Where to bring up Children?

[msmob]

Wow, Krim, that's a great photo I couldn't be more envious! I wish I were there, would love to have all that going on around me and be a part of it

While you persist with your current misogynistic attitude ...wishing and dreaming is all you have .. ((

You still think getting a women 'up the duff' will enslave her to you ..

[Trenchcoat]

While you persist with your current misogynistic attitude ...wishing and dreaming is all you have .. ((

You still think getting a women 'up the duff' will enslave her to you ..

Ah jealousy rears its head in our Mobes Enjoying your time in blighty eh?

Now I know for some having woman with children will not bind her to him, but aside from the character of the man a lot of the rest is down to society and to the way the man deals with the relationship.

Society in the UK encourages women to separate from the man. They can take the lot if they go to divorce court, he will be striped of house and home as well as the children. All of that will go to the woman the man in most/many cases will be left in a bedsit or possibly homeless and just called upon to make child support payments, which even after making he still may not see his children.

Now a man that is more canny even in such a society as the UK that allows such a scenario to occur is to firstly not p*ss off his wife so much that she will want to divorce him. Secondly is too passively avoid going to places where she may be in bad company. Thirdly is to be the leader and not go out to be a dumbass and end up in a set up where the woman is leading the show.

Now not difficult is it Mobers.

[2tallbill]

So the 'Island of Bare Naked Beach Bunnies' is just a myth??
Say it ain't so.

That one is true, but you have to have in excess of million
dollars in your checking account to visit.

[John Gaunt]

Society in the UK encourages women to separate from the man.

How?

They can take the lot if they go to divorce court, he will be striped of house and home as well as the children. All of that will go to the woman the man in most/many cases will be left in a bedsit or possibly homeless and just called upon to make child support payments, which even after making he still may not see his children.

Trenches guide to Divorce in England & Wales is it?

Trench huddling in his mums basement furiously surfing the Incel forums to reinforce his women hating views.
Why don’t you check out some family law while you’re at it. Who knows, you might learn something.
It’s a good thing he’ll never succeed in ‘getting’ with any woman, FSU or otherwise.

Now a man that is more canny even in such a society as the UK that allows such a scenario to occur is to firstly not p*ss off his wife so much that she will want to divorce him. Secondly is too passively avoid going to places where she may be in bad company. Thirdly is to be the leader and not go out to be a dumbass and end up in a set up where the woman is leading the show.

I’ve been away from the forum for a while and see that nothing much has changed.
Trench still trumpeting his theories on being a ‘man’ and how to keep hold of a woman. 
 

[msmob]

Trench, you manage to unite posters who normally can;t agree on anything, even who those confused as to who / where they are...

Hello, DS !

[John Gaunt]

Trench, you manage to unite posters who normally can;t agree on anything, even who those confused as to who / where they are...

Hello, DS !

Mobers, I’m not agreeing with you. Just pointing out TC’s idiocy.
 Just like I think you’re an Id**t as well. 

[Trenchcoat]

How?
Trenches guide to Divorce in England & Wales is it?

Trench huddling in his mums basement furiously surfing the Incel forums to reinforce his women hating views.
Why don’t you check out some family law while you’re at it. Who knows, you might learn something.
It’s a good thing he’ll never succeed in ‘getting’ with any woman, FSU or otherwise.
I’ve been away from the forum for a while and see that nothing much has changed.
Trench still trumpeting his theories on being a ‘man’ and how to keep hold of a woman. 

How because the law is heavily weighted in the females favour. She KNOWS that in the UK she can take her man to the Divorce courts and she will get all of him and she can cut him out completely. Any move the courts make to allow the guy access into children's life won't get anywhere as she knows they won't take the children from her and she can weaponise the children against him in any case. No children that's ok, she'll still take as much as she can get, usually at least half of everything she hasn't worked for, lol.

[John Gaunt]

How because the law is heavily weighted in the females favour. She KNOWS that in the UK she can take her man to the Divorce courts and she will get all of him and she can cut him out completely. Any move the courts make to allow the guy access into children's life won't get anywhere as she knows they won't take the children from her and she can weaponise the children against him in any case. No children that's ok, she'll still take as much as she can get, usually at least half of everything she hasn't worked for, lol.

Have you ever read the law on Divorce in England & Wales.
You really should before making such ridiculous and idiotic statements.

Like I said, you’ve been on too many women hating Incel forums which spout rubbish like above.

If you want to be informed about Divorce law make a start by reading the following:

In the UK the starting point for dividing the assets in divorce is 50/50. However the financial settlement will usually be different in every case as it depends on the parties’ circumstances and their needs when it comes to deciding what they should each receive from the matrimonial assets. It is possible that one party will have a greater share.

The financial claims arise as a result of the marriage and its subsequent breakdown.

Understanding divorce can be difficult. If you need help with the dividing of assets in a UK divorce, please send us a message or visit our Yate or Chipping Sodbury offices near Bristol.

What are Matrimonial Assets?
Matrimonial assets or property is sometimes called the “matrimonial acquest” and is property that has been built up during the marriage (other than by inheritance or gift) and has been described as being the financial product of the parties’ common endeavour.

Usually the greatest assets are the matrimonial home and pension.

Resolve Financial Issues
The financial issues can be very difficult to resolve. The matrimonial assets which funded one household suddenly have to try to fund two households.

The court has the power to order a lump sum payment or other financial payments such as periodical payments which are sometimes known as spousal maintenance.

The court has a duty to try to provide the parties to be independent of each other as soon as possible. This is set out in section 25(A) Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 which provides as follows:

“(1) ……….. it shall be the duty of the court to consider whether it would be appropriate so to exercise those powers that the financial obligations of each party towards the other will be terminated as soon after the grant of the decree as the court considers just and reasonable

(2) Where the court decides in such a case to make a periodical payments order in favour of a party to the marriage, the court shall in particular consider whether it would be appropriate to require those payments to be made … only for such term as would in the opinion of the court be sufficient to enable the party in whose favour the order is made to adjust without undue hardship to the termination of his or her financial dependence on the other party.”

What Do UK Courts Need To Consider When Dividing Assets?
A Court must take into account the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (and Civil Partnership Act 2004) which deals with the issues that the Court need to take into consideration. These include:

(a)  the income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future, including in the case of earning capacity any increase in that capacity which it would in the opinion of the court be reasonable to expect a party to the marriage to take steps to acquire;

(b)  the financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is  likely to have in the foreseeable future;

(c)  the standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage;

(d)  the age of each party to the marriage and the duration of the marriage;

(e)  any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage;

(f)  the contributions which each of the parties has made or is likely in the foreseeable future to make to the welfare of the family, including any contribution by looking after the home or caring for the family;

(g)  the conduct of each of the parties, if that conduct is such that it would in the opinion of the court be inequitable to disregard it;

(h)  in the case of proceedings for divorce or nullity of marriage, the value to each of the parties to the marriage of any benefit which, by reason of the dissolution or annulment of the marriage, that party will lose the chance of acquiring (typically a pension).

Income and Divorce
Each party is under a duty to maximise their income and so not simply rely on the other if they can be self reliant, either partly or completely.

However, there are times when one of the parties to the marriage is not able to work either due to health or because there are still young children to be cared for.

If they do not have an earning capacity this will affect other financial matters such as raising a mortgage.

Property Adjustment
The Court can order that property owned jointly by the husband and wife can be changed so that the property is transferred to the ownership of one or the other.

One Party Buys Out The Other

This might be where one is going to buy out the other, even if the money is not due to be paid for a number of years.

Young Children Need The House For Their Home

This might be where there are still young children who need the house for their home while they are still minors.

If the parent with care of the children can afford the upkeep of the property including the mortgage, the Court will preserve the property to continue to be the children’s home.

In that situation the other parent / spouse will have to wait for their share.

Payment Trigger Points
There are usually trigger points set into any financial order to provide for the payment due to the other party to be made on the first of various events that will happen in the future.

Typical events set into the financial order might be:

The marriage of the parent with care of the children,
or the youngest child completing full time education.
Matrimonial Home Ownership
Home Solely Owned by either Husband or Wife

The fact that the former matrimonial home is owned in the sole name of either the husband or the wife will not prevent the court from altering the ownership.

Lord Nicholls in the case of Miller v Miller, McFarlane v McFarlane 2006 said

“the matrimonial home, even if brought into the marriage by one party at the outset of the marriage, plays a central part in the marriage and so should normally be treated as matrimonial property”.

Home Jointly Owned & Mortgaged

If the jointly owned property is to be retained by one party and there is a mortgage secured on that property, it is possible that the Lender will refuse to release the outgoing party from the mortgage.

The court cannot force a Lender release anyone from a mortgage and so possibly both parties could continue to be named on the mortgage for many years where there are very young children.

In those cases the party who is to remain in the property may indemnify the other against all liabilities, but that will not necessarily prevent the outgoing party from having their credit rating affected should the mortgage payments not be kept up to date.

What are the Financial Needs of each Party?
The Court will consider each party’s needs, taking into consideration all the circumstances of the case:

The standard of living during the marriage
The age of each of the parties
Any physical or mental disability
The contributions of each of the parties, for example:
Any contributions that are made by one party over and above the other where significant might be taken into account.
Where one party has been the main wage earner and the other has been the homemaker, this will often be considered an equal contribution.
However even where there is a contribution found to be made, whether this is taken into account will depend upon the needs of both.

If needs cannot be met without taking that additional contribution then it will be ignored.

This is something that might need to be carefully considered.

Inheritance and Divorce
What happens to an inheritance in a divorce?

Assets obtained by one party as a result of inheritance may be considered separately to the matrimonial assets.

Any inheritance should initially be set to one side and if the matrimonial assets that have been built up in the course of the marriage are sufficient to meet both party’s needs then it may be that the one who has received the inheritance should keep it.

If needs cannot be met then some or all of the inheritance may have to be taken into account and distributed.

Pensions and Divorce
How are pensions divided in divorce?

A spouse may lose their spousal benefits in respect of any pension scheme of the other party. This may be where a couple have had the marriage dissolved.

This will immediately mean that the spousal benefit one party would have had to the benefits of the other’s pension will be lost.

It is for this reason that frequently the divorce should not be finalised until the finances have been dealt with.

UK Spousal Maintenance
One party to the marriage may be entitled to spousal maintenance which may be payable for a period of time or for joint lives. This will depend on the individual circumstances.

There is no specific method of deciding what level the spousal maintenance should be, unlike child maintenance which has a defined formula.

Departing from 50/50 Equality when Dividing Assets
Where one party will suffer financial hardship by the assets being divided equally, there may be a departure from the starting point of 50/50.

Typically as set out above, that may be where one party is still the carer for young children or where health has an impact on the potential for one party to earn sufficient income to meet their needs.

Divorce Financial Order
Do I Have To Attend Court To Achieve a Financial Order?

It is not necessary to attend court to achieve a financial order. Where the terms can be agreed, an order can be drafted and submitted to the court by post with a brief summary of both parties’ current financial position. This is known as a Consent Order.

The court will consider whether the order is fair in all the circumstances and if so will endorse the order and it will then become binding.

What Happens If There Is No Financial Order?

Without a financial order there is no binding agreement and it is possible for one or other party to look to the court for a financial order many years later. Neither party will have any financial certainty in that case with regard the potential claims the other may make against them.

Here you are spouting on about where to raise children but in the event you do find a woman to marry (highly unlikely ), then have children (remote possibility) and then the woman divorces you ( 100% certainty), would you not want your imaginary kids to have a roof over their heads, ie your mothers house. Safe to say this is the only asset you have so it would be right for any court to ensure the children of your marriage have a roof over their heads.
In that event, yes, you’ll find yourself in a bed sit somewhere, surfing the forums reinforcing your women hating views.

But the question is, why wouldn’t you want to see your children secure in their home and support them  by supporting their mother as the primary career?

[Trenchcoat]

Have you ever read the law on Divorce in England & Wales.
You really should before making such ridiculous and idiotic statements.

Like I said, you’ve been on too many women hating Incel forums which spout rubbish like above.

If you want to be informed about Divorce law make a start by reading the following:
Here you are spouting on about where to raise children but in the event you do find a woman to marry (highly unlikely ), then have children (remote possibility) and then the woman divorces you ( 100% certainty), would you not want your imaginary kids to have a roof over their heads, ie your mothers house. Safe to say this is the only asset you have so it would be right for any court to ensure the children of your marriage have a roof over their heads.
In that event, yes, you’ll find yourself in a bed sit somewhere, surfing the forums reinforcing your women hating views.

But the question is, why wouldn’t you want to see your children secure in their home and support them  by supporting their mother as the primary career?

Because I would be little more than a unseen wage slave living in grotty conditions likely never being able to see the kids or very little. Now why wouldn't woman a women want to live in a grotty bedsit being a wage slave and not seeing much if anything of her children while I looked after them instead and took the house? Because she would not like to live like that either is the answer, it's a mean and despicable way to treat another human being yet many women are happy to do this.

The 50/50 starting point is a load of rubbish, that's only if the woman agrees and a settlement can be sorted out along those lines without going to court or if there is more than one house. Not many guys have more than one house in this country so won't have the option of you take one house I take the other. A woman knows she can take a guy to court and get the lot. She knows a court will rule in her favour for being the primary carer, why? Because gender equality is bs and they still see the female as being more suitable here merely down to her gender. That and there is a traditional bias here to be more favourable to the woman. A woman won't care in most cases if they ruin the guys life or he is made to live in sh*tty conditions as a result she will just care about taking it all and doing well out of it.

I know of many cases where this has happened. Ask our Mobers on here how his divorce went and what the results were. I think you'll find I'm right

[msmob]

WHY, do I see some of your daft posts ? ..

1/ YOU live in the UK and seek a women to bring here and 'enslave' having impregnated her ... You'll no doubt suggest this is just your 'SoH', but with you that's another issue

2/ I offered my stake remaining 40 percent until my youngest finished full time education ( or 1st wife remarrying) ..she fought for more and my offer was accepted... I regarded this aspect as being an enforced 'pension plan'

'Sorry' to disappoint you, Trench, but I remarried and ( once again ) did not seek any pre-nup..   If you agree to marry someone to me ..you're agreeing to share all you have, or don't get married ...

I'm afraid using me as an example was but another fail on your part ..

[Trenchcoat]

By contrast with the social housing crowd again it's the woman who will get custody of the kids in most cases. She will then get a free flat or house, rent paid for on benefits by the government and a comparatively bigger place than a private tenant could get. Only if she is a hard drug user, etc might she not gain custody. She would basically really have to fail as a human being. The man meanwhile would be kicked out onto the streets, it's only where a woman dumps the kids on him that the situation would be reversed, but that rarely happens, too much incentive for the woman, it's often the reason why the woman got pregnant in the first place. Few have much intention of staying with the guy, his purpose would have been served.

[Trenchcoat]

WHY, do I see some of your daft posts ? ..

1/ YOU live in the UK and seek a women to bring here and 'enslave' having impregnated her ... You'll no doubt suggest this is just your 'SoH', but with you that's another issue

2/ I offered my stake remaining 40 percent until my youngest finished full time education ( or 1st wife remarrying) ..she fought for more and my offer was accepted... I regarded this aspect as being an enforced 'pension plan'

'Sorry' to disappoint you, Trench, but I remarried and ( once again ) did not seek any pre-nup..   If you agree to marry someone to me ..you're agreeing to share all you have, or don't get married ...

I'm afraid using me as an example was but another fail on your part ..

Your not still on the ignoring my posts theme are you Mobe, I thought we got passed that.

You prove my point. It's not fair for the woman to come along with nothing then expect to get half. It's only fair for both parties to leave with what they entered the marriage with, that is how it is in Ukraine. You have already told us you have no access to your children so you should know better than anyone how a guy gets done over by the marriage/divorce process.

Yes a wealthy guy can walk off and start over but not so for your everyday guy which is the majority of cases.

[msmob]

You prove my point.

Naturally, I haven't .. read on, misguided foolish, chap..

  It's not fair for the woman to come along with nothing then expect to get half.

In my case she ( correctly ) got the family home roof over her head ...( well I agreed for her to sell it and buy a smaller place and do it up ) and I'd get 40 percent of the value of the first place ( allowing for inflation ) when either of the criteria previously came to pass, I'd get my 40 percent back ..

She'd still 'come in with nothing' and leave with 60 percent .... *I* think if you can't accept that .. and your previous posts suggest that.. then marriage and having kids isn't for you ...   

It's only fair for both parties to leave with what they entered the marriage with, that is how it is in Ukraine.

You're in the UK and she'll know where to divorce you!

You have already told us you have no access to your children so you should know better than anyone how a guy gets done over by the marriage/divorce process.

I had issues seeing my kids and the Family Courts kept ruling in my favour...  1st Wife has/had to deal with any issues she'd created with our daughters on that score, but it STILL doesn't alter the fact that your attitude and using me as an 'example' was mistaken.

Yes a wealthy guy can walk off and start over but not so for your everyday guy which is the majority of cases.

Only if he 'hides' his assets in overseas firms in which it's hard to prove he's got an interest ..

[John Gaunt]

Because I would be little more than a unseen wage slave living in grotty conditions likely never being able to see the kids or very little. Now why wouldn't woman a women want to live in a grotty bedsit being a wage slave and not seeing much if anything of her children while I looked after them instead and took the house? Because she would not like to live like that either is the answer, it's a mean and despicable way to treat another human being yet many women are happy to do this.

The 50/50 starting point is a load of rubbish, that's only if the woman agrees and a settlement can be sorted out along those lines without going to court or if there is more than one house. Not many guys have more than one house in this country so won't have the option of you take one house I take the other. A woman knows she can take a guy to court and get the lot. She knows a court will rule in her favour for being the primary carer, why? Because gender equality is bs and they still see the female as being more suitable here merely down to her gender. That and there is a traditional bias here to be more favourable to the woman. A woman won't care in most cases if they ruin the guys life or he is made to live in sh*tty conditions as a result she will just care about taking it all and doing well out of it.

I know of many cases where this has happened. Ask our Mobers on here how his divorce went and what the results were. I think you'll find I'm right

The issue really is that you are a low wage earner who lives at subsistence level and can’t afford to live solo let alone take on the responsibility of a wife and family.
The key word being ‘responsibility’.

You frame anecdotal accounts of a few divorces to embellish your ideas of the divorce laws in this country.
Forget about Moby, I was a divorcee. My ex didn’t take me to the cleaners. We had agreed mutually satisfactory arrangements for the care of our children and mutually satisfactory financial arrangements without involving the courts. We all had a roof over our head.
The law only steps in where there are disputes. Outside of that everything can be agreed prior to the final dissolution of a marriage and endorsed by the court.
Of course, you don’t see a marriage as a partnership, just that women are out to get everything they can from wherever.

You’re the problem, not women.

[John Gaunt]

By contrast with the social housing crowd again it's the woman who will get custody of the kids in most cases. She will then get a free flat or house, rent paid for on benefits by the government and a comparatively bigger place than a private tenant could get. Only if she is a hard drug user, etc might she not gain custody. She would basically really have to fail as a human being. The man meanwhile would be kicked out onto the streets, it's only where a woman dumps the kids on him that the situation would be reversed, but that rarely happens, too much incentive for the woman, it's often the reason why the woman got pregnant in the first place. Few have much intention of staying with the guy, his purpose would have been served.

All I see are sour grapes.
You resent that you earn a low wage and have to pay for the basics. At your age, you should be at the prime earning capacity in your life and yet, here you are, whining about how you’ll end up sad,lonely and penniless in a bedsit after your imaginary wife takes you for all you have after dumping you for a better model.

Guess what, Trench, you’re already there, without even getting married.
You’re sad, you’re lonely and you’re penniless.

So nothing to worry about really.

Again, you just display your ignorance of how the law actually works in regards to divorce settlements and children’s arrangements, which, btw, are not ‘custody’ as you frame it but the terminology used is ‘residency’.

[Trenchcoat]

All I see are sour grapes.
You resent that you earn a low wage and have to pay for the basics. At your age, you should be at the prime earning capacity in your life and yet, here you are, whining about how you’ll end up sad,lonely and penniless in a bedsit after your imaginary wife takes you for all you have after dumping you for a better model.

Guess what, Trench, you’re already there, without even getting married.
You’re sad, you’re lonely and you’re penniless.

So nothing to worry about really.

Again, you just display your ignorance of how the law actually works in regards to divorce settlements and children’s arrangements, which, btw, are not ‘custody’ as you frame it but the terminology used is ‘residency’.

I know how the law works JG, never mind you terminology rubbish. I merely state how it works and how it is unfair. I'm quite happy with my state of affairs at present thank you.

[John Gaunt]

I know how the law works JG, never mind you terminology rubbish. I merely state how it works and how it is unfair. I'm quite happy with my state of affairs at present thank you.

Ah, touched a nerve there, I see.
 It’s pretty obvious you haven’t a clue how the law works, as you interpret it through the prism of your extreme bias, nor have you any lived experience of it.

So, if you try and screw a former partner out of a fair settlement then expect to get screwed in return.

You haven’t any experience of relationships, come to think of it, so all your theorizing and BS about relationships and ‘getting’ a woman is just that. BS.

You’re welcome.

[Lily]

In the West on the other hand greater opportunities can exist, but so does feminism and with it a lot of people not knowing how they fit in and a lot of people competing against each other. In general a breakdown of many families and relationship problems, a growth of Incels, etc.

My own thoughts are if I ever had Children I think I would like them to be socialised in the FSU. I wouldn't likely want to live out there a long time but during the main socializing time would likely be a good idea, not sure when that is but I think 12-16 ish is probably the main time, from general pubity time I guess.

No children on my own, and no relevant experience whatsoever. Having said that, I tend to agree with your thoughts about a better chance to probably let them grow in the FSU.

My thoughts are that it would make sense to let them grow, and being educated, in the FSU. Despite changes, the country should still have a firm memory about the classic Soviet education that was aimed at the relatively high standards. The free market has made an impact, but hopefully the culture of fundamental knowledge, European manners, etc. is still alive.

Another point that you have mentioned is a gender identification. Yes girls and boys were brought up with a solid basic idea of what is expected of them as a man or woman. Unless the young person has a substantially rebellious character and protests against traditions, he or she will likely grow up with a good grasp of what does it take to succeed as a woman or man. And probably it goes more for girls rather than boys.

The opportunities I life that you have mentioned are clearly a distinct feature of the Western society. That is why some of us prefer progressive West to traditional East. With a great FSU formation and education, wouldn't it be great for a young adult to use them later in the West, hopefully with a better benefit? I believe yes.

My thoughts are that what I have said above would rather be good for families with rather modest means. If a family can afford sending their offspring to some of the best educational establishments in the West, by all means they should do so and to take advantage of it. There is a very true saying, the Western highs are higher, but the lows are lower than those of the FSU.

[BillyB]

With a great FSU formation and education, wouldn't it be great for a young adult to use them later in the West, hopefully with a better benefit? I believe yes.

I'm not impressed with public education in America but there are private schools here that do a better job teaching kids and installing discipline. The more tools and education a child has, the greater the chances they will excel in life. In the below link is household income of various ethnic groups. FSU Americans have greater household incomes than Americans born in America. Most ethic groups do. Out of 76 groups, Americans born in America rank 61. Nowhere in the world can so many minority groups do better than the majority who was born there. This year America is doing a Census. It'll be interesting to see the new rankings when they come out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

[Lily]

I'm not impressed with public education in America but there are private schools here that do a better job teaching kids and installing discipline. The more tools and education a child has, the greater the chances they will excel in life. In the below link is household income of various ethnic groups. FSU Americans have greater household incomes than Americans born in America. Most ethic groups do. Out of 76 groups, Americans born in America rank 61. Nowhere in the world can so many minority groups do better than the majority who was born there. This year America is doing a Census. It'll be interesting to see the new rankings when they come out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

Hope you and wifey are doing well these days Billy!

That link proves the point that some best and brightest people in the world tend to emigrate for a better life.

It would be interesting to see a similar ranking for Canada. Unlike the US, this country has been capitalizing on professional immigrants for decades.

[ML]

I'm not impressed with public education in America but there are private schools here that do a better job teaching kids and installing discipline.

I am not generally in favor of private schools or trying to send your children to any school outside assigned area . . . except if it is to attend a 'Magnet School.'   Magnet Schools are those that specialize (generally in math and science) and require entrance exams, etc.

I think it is just a big excuse that children fail because of school, teacher, etc.
Now 'dangerous' schools are another matter; but you (as parent) shouldn't be living in those areas anyway.

I went to one room school houses for several of my years up through 8th grade.
One teacher, teaching 9 grades and several subjects.

I feel the same about spending extra to send kids to prestigious colleges for undergraduate study.
Send to local Community College for first two years and then closest University with in-state tuition (you can often go to adjacent state and pay in-state tuition) to get BS/BA.

Get excellent grades for BS/BA, do the required outside activities to show your 'breadth,' and then get into best graduate school possible for Masters.

This route will save $100,000 or more . . . and get person to same end point.

[Trenchcoat]

No children on my own, and no relevant experience whatsoever. Having said that, I tend to agree with your thoughts about a better chance to probably let them grow in the FSU.

My thoughts are that it would make sense to let them grow, and being educated, in the FSU. Despite changes, the country should still have a firm memory about the classic Soviet education that was aimed at the relatively high standards. The free market has made an impact, but hopefully the culture of fundamental knowledge, European manners, etc. is still alive.

Another point that you have mentioned is a gender identification. Yes girls and boys were brought up with a solid basic idea of what is expected of them as a man or woman. Unless the young person has a substantially rebellious character and protests against traditions, he or she will likely grow up with a good grasp of what does it take to succeed as a woman or man. And probably it goes more for girls rather than boys.

The opportunities I life that you have mentioned are clearly a distinct feature of the Western society. That is why some of us prefer progressive West to traditional East. With a great FSU formation and education, wouldn't it be great for a young adult to use them later in the West, hopefully with a better benefit? I believe yes.

My thoughts are that what I have said above would rather be good for families with rather modest means. If a family can afford sending their offspring to some of the best educational establishments in the West, by all means they should do so and to take advantage of it. There is a very true saying, the Western highs are higher, but the lows are lower than those of the FSU.

You've got some good points I think Lily. If I had children particularly with part FSU parentage I would kind of like them to spend some time growing up out there. Fundamentals in eduation sound good to me. In the west there can be a lot of waffling on by academics, teachers who get carried away on material that will highly likely be off little use to the majority of students, then there are subjects taught that again are likely to be off little use. Moreso handy is the men and women being socialized right and as you point out knowing what they are supposed to do and be in regards to their gender and how to act towards each other

[BillyB]

Hope you and wifey are doing well these days Billy!

That link proves the point that some best and brightest people in the world tend to emigrate for a better life.

It would be interesting to see a similar ranking for Canada. Unlike the US, this country has been capitalizing on professional immigrants for decades.

Everything is great. She loves me more today than the day we got married.  Although some claim Trump is anti immigrant, he has increased the amount of visas for professional immigrants so we can drain the brains of other nations. America will see a benefit from that. Canada has done a good job attracting quality immigrants, they got you before America did.

I think it is just a big excuse that children fail because of school, teacher, etc.
Now 'dangerous' schools are another matter; but you (as parent) shouldn't be living in those areas anyway.

It's natural for kids to try to get away with doing the minimum as possible. Parents are important but our institutions need to install discipline and insist they do more. Push push push. When the become adults and get pushed out of the nest, they are on their own. Hopefully they have strong wings when that happens. I love America but I do think FSU education has done certain things better and prepared the kids to succeed. They may not succeed in the FSU but when they come to America, they will do better than the average American.

[Steamer]

Although some claim Trump is anti immigrant, he has increased the amount of visas for professional immigrants so we can drain the brains of other nations. America will see a benefit from that. Canada has done a good job attracting quality immigrants, they got you before America did.

I believe that Trump is anti illegal immigrant.

[Trenchcoat]

I am not generally in favor of private schools or trying to send your children to any school outside assigned area . . . except if it is to attend a 'Magnet School.'   Magnet Schools are those that specialize (generally in math and science) and require entrance exams, etc.

I think it is just a big excuse that children fail because of school, teacher, etc.
Now 'dangerous' schools are another matter; but you (as parent) shouldn't be living in those areas anyway.

I went to one room school houses for several of my years up through 8th grade.
One teacher, teaching 9 grades and several subjects.

I feel the same about spending extra to send kids to prestigious colleges for undergraduate study.
Send to local Community College for first two years and then closest University with in-state tuition (you can often go to adjacent state and pay in-state tuition) to get BS/BA.

Get excellent grades for BS/BA, do the required outside activities to show your 'breadth,' and then get into best graduate school possible for Masters.

This route will save $100,000 or more . . . and get person to same end point.

I'm not really one in favour of private schools. In the UK private schools can run the risk of cutting kids if from the rest of society. At worst it can make them not very street wise and the other main negative is that it can give them a posh accent. Now maybe some US guys & girls might dig that but in the UK it can really confine those that sound posh to the posh crowd. So while that may sound not so bad on the face of it I always see it as them being out of sync with the majority of British society and not well taken too when they come into contact with the majority of us. Now not all private school kids have that but a lot of them do.