I am completely neutral on the Duggar's, since I can see pros and cons to their lifestyle. I come from a large French Canadian catholic family, as did my mother, as did hers. I absolutely adore my siblings and loved growing up in a large family. I look so forward to our family reunions because I have over 75 cousins to enjoy time with. Yet neither myself and siblings, nor any of our cousins can say we felt like we were assigned a younger sibling to look after. Sure we looked out for each other in a general sense, but it seemed our parents' main expectations were that we help out with the household chores, and focus on our studies for school. The childcare was the responsibility of our stay at home mothers, not any of us. When we were asked to do specific childcare if our mother wasn't available, it was called babysitting and we were given a little money to put in our piggy banks or maybe just given a little treat as a thank you. None of my Aunts had more than 12 children, so perhaps they thought that was the limit to the number they could care for themselves, without imposing the childcare on others. Being very conservative catholics back in the day, I know my own mother (and probably her sisters) relied on the rhythm method for birth control. Although there were no doubt some 'Oops' babies, that method was fairly successful overall, since a dozen or less children each were conceived from bridal bed to menopause, encompassing more than 30 years. That isn't an option for the Duggars though, because any form of birth control is contrary to their desire to have as many children as they are blessed with. I can understand how some posters feel the Duggar parents are being unfair and a bit selfish by fulfilling their own desires, but not really giving their children any voice in the matter. And I truly don't know if I'd be so enamoured of large families and so happy to have come from one, if the repsonsibility of caretaking for one of my siblings had been given to me as an automatic 'assignment.' Regardless, I think the Duggars are a lovely family, who appear to be raising very kind and loving children. Hopefully, their children will continue to be well adjusted individuals and never become resentful of the choices their parents made for them.

Well, next time you guys get a phone call from someone claiming to be from IRS and asking for money, here's what you should do: 1. If you think you might owe taxes, call the IRS. They can help you set up a payment arrangement. 2. If you get a call and you know it's a scam, refer the call to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. 3. File a complaint with the FTC through their website. 4. Expose the phone scam by reporting it to Callercenter.com. Submit a complaint and warn others. Remember that the IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers to discuss tax issue and demand immediate payment.

MtnRwdux, that would've happened to you at my house. I never ever answer the door to strangers. I don't care what you look like. If it's daylight, I may go to the door, which is glass, with my 100 lb barking black lab, to see who it is and if I don't know them, I tell them I don't open the door to strangers so if they have something they want to tell me, they can leave literature at the door. Nothing irritates me more than someone coming uninvited to my door at dinner hour. Coincidentally, just this evening I saw someone get scammed right in front of our grocery store! As I was leaving, I saw a man b/w 40-50 yrs old with wallet in hand talking with a young girl who appeared to be in her 20s. She was dressed "nicely" in loose cotton shirt with long summery cotton skirt, blond hair in a loose bun. I didn't think much of it as I passed by them and then noticed a guy in an unrecognizable uniform heading toward us, about 50 ft away. I thought he was just going shopping, but then I hear him suddenly yell, "you need to leave the property immediately. You are not allowed here. Get out of here now!" She kind of took off and the man was standing there bewildered. It hit me that she must pave given him a sob story needing money. I've never seen security there before but wonder if this has been a problem lately so they hired someone. Odd. Two,summers ago, I was approached by a man and his son outside a hotel in NJ. I had just checked in and went out to the car to get a few things. We were there for a soccer tournament so,the area was unfamiliar. He gave me some song and dance about needing a few dollars for gas, but I've heard about these kind of scammers before so I politely refused. I then went back inside and reported to hotel staff. My elderly parents got the IRS scam call. They are both totally "with it" and my mother had a nice argument with a guy with a strong Indian accent. She basically told him to go ahead and send the cops..she wasn't worried about getting arrested. I do worry as they age that they might not be so smart.

I've actually had a similar idea to yours cynic, but with a slight change that might actually make the solution workable. Whenever a call is received, the recipient has the option of hanging up and dialing similar to *69 (I'll call it *96) which would cause some amount (say 50 cents) to be added to the callers bill, and that amount would be credited to the recipient's bill. Think about it. You've just got a call from 'Bridget at card services" or from "Microsoft" or from some annoying survey or from the opposing political party regarding their reprehensible candidate, and rather than merely hanging up and walking away silently fuming (like I did moments ago in the middle of writing this message) Instead imagine hanging up, dialing *96 and walking away slightly smirking because you've actually affected the annoying caller, and your phone bill will be slightly smaller this month. Imagine the smile when you think, "Five more of them, and this month is free!" The details of the plan would need some careful thought to avoid creating a new mode of abuse wherein some scammer calls you leaving a message saying "Its an emergency, call me back at this number ASAP" and then when you do, they *96 you and garner 50 cents from you. Maybe each caller gets a handful of *96 calls in a given month before they are debited. Or perhaps the caller is notified that the recipient has done a *96, and the caller has the option of dialing *97 and negating the charge back, but only a couple of times a month. It would take decision at the Federal level to force the phone companies to implement this, since I'm sure they'll fight it tooth and nail. Furthermore the telemarketing industry will surely claim it would affect their business, and jobs of all the poor schlubs they employ, but ... duh, that's the entire point of the measure. The one issue I see with the measure is that it would be so effective, that perhaps within a year of being implemented, the need for it and the use of it would drop to near zero. (Note if a lawmaker reads this and wants to implement this scheme, I'll gladly license the design for a meager 1/100th of a cent per call that is *96'ed :-)