Romney mocked for comment about jet windows

[Phi for All]

Why would you need to open the windows, anyway?

Littering. Spitting. Making it easier for a cohort on the ground crew to toss you up a gun once you're aboard.

 

Just stuff.

[iNow]

The only exciting view I've ever seen from a plane window was a nice flyover of southern Greenland on a flight from Washington D.C. to Amsterdam.

I always enjoyed flying into LaGuardia as it felt like the place was about to land in the water on approach. Flying into Hong Kong is pretty cool, too, with the way the mountainsides are nestled throughout the various tributaries.

[swansont]

I've always wondered why they put windows on planes. Kids are the only ones I see that are fascinated for more than a few minutes, and I would think there'd be more concerns about freaking out the acrophobes and the panic flyers. I'm sure they've done studies but I wonder if it isn't just an antique holdover from the early days of commercial flight.

What about the claustrophobes?

[rigney]

I always enjoyed flying into LaGuardia as it felt like the place was about to land in the water on approach. Flying into Hong Kong is pretty cool, too, with the way the mountainsides are nestled throughout the various tributaries.

Want a real thrill? Try Saba or St. Marrtens in the Caribbean Windward Islands. Edited September 27, 2012 by rigney

[Phi for All]

What about the claustrophobes?

I thought about them, but I would think they either wouldn't fly at all if the reasonably large space aboard an airplane bothered them, or they wouldn't really be that assured by looking out at all that space they can't flee to.

[Greg H.]

What about the claustrophobes?

 

My wife is mildly claustrophobic - I can tell you from experience that having windows on the enclosed space doesn't help.

[swansont]

My wife is mildly claustrophobic - I can tell you from experience that having windows on the enclosed space doesn't help.

I can say that not having windows (I've been on a submarine) is a tad disconcerting, but have never had any issues on a plane.

[Ophiolite]

I had no idea I was claustraphobic till I had an MRI scan. It made me very nervous, but much less nervous than the prospect of Romney winning the election.

[swansont]

I had no idea I was claustraphobic till I had an MRI scan. It made me very nervous, but much less nervous than the prospect of Romney winning the election.

OMG, MRI scans cause claustrophobia?!?

[Phi for All]

I had no idea I was claustraphobic till I had an MRI scan.

Now there's a great place for a window. I don't know why they don't do that. It's a real problem. So it's very dangerous.

 

It made me very nervous, but much less nervous than the prospect of Romney winning the election.

Can you give us a bit more from an above average EU citizen on why Romney makes you nervous?

[chilled_fluorine]

My father used to work 120 hours a week on the family farm so that it wouldn't go under. He turned down an electrical engineering job offer from IBM because of his sense of duty to his family.

 

I doubt you've ever done true, backbreaking physical labor like the kind I was raised around. So do not preach to people about what true labor is. You do not know. And yes, I do know that for certain. I can tell by the arrogance of your posts and how dismissive you are of the plight of the less fortunate. You are cold and elitist.

If people were paid for the amount of work they actually did, my family would be worth billions of dollars thanks to my father. We are not. We are still technically classified at the "below poverty" level for a family of five.

 

Your posts reek of a complete misunderstanding of life and what low-income work actually is. Quite frankly, it's nauseating.

 

I don't have a physical job, admittedly. But where's the shame in that? Nowadays, very few Americans have physical jobs. The key words in your post are "that I was raised around". All of my family came from such a background, starting as poor farmers, and gradually increasing their children's quality of life, education, and job. Now, after this hard work has paid off, I have been given a life full of opportunities, and a college education. One day, I will pass on an even better life to my offspring, and they shall have a higher quality of life than I did. My family as well has had it's hardships. I respect you, for knowing the troubles of life. In essence, we are the same. Your chain of events just hasn't progressed as far as my own. I knew low income work, btw, before I went to college. I had to work quite a bit for what I have.

 

I will flat out guarantee it's the same way in China. I agree. Just to a lesser extent.

 

 

As I mentioned before, the Chinese cost of living is much less, so they need less money to live. Consumer prices in the US are over 42% higher than in China. Rent for comparable housing is over 52% higher in the US. Restaurant prices are over 85% higher in the US. Source: http://www.numbeo.co...2=United+States

But they can buy much less, either way, even including the differences in cost. The Chinese cost of living is low because they have no more money to spend to increase that cost. I can guarantee you that if they made more money their cost of living would increase.

And it's a fairy tale that Chinese people all work hard. Lazy is a human trait, and you'll find it all over the world. Of course there are some lazy people, but I have met only 1 or 2 lazy Chinese people, and a whole hoard of admirably hard working ones.

 

 

Romney wants to give corporations even bigger tax breaks. And they're already sitting on record amounts of cash, and have the highest paid C-level executives of all time. Aren't they doing well enough that maybe they can pay the same rates they were back when the US was super prosperous? Businesses need consumers to be able to afford their products, after all.

We do need to give businesses less breaks. But with these reductions in breaks should come reductions in regulation. I am all for giving businesses breaks, however, if we can make them spend it here as a condition, to benefit the American people, and have some way to enforce this. American tax dollars need to benefit American citizens.

 

They already have a bunch of doors that will do that, and would be more efficient at ventilation, and provide better security than so many windows being openable. I'm not saying I think mitt had a good idea, I'm just saying that with a few modifications it isn't a completely retarded idea.

 

 

I was shooting for ironic. CaptainPanic is from Niederlande.

Oohhh... Sorry, I thought you were mocking me. It's been done before. Not by you, of course.

It WAS meaningful to me. That IS the real problem, we aren't doing enough to learn where we're wrong, where we're being inefficient, where we could do better. And I like that you can recognize when public funds should go to the public welfare. I was born an Eisenhower Republican and I hate how the party has let itself be so degraded by extremist conservatives. I was born into an independent family, and I became a republican because I found their views were most similar to my own. I am not an extremist conservative. I am not a political lemming. I make my choices based on rational thought. Not bias, or hate.

 

 

 

 

How do you ensure that, and at what cost? Why would you need to open the windows, anyway?

 

I'll leave that to the engineers. I don't think mitt's was a good idea, I'm just trying to point out that, with modification, it isn't completely retarded. To let in oxygen of course. Lol

[iNow]

I can't believe it's almost 2013 and people still make such stereotypical generalizations like you're doing with your comments about Chinese people. FFS, man.

 

It would be funny if it weren't so sad and common.

[A Tripolation]

I don't have a physical job, admittedly. But where's the shame in that?

 

In my opinion, you can't work hard unless your job is one of intense physical labor. Sure, you might have an important job. Do a lot of stuff. But work hard? Nah. Falling into bed after 19 hours of straight tobacco labor is "a hard day's work." Not falling into bed after a 10-hour shift in an air-conditioned office. I would never consider anything you could possibly do as "hard work."

 

 

All of my family came from such a background, starting as poor farmers, and gradually increasing their children's quality of life, education, and job. Now, after this hard work has paid off, I have been given a life full of opportunities, and a college education.

 

Ooooooooooooo. I am so GLAD you said this. So we've already cleared the fact that my father works hard, right? So, according to you, my quality of life would've improved and I would've gotten opportunities because of his hard work, right? Did that happen? Nope.

 

My father instilled a work ethic in me that allowed me to have a solid GPA in high school. I scored incredibly high on the administered standardized tests in every section, particularly the mathematics and sciences. According to you, I should have had opportunity-palooza! But I didn't. The scholarships I was offered only covered tuition. My family couldn't afford to pay the rest. They couldn't shell out money for books, a laptop, meal plan, etc, because they were below the poverty level. I wasn't going to school.

 

Enter the government: I was offered Pell Grants, state financial aid, and federal aid accorded to me due to my background from living in a very impoverished region *and* being a minority. And other wonderful measures thanks to "dirty socialism" that the conservatives are now so Hell-bent on repealing. I could finally attend college.

 

One day, I will pass on an even better life to my offspring, and they shall have a higher quality of life than I did.

 

My father certainly tried. But it wasn't enough. Luckily for me, the government stepped in and ensured that I would be able to attend uni and receive a physics degree. And, thanks to their further intervention, grad school awaits in the future.

 

Sometimes, it doesn't matter how hard a person works. Sometimes, all the cards are stacked against them. Sometimes, people just need to be helped up from the dirt. This is the simple logic no conservative seems to understand.

Edited September 28, 2012 by A Tripolation

[mississippichem]

OMG, MRI scans cause claustrophobia?!?

 

Sounds like a grant proposal to me . Hey, the autism/vaccine people got funding with worse logic.

[Phi for All]

But they can buy much less, either way, even including the differences in cost. The Chinese cost of living is low because they have no more money to spend to increase that cost. I can guarantee you that if they made more money their cost of living would increase.

Um, you were arguing that American workers expect to be paid much more than the man in hong kong. Don't you think this has a lot to do with the differences between our costs of living? How would our businesses survive selling products at US prices if our people make Chinese wages? You're pulling from only one side of the equation and then claiming we're overpaid.

 

Of course there are some lazy people, but I have met only 1 or 2 lazy Chinese people, and a whole hoard of admirably hard working ones.

I'm guessing these are Chinese people who've moved to the US, correct? People who are earning US wages, have the wherewithal to move halfway around the world and start a new life here? Perhaps you should meet people who actually live in China before you make such comparisons.

 

We do need to give businesses less breaks. But with these reductions in breaks should come reductions in regulation.

We relaxed banking regulations and look what happened. Regulation isn't always a bad thing. Business complains because that's what the model calls for, and they can make even more money for shareholders if they get to cut corners with our health and safety, especially when it's made legal through deregulation. This isn't as cut and dried as most Republicans think. It can be extremely dangerous in the long term to relax good regulations.

 

My father certainly tried. But it wasn't enough. Luckily for me, the government stepped in and ensured that I would be able to attend uni and receive a physics degree. And, thanks to their further intervention, grad school awaits in the future.

 

Sometimes, it doesn't matter how hard a person works. Sometimes, all the cards are stacked against them. Sometimes, people just need to be helped up from the dirt. This is the simple logic no conservative seems to understand.

This is why I'm proud to pay taxes that help Americans better themselves, rather than helping already successful businesses pay their executives and stockholders more. Free market capitalism already gets to use my roads, schools, airports, libraries and other public projects, plus I support them with my consumerism. If they can't succeed with that much, they don't deserve to succeed.

[chilled_fluorine]

In my opinion, you can't work hard unless your job is one of intense physical labor. Sure, you might have an important job. Do a lot of stuff. But work hard? Nah. Falling into bed after 19 hours of straight tobacco labor is "a hard day's work." Not falling into bed after a 10-hour shift in an air-conditioned office. I would never consider anything you could possibly do as "hard work."

 

Do you, by your own definition, work hard? Does more than 5% of America? If the answer to either of these questions is no, I suggest you come up with a better argument.

 

Ooooooooooooo. I am so GLAD you said this. So we've already cleared the fact that my father works hard, right? So, according to you, my quality of life would've improved and I would've gotten opportunities because of his hard work, right? Did that happen? Nope. Your quality of life would have improved if he had managed to acquire enough money to make it. Hard work does not always lead to succes. Cunning and hard work lead to success. Seeing how you are above average, I would guess your father had cunning, but lacked luck/opportunities. Seems like the odds weren't in your favor.

 

My father instilled a work ethic in me that allowed me to have a solid GPA in high school. I scored incredibly high on the administered standardized tests in every section, particularly the mathematics and sciences. According to you, I should have had opportunity-palooza! But I didn't. The scholarships I was offered only covered tuition. My family couldn't afford to pay the rest. They couldn't shell out money for books, a laptop, meal plan, etc, because they were below the poverty level. I wasn't going to school.

 

Enter the government: I was offered Pell Grants, state financial aid, and federal aid accorded to me due to my background from living in a very impoverished region *and* being a minority. And other wonderful measures thanks to "dirty socialism" that the conservatives are now so Hell-bent on repealing. I could finally attend college. Who said I disapprove of financial aid for promising students? This is an investment in America's future, and one with a very good return.

 

 

 

My father certainly tried. But it wasn't enough. Luckily for me, the government stepped in and ensured that I would be able to attend uni and receive a physics degree. And, thanks to their further intervention, grad school awaits in the future.

 

Sometimes, it doesn't matter how hard a person works. Sometimes, all the cards are stacked against them. Sometimes, people just need to be helped up from the dirt. This is the simple logic no conservative seems to understand. Are you seriously trying to say I don't help people? I volunteer time, give food to the poor, help build at habitat for humanity, help troubled kids, help the boyscouts. Help kids with schoolwork. Help old people cross the street. Hold doors for everyone. I go completely out of my way to help people, but because I am a republican, people assume I am a prejudiced, hateful, bigot, who couldn't miss an opportunity to look down on someone. I am almost the most charitable person I know.

 

Um, you were arguing that American workers expect to be paid much more than the man in hong kong. Don't you think this has a lot to do with the differences between our costs of living? How would our businesses survive selling products at US prices if our people make Chinese wages? You're pulling from only one side of the equation and then claiming we're overpaid.

Americans aren't overpaid, the Chinese are underpaid. In this day, who could think we're overpaid? Except for the occasional billionaire, of course. So many people need our help.

 

I'm guessing these are Chinese people who've moved to the US, correct? People who are earning US wages, have the wherewithal to move halfway around the world and start a new life here? Perhaps you should meet people who actually live in China before you make such comparisons.

People who moved to the US, and in Hong Kong. Admittedly, I've never been to mainland China (except to refuel), but the people in HK seemed to be very hard workers. Is it different in mainland?

We relaxed banking regulations and look what happened. Regulation isn't always a bad thing. Business complains because that's what the model calls for, and they can make even more money for shareholders if they get to cut corners with our health and safety, especially when it's made legal through deregulation. This isn't as cut and dried as most Republicans think. It can be extremely dangerous in the long term to relax good regulations. Regulation is always needed, of course, but in moderation and in the right places.

 

This is why I'm proud to pay taxes that help Americans better themselves, rather than helping already successful businesses pay their executives and stockholders more. Free market capitalism already gets to use my roads, schools, airports, libraries and other public projects, plus I support them with my consumerism. If they can't succeed with that much, they don't deserve to succeed.

[Ben Banana]

I'm just trying to point out that, with modification, it isn't completely retarded. To let in oxygen of course.

 

I'm not exactly sure, but I think they do let in oxygen anyway, but they facilitate it first. Right?

 

EDIT:

Also, they have masks... you know? Those thingies that drop down? Yeah... it's also good that they are sealed and concentrated (no wasteful permeation/leakage or any smoke inhalation at all) because providing additional uncontrolled oxygen is just a great way to burn the people up faster!

Edited September 28, 2012 by Ben Bowen

[CaptainPanic]

Yeah, CaptainPanic, why can't we just drop the whole political discussion thing, pretend it makes no difference and respect each other as Americans? Why? Why?!

I am glad you corrected yourself a little later. For those who don't know, I am not American. Therefore, I don't care about your national (internal) issues, or how much tax you pay. I find it fascinating, but it's none of my business. But I do live on this planet too, and what you guys vote affects me. The USA is the largest military power, the largest consumer of energy, and the largest economy.

 

So, why (not) drop it?

 

Because Romney is a lot more likely to suck its NATO allies from Europe into another pointless war, probably with Iran, than Obama.

Because Romney is a lot less likely to solve the situation in Israel/Palestine, because he simply chooses sides with the Israelis, rather than negotiate for stability.

Because Romney is a lot less likely to impose more strict environmental regulations on industry than Obama.

Because Romney is against the Kyoto protocol, and it is my belief that he is against any international cooperation regarding the climate.

Because Romney is a lot less likely to impose more strict financial regulations on banks and investment companies than Obama, although I doubt Obama will.

 

In short, because I think Romney is a disaster when it comes to all international issues: war/peace, the environment and the economy. And that affects me too.

 

Does that answer the question?

 

Let's get back on topic: whether you should leave all the decisions I described above to a guy who thinks jet airplanes should have windows that open.

[Ophiolite]

Can you give us a bit more from an above average EU citizen on why Romney makes you nervous?

I can't really speak for the rest of the EU, at least, not without filling out a bunch of forms, but I'll share my own view.

 

Socialism, which is a rude word in much of the US - certainly the parts I frequent - is generally a valued word in the EU. We think it is good to for those of who have to help support those who don't have quite as much. We value the fact that in one form or other affordable and universal health care is available. A couple of years ago when I experienced on-going chest pains I was able to call a 24 hour service, explain my symptoms and an ambulance with two paramedics was at my door within eight minutes. At no time did I have to worry if my insurance was going to adequately cover what ever procedures might be needed. That is a civilised environment to live in. I know several people in the US who are beyond retirement age who are working purely to maintain their company health insurance. That can't be right.

 

Obama seems to be trying to approach a comparable situation with the EU, in this and other matters. I say approach, but from a European standpoint Obama himself is arguably right wing. It's just that this places Romney far off-stage.

 

Sorry, that was rambling a little. The bottom line is that I fear for the quality of life for many Americans if Romney is elected.

 

Secondly, Obama seems to have the savvy to understand how badly American actions can screw up the rest of the world. Romney seems to lack that ability. So I fear for the global consequences if he is elected.

[rigney]

If five average Americans were to read this joke, 5/4 of them would have no clue what I'm trying to say. Am I bitter? Mmm.. Sometimes. Do I cling to guns? Yup. Do I cling to religion? Mmm.. Not so much.. I'm a bankruptcy attorney, and yes, I am better off now than I was 4 years ago!

I believe your little pun says it all. Edited September 28, 2012 by rigney

[Phi for All]

@chilled_flourine

You've gone back to embedding your red replies in the quotes of others after you seemed to have figured out the proper tagging sequence. Do you realize that when we hit the Reply button on posts like that, NOTHING shows up? You're causing a lot of extra work for anyone who wants to reply methodically to the points you're making.

 

Regarding underpaid Chinese, I think you'll find they're paid just fine within the context of their own cost of living. They have a middle class that's as big as the entire US population.

 

With regard to regulations, you're simultaneously arguing for relaxed regulation, smart regulation, and regulations that would allow for open-capable windows aboard commercial airliners. For a small government Republican, that's an awful lot of new laws you're going to have to pass and enforce on an already shaky industry just to keep Mitt from looking like he makes uninformed, emotion-based executive decisions.

 

This is already a sore point with non-Republicans, this conflict of interest with a platform that wants small government, constitutional integrity and protection of personal rights, but also wants abortion denial, legislating morality through a combination of church and state, controlling women and increased federal spending for mega-corporate special interests.

 

I'm not exactly sure, but I think they do let in oxygen anyway, but they facilitate it first. Right?

 

EDIT:

Also, they have masks... you know? Those thingies that drop down? Yeah... it's also good that they are sealed and concentrated (no wasteful permeation/leakage or any smoke inhalation at all) because providing additional uncontrolled oxygen is just a great way to burn the people up faster!

Exactly. I'm pretty sure the airline industry has run some tests and conducted a few studies into the optimum systems, and don't really need any armchair politicians second-guessing their capabilities.

 

Secondly, Obama seems to have the savvy to understand how badly American actions can screw up the rest of the world. Romney seems to lack that ability. So I fear for the global consequences if he is elected.

I have to admit that one of my biggest criticisms of Obama has been his insistence on appealing to all sides in his decisions, even when it became obvious that the Republicans simply wanted to stonewall anything that came from his desk, but I do see now that he was thinking more globally than I was. I really wanted him to focus on OUR problems, while the rest of the world was also feeling the repercussions of the tragedy that was Bush.

 

I still feel that a stronger US would be more able to help the rest of the world get back on its feet, and I also feel that Romney will be just more Bush, focused on strengthening the already strong top while the middle and bottom fall apart underneath. I keep picturing the classic movie denouement where the villains have pushed the self-destruct button, and as the former fortress shakes itself apart, the bad guys take off from the roof in their luxury helicopter with their hoarded wealth aboard and head off to their private island for some R&R.

 

I believe your little pun says it all.

I do hope you can realize the cyclical nature of things like bankruptcy, rigney. It takes a while for things to fall apart on a national scale the same as on a personal scale. People rarely lose their jobs and file immediately for bankruptcy. What were seeing here is the result of the Bush years (even though you may not want to hear it). Things ARE picking up now, what Obama has been able to do HAS been effective. Even with so much of Congress blocking his way just to make him look bad. The graphs are heading upwards, now is not the time to switch tactics by opening windows on the plane.

 

Edit to add: It's easy to see why the Republicans so desperately want to oust Obama. Eight years of Bush ended in disaster, and if eight years of a Democrat ends in a prosperous comeback (even if it is partly due to cyclical trends), I think the ultra-conservative trend in the Republican party (or possibly the party as a whole) is in real danger of being labeled toxic to worldwide prosperity.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Phi for All
additinal comment

[rigney]

I do hope you can realize the cyclical nature of things like bankruptcy, rigney. It takes a while for things to fall apart on a national scale the same as on a personal scale. People rarely lose their jobs and file immediately for bankruptcy. What were seeing here is the result of the Bush years (even though you may not want to hear it). Things ARE picking up now, what Obama has been able to do HAS been effective. Even with so much of Congress blocking his way just to make him look bad. The graphs are heading upwards, now is not the time to switch tactics by opening windows on the plane.

Not to contest your wisdom Phi for All, since you may be absolutely right; but I have my reasoning for believing just as you do. In all honesty I read and listen almost exclusivelly to things from the right simply because I can't stand the hate being spewed by the left. As I'v stated in several of my posts, I don't hate Obama, I just don't believe in his method of trying to change our country will work. Had that approach been taken 200 years ago i might have agreed, but not today. The statements made by Romney about the airplane windows did not earn him an A+ for his effort. But had your wife or mine been on that plane we may have said something equally as stupid, at that particular moment. Here is something you might want to look at that also has nothing to do with windows but may shed some light on my belief in democracy.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_years_did_democrats_control_both_house_and_senate

Edited September 28, 2012 by rigney

[Phi for All]

Not to contest your wisdom Phi for All, since you may be absolutely right; but I have my reasoning for believing just as you do. In all honesty I read and listen almost exclusivelly to things from the right simply because I can't stand the hate being spewed from the left.

I think there's a lot of frustration coming from the left (or what we call the left here in the US, which is more centrist/right of center from the rest of the world's perspective). For my part, it's very difficult to think that half the country identifies with the party that's talking about women closing their fallopian tubes to prevent rape pregnancies, or that planes should have windows that open, or that gay people are denying the civil rights of the religious, or that opening public lands to logging and mining is good conservation, or that there are secret race-based governments being formed in the US, or that contraception is evil, or that wanting every child to be able to go to college is snobbery, or that the internet must remain free from censorship unless they don't like what's being said, or that any scientific endeavors be approved by councils where religious leaders hold sway, or that abstinence education is effective despite not a single piece of evidence that supports it. I can easily see why objections to those who feel represented by such a stance may seem like "hate". Sorry to spew.

 

As I'v stated in several of my posts, I don't hate Obama, I just don't believe his method of trying to change our country will work.

I know, and we keep asking you why you think it won't work and you can't say specifically.

 

I'm going through this with my daughter right now. Now that she wants to wear nicer clothes, we want to start putting them on hangers in her closet instead of folding them in drawers. It would save time for everyone (we share laundry duties in my house), be easier to see what's there, and keep her clothes from wrinkling. But she says she prefers them folded, but has no reason other than that, and it frustrates me. She can't tell me why she prefers her clothes folded, it's just her preference, no matter how illogical it is.

 

Had that approach been taken 200 years ago i might agree, but not today.

OK, I'll bite. Are you saying we're too far down the road to the dark side, or what? What approach are you talking about, exactly? What is it specifically that would've worked 200 years ago but won't now?

 

Here is something you might want to look at that also has nothing to do with windows but may shed some light on my belief in democracy.

http://wiki.answers....ouse_and_senate

I don't get your point. Are you saying that the times we had a Democrat-controlled Congress were bad times, and when it was Republican-controlled things were great? How does this shed light on your belief in democracy? Personally, I think it's horrible that a nation of this size only has two representative parties that matter.

[chilled_fluorine]

I'm not exactly sure, but I think they do let in oxygen anyway, but they facilitate it first. Right?

 

EDIT:

Also, they have masks... you know? Those thingies that drop down? Yeah... it's also good that they are sealed and concentrated (no wasteful permeation/leakage or any smoke inhalation at all) because providing additional uncontrolled oxygen is just a great way to burn the people up faster!

 

And what if the fire melts the mask? The masks are in case the cabin depressurizes. Not to protect from fires. If there was a fire, you would need to get out. If there was a fire while you were flying, you would be screwed if you couldn't put it out. Unless you landed on time, but that isn't too likely. Or you jumped out with a parachute, but I don't think that would be an option for a passenger plane.

[rigney]

I know, and we keep asking you why you think it won't work and you can't say specifically.

 

I'm going through this with my daughter right now. Now that she wants to wear nicer clothes, we want to start putting them on hangers in her closet instead of folding them in drawers. It would save time for everyone (we share laundry duties in my house), be easier to see what's there, and keep her clothes from wrinkling. But she says she prefers them folded, but has no reason other than that, and it frustrates me. She can't tell me why she prefers her clothes folded, it's just her preference, no matter how illogical it is.

At some point in her young life I'm sure she will realize that putting her things on hangers will be more convenient, expedient and also retain their shape better. At eighty now and with an un-recanting and conservative mind, I can honestly rationalize why my clothing still remains wrinkled after all of these years. Edited September 28, 2012 by rigney