U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-15-2014, 11:12 PM
 
11,407 posts, read 6,441,030 times
Reputation: 6157

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbiekat View Post

Who are these people turning their noses up? Skimping is not what someone is doing if they are providing the best they can for their child.
How many parents can say they couldn't do more?


Quote:
Why would we assume that? You said some people do this. Now you say you made the whole thing up.
Because it's a very irrelevant point. If it pleases you, let's say that "Bob" said it. Happy?

Quote:
Changing sides, I see. First you wanted people to be satisfied being average. Now you want people to do better. I think you just like to argue. Why else would someone start 2 threads trying to convince parents that having kids doesn't really cost much?
Nope, no sides changed. I'm curious to find out how people rationalize not giving their child the best life possoble. I'm not saying they should or should not do more.

 
Old 08-16-2014, 06:21 AM
 
Location: here
24,472 posts, read 28,756,384 times
Reputation: 31051
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
How many parents can say they couldn't do more?


Because it's a very irrelevant point. If it pleases you, let's say that "Bob" said it. Happy?

Nope, no sides changed. I'm curious to find out how people rationalize not giving their child the best life possoble. I'm not saying they should or should not do more.
I think most parents do give their kids the best life possible for them. More money doesn't mean better life.
 
Old 08-16-2014, 07:04 AM
 
1,167 posts, read 1,040,254 times
Reputation: 2136
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post

Nope, no sides changed. I'm curious to find out how people rationalize not giving their child the best life possoble. I'm not saying they should or should not do more.
Best by whose standards?

I don't consider designer clothes to be the best for my kid. I want him to be able to get dirty, wear out the knees of his jeans and the soles of his shoes (when he's wearing shoes at all), to have the freedom to play outdoors all day long, and not while locked in the back yard behind a 6 foot privacy fence, I don't care about standardized test scores, but I do care about him developing, and keeping, a love of learning for the sake of learning. I care that he is polite and considerate, but not blindly obedient, to be comfortable to express his thoughts and feelings, no matter on what end of the spectrum they are, but to do so in a way that is healthy and not harmful or deliberately hurtful to those around him. I want him to grow up being content to follow and fulfill honest desires and interests rather than a mindless scramble toward better and best and more, more, more.

I probably spend more on my child than you deem "average" based on your life and living experience, but I spend far, far less than I could for the area I live in and the interests we pursue and lifestyle we live as a family.

You may consider the price I pay for his care/schooling ludicrous but I spend more there because it is better for my child, that I (and his father) know better than anyone else knows, in so many ways than the alternative.

It's not The Best (but the best we can do), and there are people who would argue if it was good at all because it isn't focused on testing and test scores, but that's fine and dandy, because what they consider best for their kids isn't the bar by which I set my own standards.
 
Old 08-16-2014, 08:00 AM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
27,272 posts, read 15,053,470 times
Reputation: 20869
So ~ here's the deal. Even average kids are expensive.

End of thread.
 
Old 08-16-2014, 08:54 AM
 
12,610 posts, read 14,621,137 times
Reputation: 14115
But aren't you the poster who several months ago posted that you are "retired" in your 20s? So basically your children won't have these things because you don't want to work. I remember you saying your girlfriend/wife does work. I think there's a difference between both of you working and not being able to provide better for your children, and not working because you have chosen to "retire" and "enjoy life" in your 20s while your significant other works. I guess I would see that differently if you were the stay at home parent caring for the children and the house, but in your thread about "retiring" early, I think you didn't have children to care for, you just did whatever you wanted to and your focus was on "enjoying life." I guess your spouse doesn't get to enjoy life because she has to support you and the kids.

I think all your threads are related to YOU not wanting to work.

Live the good life on $20k/year - retire in your 20s or 30s?
 
Old 08-16-2014, 09:19 AM
 
15,758 posts, read 13,184,034 times
Reputation: 19646
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
I don't see how this is relevant. Lets say the parents take trips to the Caribbean to relax and unwind.
Ah, so the real question is not what you originally posted but rather, is it morally acceptable for parents to give less than they can to their children so they can go on vacation.

More than a little different.
 
Old 08-16-2014, 09:21 AM
 
15,758 posts, read 13,184,034 times
Reputation: 19646
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
Did you read the entire passage namely this part:

It is perfectly conceivable that a married couple in which one is a teacher/nurse/plumber have a combined income of less than $100k. This is especially true for parents who are usually in their 20s or early 30s. At this age, people have little experience and usually fall into the lower range of pay for their given occupation. For example, a teacher with 4 years of experience (probably 26-27 yrs old...perfect child bearing age) makes about 32k in my state whereas a teacher with 20 years experience may make $50k.

No need to be rude. Look at the date from Wiki - 2005. The BLS number you provided was from 2011. That a gap of six years.

Regardless, why are you fixated on whether $65k is "middle class" or "lower middle class" (rather arbitrary labels)? Are you a nurse or something? I know some people get offended by being labeled "lower" anything.
Because again, it is intellectually dishonest.

This entire thread is an exercise in being intellectually dishonest.

It isn't about what class the parents are, it is about not doing the best one can for their children, and instead doing the best one can of one's self.
 
Old 08-16-2014, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Western Washington
8,004 posts, read 9,661,231 times
Reputation: 19409
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
Another thread I made about how raising a child doesn't have to be terribly expensive drew a lot of criticism.

It seems that some people hold the opinion that being content with what you've provided your child (unless it's the best) is a disservice to that child. They feel that a parent should constantly strive to provide better, better, better for the child. This could be in the form of better schools, better neighborhoods, better city, a slew of extracurricular activities, the best ranked childcare providers, the best foods, clothing, medical care, etc, etc.

My question is - is it OK to be content with what you've provided for child? For example:

- child attends an average public in the state (a mix of poor, working class and middle class families)
- family lives in an average (or even below average) home in a working class/average neighborhood/city (not dangerous, but not the safest)
- child wears relatively modest clothing (perhaps even some hand-me-downs)
- child receives 2 or 3 star childcare instead of 5 star
- child doesn't have access to all extracurricular activities/tutoring and parents probably can't afford to pay for all college expenses

Is it somehow morally wrong for this parent to be satisfied with what they've provided (i.e. calling it good enough and enjoying life) or should they constantly strive/work hard/stress to provide their child with something better?

Where do you draw the line between fanatical and satisfied?
We've held to the "middle ground" on this. I'm glad we did, because that is one of the things I'm seeing that has given my children an advantage in life. We never competed with anyone else and tried to instill that in our children. If you want "the best", what does that even MEAN!? Seriously? Why is one thing better than another?

It's all about perspective. My best, would be a small country school, zero violence, 20 acres of land, with the house in the middle of it, minimal people, all of whom have each other's backs. That may not be the best for others. Parents who are doing THEIR best and trying to keep "greater good for all" as their driving force, well, I can't imagine them ever being made feel as if they aren't doing the "right" things.

They're not. They're doing what they hope to be, the best for their children. That's all they're supposed to do. Parents are supposed to be the models for their children's basic moral compasses. If you are not showing them how to be, telling them will only cause them to not trust you or believe in you. If you are teaching your children things, which end in them having serious negative consequences, you are harming your children and again, causing your children to doubt and mistrust you. If you teach your children to disregard the feelings of others, because they think that ONLY they deserve the best, YOU will likely become their victim, eventually.
 
Old 08-16-2014, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Cypress
16 posts, read 14,149 times
Reputation: 28
All subjective. I really wanted to say that the OP Eddie posts very interesting topics that really sets people off in many directions and he loves that. That is his intent. It is part hypothetical and part his reality in his posts. As others start screaming and ranting or calling him names he remains cool. It is so funny to read. Behind all those blue letters he is accused of being jealous of lies a true GENIUS!!!
Good job Eddy. Would love to know your IQ!
 
Old 08-16-2014, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Denver area
21,142 posts, read 22,123,052 times
Reputation: 35568
Quote:
Originally Posted by svehla View Post
All subjective. I really wanted to say that the OP Eddie posts very interesting topics that really sets people off in many directions and he loves that. That is his intent. It is part hypothetical and part his reality in his posts. As others start screaming and ranting or calling him names he remains cool. It is so funny to read. Behind all those blue letters he is accused of being jealous of lies a true GENIUS!!!
Good job Eddy. Would love to know your IQ!
I would have to disagree that a young, non-parent ranting about being judged by hypothetical real parents for not spending everything he has on his hypothetical children is interesting....most of the responding posts are not arguing with his purported premise (that it is not necessary to overspend while raising children). But, the reality is his intent is to make up stories that are apparently not based in reality, pose them as if they were, and "set people off"...in other words...stir the pot. There is also another word for this but it's against the TOS to use that word. So I won't.

Last edited by maciesmom; 08-16-2014 at 11:14 AM.. Reason: clarity
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top