Strollerderby : rich

Best of FameCrawler: Week of March 27th

Whit Honea — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:00:00 GMT

Jon & Kate Plus 8 Finale - To Divorce or Not?

Is Michael Jackson Going to Adopt While in England?

Kidnap Suspect Amalia Tabata Pereira is Wife of MLB Player Jose Tabata (PHOTOS)

Natasha Richardson's Mom Wore White To Her Funeral - Why?

Anna Nicole Smith Death Case to be Reopened?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan Has a Secret Son!

TLC's Jon & Kate Plus 8 - Is It Over!?

Octomom Nadya Suleman Fires Nurses, Says They Were Spying

The Hottest Moms - Photos

Jenny McCarthy Slaves Over Her Looks

They Say: Poor Kids, Rich Kids Think Differently

JeanneSager — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:54:00 GMT

Imagine that. One set's worrying about where the next meal's coming from; the other's worrying about their next iPod. And experts had to do actual studies to figure out rich kids and poor kids think differently?

It was a small study - just twenty-six kids - out of UC Berkley, but the significance is its focus. Scientists did not look at how well kids were faring on tests, which could have as much to do with a lack of quality education as it does with actual brain function or smarts. Instead they took a group of kids from low-income backgrounds and another of kids from high-income families and measured activity in the brain's prefrontal cortex, the part linked to problem solving.

When they flashed images on the screen, a measurement of the activity in that area was measured on all of the nine- and ten-year-old kids. The kids from lower-income households showed markedly less activity than their rich counterparts. As I said, it's a small study, which means the data is relatively worthless. But it proves there's merit to look at the environmental affects on intelligence, not just on health.

Image/Source: BBC News

Blogging Moms Find a Kidney For Teen on Dialysis

Teacher Sells Ad Space on Math Tests to Cover Budget Shortfall

They Say: Boys Read if Dad Does

K-Fed Is Dad of the Year. Seriously.

Kelly Mills — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:04:00 GMT

I swear this one must really be a sign of the apocalypse: Kevin Federline is getting an award for "father of the year". No, I'm not making this up, and this time it isn't Details just whoring for publicity. Um, you might wanna dig yourself a bomb shelter and find some religion, because I have seen the sign, and it is called celebration of the K-Fed. But I guess he's being lauded for stepping up with his children when Britney went rogue on us and wasn't fit to parent.

Oh, but wait a minute: It's a Las Vegas club, Prive, that is giving out the award, and K-Fed is hosting a party there on Father's Day. It is just cheap publicity whoring. Phew! You can put away the sackcloth. But perhaps I could take this li'l opportunity to point out that once again, a dad gets props for doing what many other women--even ones who were married to celebrities--have already done, i.e. becoming sole parent when the other parent wasn't doing so hot. So he did his job. Um, what was he going to do--abandon the kids? K-Fed has cash to burn and nannies galore and I don't feel all that proud of his sad ass. I bet there's plenty of more deserving single dads and moms out there. I mean, big whoop.

Top five worst diva dads

Britney Spears loses custody of kids

Children of Men (for real): Japan's Child Pop. Drops for 27th Straight Year

Cole Gamble — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:00:00 GMT

While we in America like to celebrate the 5th of May by depositing large quantities of tequila into our stomach (just for safe keeping before we deposit said tequila in a toilet later that night), in Japan they celebrate Children's Day. Thing is, at the rate they are going, pretty soon they won't have anything to celebrate.

The population of children in Japan has declined for the 27th straight year in a row. The reasons are thought to be a product of modernization. I.E: as a country becomes richer, birth rates tend to decline. Yes, it's a stereotype but it is true, the poorer and less educated a population, the more kids get popped out.

The effects of such a decline in Japanese youths could potentially be disastrous. Just look at the fears we have with our own withering Baby Boomer generation. Time will come when the infirm and incapable will outnumber the vital and capable, and when it does, look out. It's simple math: when there are more people who are taking out of the system than there are people putting in, well everything kind of goes to hell.

The impact of this youth drain could prove dire for Japan, but at least they'll get watch us fall apart first. Maybe they can learn something from us as our capital building is transformed into a Denny's and the a street gangs of elderly men take to mugging innocent people for their precious Viagra money.

Photo: www.ctv.ca

Is Child No. 3 a Luxury Good?

Madeline Holler — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 19:31:00 GMT

If there's one person who has made the child/commerce connection, it's Pamela Paul. She's the author of Parenting, Inc. and Babble contributor with a dispatch this week that, and perhaps I'm speaking only for myself here, reassured those of us parents who never managed to follow through on the baby sign language classes, thereby condemning our children to low IQs and drool.

Well, she's digging in deeper to the idea of kids and cost in a recent Washington Post essay, where she's talking about the status of the third child, particularly for those raising their families in expensive cities. Apparently, Baby No. 3 is something of a luxury good. Or, as some would believe, a completely insane, misguided, poorly thought out idea that she and her husband -- New York City dwellers and parents of two -- will nonetheless be adding to their lives.

Kids these days are expensive (private schools! nannies! 70 new toys a year!) and they take up precious real-estate. So no wonder, she argues, there's the perception that a third (or fourth or sixth) child is an achievement bestowed only on the fabulously wealthy. It's also something people of means are largely doing, rather than the recession-sensitive middle-class. The showoffs!

From washingtonpost.com

It's true that, following in the designer maternity clothes of such fecund celebrities as Posh Spice (three kids) and Angelina Jolie (speculatively six), most of the people going for a third baby are well-heeled moms and their high-salaried husbands. A February analysis of Current Population Survey data by the Council on Contemporary Families found that in the past 10 years, the top-earning 1.3 percent of the population has seen an uptick in families with three or more children. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, 12 percent of upper-income women had three children or more in 2002, compared with only 3 percent in 1995.

She also cites that breathtaking stat that each child costs on average $204,060 to house, clothe, educate and entertain until the age of 18. (Jeez, my kids are the ones holding THAT number down ...)

So what do you think? Did you trade in financial security and your Birken bag for a third child? Are large families just for crazy ladies like Angelina and that Mormon mom in the RV?

Image: Celebrityhack.com