rehab.

[MatthewDuggar]

9 hours ago, CreationMuseumSeasonPass said:

Pickles is reporting on her Facebook that TLC was filming the Duggars at a lumberyard last week. No. Just no.

And Inquisitr was right on it:

http://www.inquisitr.com/2700819/duggar-family-filming-again-tlc-cameras-follow-duggars-during-mundane-outing-josh-has-chance-at-getting-back-on-tv/

[nastyhobbitses]

On 1/10/2016 at 3:39 PM, SassyPants said:

I so want JB to be found guilty of some sort of tax fraud/evasion. He is just presents as such an opportunistic shyster.

I have a feeling that this will be the next scandal. Dude is shadier than a rainforest.

[ljohnson2006]

Why are they taking Smugs back in? He deserves to rot.

[SassyPants]

I think the Duggars need to read this article. It's too late for the 2nd generation, but maybe it will help prevent another generation from being affected.

 

 

Why You Might Want to Rethink Having Another Kid

 Becky Bracken

If you've always dreamed of a big family, you might want to rethink your plans for that second, third, or even fourth baby. A new study says kids from smaller families tend to do better in life. 

Why?

It's all about "parental investment."

Economists Chinhui Juhn, Yona Rubinstein, and C. Andrew Zuppann looked at data over a 26-year period and found that every new baby added to a family decreases older kids' cognitive scores by 2.8 percent and brought on more behavior problems.

The reason is the amount of "parental investment," meaning essentially how much time and resources parents have to devote to their kids -- from family dinners to money and attention. And as the parental investment drops, so does a child's ability to thrive, both throughout childhood and even into adulthood, the study says.

But none of these findings should come as a surprise. Not only are older kids in large families getting less attention as kids are added -- but they're also often required to pick up some of the responsibilities for caring for younger siblings. And forcing kids into parenting roles so young can't be good for them. It certainly isn't fair.

The study points out that older girls in large families will lose more cognitive ability and will most often see basic reading and math scores drop. Older boys in large families, on the other hand, are more likely to act out and have issues with behavior.

It's not like this everywhere else in the world. Parents in countries like the Netherlands receive more support from the government -- like paid parental leave or childcare subsidies -- that helps parents spend more time with their children. The inability for parents in the US to quit their jobs or take on a flexible schedule exacerbates the natural toll that adding kids to the family takes on older sibs.

And so, like most things in life, parenting seems to come down to a quality-versus-quantity equation. The more kids you add to the family, the less of you there is to go around, and that can have a real impact on your kids. Something to consider before you decide to have another baby.

[Valerie3kids]

2 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I think the Duggars need to read this article. It's too late for the 2nd generation, but maybe it will help prevent another generation from being affected.

 

 

Why You Might Want to Rethink Having Another Kid

 Becky Bracken

If you've always dreamed of a big family, you might want to rethink your plans for that second, third, or even fourth baby. A new study says kids from smaller families tend to do better in life. 

Why?

It's all about "parental investment."

Economists Chinhui Juhn, Yona Rubinstein, and C. Andrew Zuppann looked at data over a 26-year period and found that every new baby added to a family decreases older kids' cognitive scores by 2.8 percent and brought on more behavior problems.

The reason is the amount of "parental investment," meaning essentially how much time and resources parents have to devote to their kids -- from family dinners to money and attention. And as the parental investment drops, so does a child's ability to thrive, both throughout childhood and even into adulthood, the study says.

But none of these findings should come as a surprise. Not only are older kids in large families getting less attention as kids are added -- but they're also often required to pick up some of the responsibilities for caring for younger siblings. And forcing kids into parenting roles so young can't be good for them. It certainly isn't fair.

The study points out that older girls in large families will lose more cognitive ability and will most often see basic reading and math scores drop. Older boys in large families, on the other hand, are more likely to act out and have issues with behavior.

It's not like this everywhere else in the world. Parents in countries like the Netherlands receive more support from the government -- like paid parental leave or childcare subsidies -- that helps parents spend more time with their children. The inability for parents in the US to quit their jobs or take on a flexible schedule exacerbates the natural toll that adding kids to the family takes on older sibs.

And so, like most things in life, parenting seems to come down to a quality-versus-quantity equation. The more kids you add to the family, the less of you there is to go around, and that can have a real impact on your kids. Something to consider before you decide to have another baby.

The Duggars would read the article and decide none of it applied to them as they "pray and are Jesus lovers". So, that makes them one up on the rest of the heathen world. Plus, Meechelle was a stay at home mom so they will say the kids got her attention 24/7. We all know this not to the truth but in Duggarland it is. They live by a different set of morals and rules.

Filming them buying wood? It doesn't get much duller than that unless we are watching the paint dry on the wood. I just do not see how they are going to make a go of any show if that is all they have to offer. I would think even the leg humpers would start turning the channel out of sheer hair pulling boredom. Unless they start facing up to the facts and admitting their mistakes there is nothing left to watch.

[EmCatlyn]

6 hours ago, MatthewDuggar said:

And Inquisitr was right on it:

http://www.inquisitr.com/2700819/duggar-family-filming-again-tlc-cameras-follow-duggars-during-mundane-outing-josh-has-chance-at-getting-back-on-tv/

Get ready for the special starring Josh:

Quote

Now critics of the Duggar family may have to worry about Josh Duggar returning to TV. He’s the only adult member of the family who hasn’t publicly spoken about his two sex scandals that were such hot topics last year, and TLC would likely score a big ratings boost if it aired a special centered on the troubled eldest Duggar son. Jo
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2700819/duggar-family-filming-again-tlc-cameras-follow-duggars-during-mundane-outing-josh-has-chance-at-getting-back-on-tv/#iLwgpGJvXJXoj3Fr.99

 

[LovelyLuna]

please please no. don’t put Joshy Boy back on tv. 

[HarleyQuinn]

Filming at a lumber yard, how riveting. Fuck off, TLC.

[Drala]

1 hour ago, EmCatlyn said:

Now critics of the Duggar family may have to worry about Josh Duggar returning to TV. He’s the only adult member of the family who hasn’t publicly spoken about his two sex scandals that were such hot topics last year, and TLC would likely score a big ratings boost if it aired a special centered on the troubled eldest Duggar son. Jo
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2700819/duggar-family-filming-again-tlc-cameras-follow-duggars-during-mundane-outing-josh-has-chance-at-getting-back-on-tv/#iLwgpGJvXJXoj3Fr.99

I can see it all now:  TLC will boost ratings further by convincing HLN to run a segment of Dr. Drew analyzing Josh's "recovery" while Nancy Grace features a special on the molestation cover-up and the porn star lawsuit.  .

Complete coverage with talking heads.

[patsymae]

Even if they go back on, I don't see them reaching the same heights" as before--actually all the People covers bother me a lot more than a TLC show. It might have enough viewers to satisfy TLC for a while, but IMO major sponsors won't want the headaches, plus most of their fan base that actually watches TV, which I suspect is pretty slim, doesn't have the consumer clout to pay off for those who do advertise. I think it will fade away, like Sister Wives, and along with it all of the nonfundie speaking engagements. I can see Dr. Drew and nancy Grace getting in on the act, though.

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, patsymae said:

Even if they go back on, I don't see them reaching the same heights" as before--actually all the People covers bother me a lot more than a TLC show. It might have enough viewers to satisfy TLC for a while, but IMO major sponsors won't want the headaches, plus most of their fan base that actually watches TV, which I suspect is pretty slim, doesn't have the consumer clout to pay off for those who do advertise. I think it will fade away, like Sister Wives, and along with it all of the nonfundie speaking engagements. I can see Dr. Drew and nancy Grace getting in on the act, though.

I think TLC is going to milk the scandal and the fan base until they dry out.  I am sure they will continue on the lookout for other clusterfucks to market and will stop showing Duggar stuff as soon as they don't see the profit.

What I am wondering is how soon after Josh returns "Reformed" will TLC start showing old 19 Kids reruns.