1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Omaha area Housing and Market statistics

Moderators: Brad, nebugeater, Coyote, Omaha Cowboy

icejammer
County Board
Posts: 3594
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Council Bluffs

1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby icejammer » Fri Nov 14, 2014 11:18 am

Study: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

The eight counties that make up the Council Bluffs-Omaha metro area might have 1.2 million residents by 2050 – an increase of 400,000, according to a future needs study.

This increase will have a measurable impact across the entire area, affecting not only the urban centers but also the suburban and rural communities, according to Heartland 2050, a long-term visionary study presented in its final version Thursday. . .

The findings in the study came from Heartland 2050 committees, research teams and the general public, ensuring opportunities at every level for everyone to contribute to this project. The finished product centers around six goals that span all aspects of life. . .

There are numerous ways to implement these goals, but the key is cooperation and a spirit of unity among the communities and the two states, Fregonese and Youell said.

“It’s people working together for the good of the region,” Fregonese said.

Added Youell: “If a business lands in Council Bluffs, Nebraska needs to recognize that it’s a win for everyone.”

Fortunately, the study found this area has a strong track record of successful regional cooperation.

“They really do have a sense of place, of ownership of this region,” Fregonese said.
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan

User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 8581
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Midtown

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby iamjacobm » Fri Nov 14, 2014 11:37 am

Aren't we passed 900K by now? That would get us closer to 1.3 million.

icejammer
County Board
Posts: 3594
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Council Bluffs

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby icejammer » Fri Nov 14, 2014 11:43 am

Heartland 2050 Vision: Omaha, Council Bluffs should draw young, skilled workers

In the future, the Omaha-Council Bluffs area should become a magnet nationally for a young, highly skilled workforce.

The eight-county region should provide high-quality education to fuel the workforce in the future. The area should be known for healthy living, safe neighborhoods, arts, culture and top-notch health care.

Those are among the regional goals in the final draft of the Heartland 2050 Vision, which was presented to the public Thursday after years in the works. . .
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan

GRANDPASMUCKER
Human Relations
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:10 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby GRANDPASMUCKER » Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:36 pm

The way South American, Central American and Mexican illegals are pouring into this country I think the real population figures are going to be much higher then 1.3 million in 2050. They might be just about running the place by then. :yes:

debradomayer
Home Owners Association
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:28 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby debradomayer » Fri Nov 14, 2014 5:27 pm

Sorry, but most of us will be dead by then....

nativeomahan
Planning Board
Posts: 3414
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby nativeomahan » Thu Nov 27, 2014 1:56 pm

debradomayer wrote:Sorry, but most of us will be dead by then....


Nice to read something accurate on this thread.

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby daveoma » Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:58 pm

GRANDPASMUCKER wrote:The way South American, Central American and Mexican illegals are pouring into this country I think the real population figures are going to be much higher then 1.3 million in 2050. They might be just about running the place by then.  :yes:


I love Omaha but the politics of the state of Nebraska are not progressive enough of attract a significant number of young people or tech companies--which will provide many of the jobs of the future. The state is too religious, too anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-woman, and anti-gay. It kills me to say it but that's part of the reason I moved away. :-( I hope that someday I'm proven wrong.

User avatar
HR Paperstacks
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1638
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:39 pm
Location: Midtown Crossing

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby HR Paperstacks » Tue Jan 13, 2015 9:31 am

daveoma wrote:I love Omaha but the politics of the state of Nebraska are not progressive enough of attract a significant number of young people or tech companies--which will provide many of the jobs of the future. The state is too religious, too anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-woman, and anti-gay.  It kills me to say it but that's part of the reason I moved away. :-( I hope that someday I'm proven wrong.

Well Iowa is certainly more liberal, so maybe Council Bluffs can get a lot of this stuff.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1789
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby GetUrban » Tue Jan 13, 2015 1:02 pm

1.2 M sounds like a big number, but the rate of growth is much slower here than say, the sunbelt. So we'll actually be even less densely populated by comparison to other places, than we are now.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
Stargazer
County Board
Posts: 3904
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 11:06 am
Location: west Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Stargazer » Thu Jan 29, 2015 10:43 pm

much slower here than say, the sunbelt


Phoenix, which the rest of my family abandoned Omaha for... added more than 'an Omaha' in each of the last 2 decades alone.

riceweb
Home Owners Association
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:54 am
Location: Omaha, NE

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby riceweb » Fri Jan 30, 2015 6:34 am

GetUrban wrote:1.2 M sounds like a big number, but the rate of growth is much slower here than say, the sunbelt. So we'll actually be even less densely populated by comparison to other places, than we are now.


Our metro will likely have fallen further behind other metro areas, but population density may still favor Omaha--it all depends on how these other metros grow (either in-fill or sprawl). I think if Omaha can continue to grow via in-fill projects, we may be able to put ourselves in a situation where we can draw the same types of tenants as larger cities thanks to vibrant urban districts.

Erik
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1201
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:55 am

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Erik » Fri Jan 30, 2015 11:03 am

1.2 million is one of many estimates thrown out there.

If we are at 1.2 million people at 2050 then our city would have taken a considerable step backwards from the last 25 years.

2010 865,000 99,000 from 2000 average 10k a year
2013 895,000 30,000 from 2010 average 10k a year ( history has shown the us census loves to underestimate omaha and nebraska)
2050 1,200,000 335,000 in 40 years average averaging 83.5k a decade or 8.35 a year. The rate of growth will apparently be 65-70% of what it is today.

So my question is this. What are they predicting for our ifuture? Is the belief that we can no longer grow like we have been in the last quarter century? Or is this one guesstimate based off a very conservative projection?

User avatar
skinzfan23
County Board
Posts: 4860
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 11:26 am
Location: Omaha/Bellevue

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby skinzfan23 » Fri Jan 30, 2015 11:50 am

I agree 1,200,000 seems pretty conservative given the growth rate for the past 60 years is around 12-15% each decade. If we were only to be 1.2 million, that would be around 9%.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1789
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby GetUrban » Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:57 pm

riceweb wrote:
GetUrban wrote:1.2 M sounds like a big number, but the rate of growth is much slower here than say, the sunbelt. So we'll actually be even less densely populated by comparison to other places, than we are now.


Our metro will likely have fallen further behind other metro areas, but population density may still favor Omaha--it all depends on how these other metros grow (either in-fill or sprawl). I think if Omaha can continue to grow via in-fill projects, we may be able to put ourselves in a situation where we can draw the same types of tenants as larger cities thanks to vibrant urban districts.


Yeah, you may be right about the density of Omaha recently beginning to increase again with infill. I don't know that there is enough infill for the overall density to be increasing yet though. New neighborhoods are still being built further and further west/northwest & southwest. This fringe growth is happening nowhere near as fast as other places like Dallas or Phoenix, though. It's encouraging Omaha has adopted a Master Plan that encourages infill and higher-density development.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
iamjacobm
City Council
Posts: 8581
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Midtown

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby iamjacobm » Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:00 pm

Omaha as a whole is going to continue to become less dense over the foreseeable future. East of 72nd might become a little more dense, but not near enough to offset any of the massive suburban growth.

Erik
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1201
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:55 am

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Erik » Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:27 pm

There is no doubt that Omaha will continue to become less dense. The demand for suburban living will always be greater.

I am, hhowever, very encouraged by how we rank as far as downtown/midtown population wise. The flurry of high density building has a long ways to go before even the possibility of a slowdown

Kinda the best of both worlds here. Despite the continued vast surburban growth.

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1833
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby bigredmed » Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:11 am

1. OPS still sucks and the Catholics are increasingly unwilling to serve as a safety net for kids who live in OPS and want a good education. Therefore, either fix OPS or anticipate continuing the relo agents'practice of showing clients the east edge of Millard and telling them to look from here west.

2. Omaha east of 90th has the appearance of a shotgun pattern if you mixed good and bad neighborhoods and blasted them on a map. Everyone raves about Dundee, but only west of 49th. Live east of there? Sucks to be you. The Beemer set of rich people Dundee don't care. We think about how cool Benson is, but walk the streets east from Benson or Monroe at night. Tell me how cool it is.

Till we deal with the needs of regular Joes, we will not have the kind of regenerative areas that are needed to keep a city going. Rich people are great, but there are a lot more Indians than Chiefs. We need to help the worker bees live in safe, stable neighborhoods with good schools.

Fix these, and when gas goes back to $3.50/gal., eastern Omaha will grow.

Erik
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1201
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:55 am

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Erik » Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:20 am

But those areas are growing. Downtown, m8dtown etc have seen a lot of new development. I highly advise you to check the urban forum here. You will see that strong demand does exist for high density which leads to those developments. Or even better, you will see that our recent growth in the core areas have lead to Omahas high ranking of population within and close to downtown. The US census bureau validates this demand again with the rate of growth based on census tracks.

That said, i am not blind and can see that surburban demand still overshadows the urban demand. But for you to say that urban demand barely exists is a very blind statement.

Erik
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1201
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:55 am

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Erik » Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:22 am

Just now i also stumbled on Mapa's 2050 heartland population projection of most, not all, of the metros counties. They project a 1.5 million population within their region of 6 counties.

bigredmed
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1833
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby bigredmed » Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:49 pm

Erik wrote:But those areas are growing.  Downtown,  m8dtown etc have seen a lot of new development. I highly advise you to check the urban forum here. You will see that strong demand does exist for high density which leads to those developments. Or even better, you will see that our recent growth in the core areas have lead to Omahas high ranking of population within and close to downtown.  The US census bureau validates this demand again with the rate of growth based on census tracks.

That said, i am not blind and can see that surburban demand still overshadows the urban demand.  But for you to say that urban demand barely exists is a very blind statement.


Not sure who you are replying to. My point was that the areas of mid town, etc are aimed at wealthy people. We need to aim at serving the needs of middle class families that need good schools and want front yards their kids can play in.

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby daveoma » Mon Feb 02, 2015 1:40 am

I think many of us who love urban living might disagree with big red med but I think his perspective and judgements are fairly common--especially in west Omaha where I grew up. We have an opportunity to learn from his perspective. Perhaps the needs of potential new residents can be met and misinformed perceptions can be changed. I personally don't agree with your views sir but kudos for expressing yourself. It might surprise you that while living at 16th & Jackson between 2006 and 2013 I used to park at the lot that used to be at 15th & Jackson...too many times I accidentally left my windows down or cracked open. Not once was anything stolen from my car, even when I forgot my wallet a couple times. My own forgetfulness notwithstanding, I think that shows how safe the community that appeared to be run down really was.

NEDodger
Library Board
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 1:19 am

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby NEDodger » Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:51 am

daveoma wrote:I think many of us who love urban living might disagree with big red med but I think his perspective and judgements are fairly common--especially in west Omaha where I grew up. We have an opportunity to learn from his perspective. Perhaps the needs of potential new residents can be met and misinformed perceptions can be changed. I personally don't agree with your views sir but kudos for expressing yourself. It might surprise you that while living at 16th & Jackson between 2006 and 2013 I used to park at the lot that used to be at 15th & Jackson...too many times I accidentally left my windows down or cracked open. Not once was anything stolen from my car, even when I forgot my wallet a couple times. My own forgetfulness notwithstanding, I think that shows how safe the community that appeared to be run down really was.


That's like one block from Police HQ. Not really a good counterexample.

GRANDPASMUCKER
Human Relations
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:10 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby GRANDPASMUCKER » Mon Feb 02, 2015 10:59 am

NEDodger wrote:
daveoma wrote:I think many of us who love urban living might disagree with big red med but I think his perspective and judgements are fairly common--especially in west Omaha where I grew up. We have an opportunity to learn from his perspective. Perhaps the needs of potential new residents can be met and misinformed perceptions can be changed. I personally don't agree with your views sir but kudos for expressing yourself. It might surprise you that while living at 16th & Jackson between 2006 and 2013 I used to park at the lot that used to be at 15th & Jackson...too many times I accidentally left my windows down or cracked open. Not once was anything stolen from my car, even when I forgot my wallet a couple times. My own forgetfulness notwithstanding, I think that shows how safe the community that appeared to be run down really was.


That's like one block from Police HQ. Not really a good counterexample.


My Dad used to say "Bees won't sting an idiot."

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Mon Feb 02, 2015 1:40 pm

daveoma wrote:
I love Omaha but the politics of the state of Nebraska are not progressive enough of attract a significant number of young people or tech companies--which will provide many of the jobs of the future. The state is too religious, too anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-woman, and anti-gay.  It kills me to say it but that's part of the reason I moved away. :-( I hope that someday I'm proven wrong.


As a whole, Nebraska is a very moderate state. If you felt the state was oppressive enough that you were compelled to leave, then I think you are either A: very thin-skinned, or B: probably have personal issues that were the real basis behind your decision to leave.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby RNcyanide » Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:59 pm

S33 wrote:
daveoma wrote:
I love Omaha but the politics of the state of Nebraska are not progressive enough of attract a significant number of young people or tech companies--which will provide many of the jobs of the future. The state is too religious, too anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-woman, and anti-gay.  It kills me to say it but that's part of the reason I moved away. :-( I hope that someday I'm proven wrong.


As a whole, Nebraska is a very moderate state. If you felt the state was oppressive enough that you were compelled to leave, then I think you are either A: very thin-skinned, or B: probably have personal issues that were the real basis behind your decision to leave.


I can see where some of what daveoma and S33 is coming from, but I agree with S33 more.
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.

The Bride

daveoma
Human Relations
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby daveoma » Sat Feb 07, 2015 4:31 pm

S33 wrote:
daveoma wrote:
I love Omaha but the politics of the state of Nebraska are not progressive enough of attract a significant number of young people or tech companies--which will provide many of the jobs of the future. The state is too religious, too anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-woman, and anti-gay.  It kills me to say it but that's part of the reason I moved away. :-( I hope that someday I'm proven wrong.


As a whole, Nebraska is a very moderate state. If you felt the state was oppressive enough that you were compelled to leave, then I think you are either A: very thin-skinned, or B: probably have personal issues that were the real basis behind your decision to leave.


Your assumptions about new are unfounded and pitifully uninformed.

1. I am gay and thick skinned enough to come out to my parents who are not "moderate", but rather whose views are similar to most Nebraskans their age.

2. I was thick skinned enough to protest many times for gay rights (sometimes in the rain or in the middle of winter) in the face of 70% of "moderate" Nebraskans (many of whom drove by laughing at us on 72nd and dodge) who were evidently too ignorant to understand that gay people deserve the right to marry. If Nebraska wants data centers, then don't flight gay marriage like it's communism.

3 I stuck around and was out of the closet and open at work whilst my employer did NOT have a discrimination policy that protected gay people--if you're not gay or know someone who is you have NO idea what kind of "thick skin" it takes to put your livelihood on the line just because you talk to your friend at work about a measly date with someone who just happened to be the same gender as yourself.

4 I have the GUTS to tell you HERE and to your face ANY DAY that I love the earth (Nebraska) that fed me, I love the Omahans who nourished me, and I have the courage to stand up to those ignorant Nebraskans like yourself who sit back and drive by judging those who are different from you standing up for what is just and fair! !

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Sat Feb 07, 2015 8:39 pm

Good chat, Dave. You da man.

P.S. If you knew anything about me, you would know that I am 100% in favor of recognizing the gay community as 100% equal to heterosexuals, socially and legally.

But I just don't like stupid people. And I reallllly don't like whiny stupid people. (Not saying you are whiny and stupid, but you're putting out the vibe)
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

Louie
Library Board
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:23 pm
Location: Park Ave>NW Omaha>Millard

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Louie » Sun Feb 08, 2015 11:18 am

The people of Nebraska voted Pete Ricketts as their governor. I mean if that doesn't prove Dave's points, what will?

User avatar
jessep28
Planning Board
Posts: 2288
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:10 pm
Location: Omaha Metro Area

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby jessep28 » Sun Feb 08, 2015 11:23 am

Louie wrote:The people of Nebraska voted Pete Ricketts as their governor. I mean if that doesn't prove Dave's points, what will?


The fact that Ben Nelson, a Democrat, was governor from 1991-1999?
Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Sun Feb 08, 2015 11:45 am

jessep28 wrote:
Louie wrote:The people of Nebraska voted Pete Ricketts as their governor. I mean if that doesn't prove Dave's points, what will?


The fact that Ben Nelson, a Democrat, was governor from 1991-1999?

Get those facts out of here. You're going to crush his narrative.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

Dundeemaha
Library Board
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 11:41 am
Location: Country Club

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Dundeemaha » Sun Feb 08, 2015 12:08 pm

Ben Nelson was a Nebraska Democrat. A "Democrat in Name Only" to borrow a phrase.

Back in college my wife wrote a letter to Nelson about the importance of reproductive rights for women and the importance of access to safe abortions. Ben Nelson sent back a letter stating: "I know that all good Nebraskans support me in my defense of the sanctity of life"

The National Journal ranked him as more conservative than several Senate Republicans while he served.

He supported Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy, blocked Democratic filibusters of Bush nominees, and supported numerous other partisan Republican initiatives.

I've lived in Nebraksa my entire life and love it here. But that is in spite of it being a very conservative state.

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Sun Feb 08, 2015 12:18 pm

Not trying to change the subject, but if some people worked as hard to use methods of birth control and, God forbid, use a darn condom, as they do trying to lobby for greater access to abortions, I would think this issue could largely work itself out.

But, as always, we need to continue to expand our framework of legislation for our or irresponsibilities, instead.

Absolutely no personal responsibility anymore.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby RNcyanide » Sun Feb 08, 2015 1:28 pm

S33 wrote:Not trying to change the subject, but if some people worked as hard to use methods of birth control and, God forbid, use a darn condom, as they do trying to lobby for greater access to abortions, I would think this issue could largely work itself out.

But, as always, we need to continue to expand our framework of legislation for our or irresponsibilities, instead.

Absolutely no personal responsibility anymore.


A weird quirk to the reproductive rights issue is sex education. Most schools in Nebraska and other parts of the nation practice abstinence only education. You think that things like birth control and prophylaxis would be obvious, but one thing I've learned in nursing school is you can never overestimate someone's knowledge about a topic. It's the same thing with parents teaching their children about sex. They're going to do it no matter what, so teach them right. You'd be surprised how many teens still think you can't pregnant your first time having sex. And the STD issue is a whole other ball of wax. My instructor told us a story of how her cousin got pregnant on birth control, and after a few questions, discovered she was putting the pill in her garden. This was a woman who was also in college at the time. Have a problem with abortions? Then do proper sex education.

EDIT: really? Vãgina is changed to garden? Who comes up with that?
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.

The Bride

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Sun Feb 08, 2015 2:11 pm

Now we're talking about gardens? Lol.


Anyway, it's completely indefensible that our sex education is the way it is.

Everyone knows billy is going to bang Sally, so why not at least teach him to wrap it up?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Uffda
Planning Board
Posts: 2932
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Uffda » Sun Feb 08, 2015 5:17 pm

S33 wrote:Anyway, it's completely indefensible that our sex education is the way it is.

Everyone knows billy is going to bang Sally, so why not at least teach him to wrap it up?


School sex Ed is controlled by what the parents want or don't want taught. Or will allow their child to hear.


http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewc ... ext=wmjowl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby RNcyanide » Sun Feb 08, 2015 5:40 pm

Uffda wrote:
S33 wrote:Anyway, it's completely indefensible that our sex education is the way it is.

Everyone knows billy is going to bang Sally, so why not at least teach him to wrap it up?


School sex Ed is controlled by what the parents want or don't want taught. Or will allow their child to hear.


http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewc ... ext=wmjowl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Pathetic. Complain about glorification of teenage pregnancy and abortions, then turn around and gripe about the corruption of children and violation of Christian values during sex ed. You know, it's almost like they don't want the problem solved.
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.

The Bride

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Sun Feb 08, 2015 7:53 pm

I assumed the lack of any real sex education was probably on behalf of the parent's sensitivities. Parents do too much meddling in school affairs, imo. (Not that the teachers are always perfect)

That said, im not emphatically against abortion, though. Before I had kids, I really didn't care one way or the other. After having kids, I'm a bit more against it.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Garrett
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1717
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:29 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby Garrett » Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:15 am

S33 wrote:I assumed the lack of any real sex education was probably on behalf of the parent's sensitivities. Parents do too much meddling in school affairs, imo. (Not that the teachers are always perfect)

That said,  im not emphatically against abortion, though. Before I had kids, I really didn't care one way or the other. After having kids, I'm a bit more against it.


I believe Vice President Biden summed my view up perfectly in one of the Vice Presidential debates when he said that abortion is not something he supports personally, but he cannot impose his own personal views on other people.
From Omaha to Chicago
From Axel to Garrett

Still the same guy

User avatar
RNcyanide
Planning Board
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Chalco

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby RNcyanide » Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:04 am

Garrett wrote:
S33 wrote:I assumed the lack of any real sex education was probably on behalf of the parent's sensitivities. Parents do too much meddling in school affairs, imo. (Not that the teachers are always perfect)

That said,  im not emphatically against abortion, though. Before I had kids, I really didn't care one way or the other. After having kids, I'm a bit more against it.


I believe Vice President Biden summed my view up perfectly in one of the Vice Presidential debates when he said that abortion is not something he supports personally, but he cannot impose his own personal views on other people.


Same.
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.

The Bride

User avatar
S33
County Board
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: 1.2M residents in metro by 2050

Postby S33 » Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:02 pm

Politically, I would agree. He played that perfectly.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill


Return to “Statistics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest