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.
No disagreements from me. I don't have kids, so it's easy for me to say....but I don't personally get why anyone would want to have a couple of kids and then have 2 parents work full time and put them in day care for someone else to raise. It seems like a pointless rat race to me...but whatever.
Ive always wondered about this, I worked for 18 years minding pre fives in a nursery, and wondered about parents missing those first steps.. first words.. and not being there... why bother to have them if you want someone else to rear them.. make you millions first then have the children ... from a baby to five is the most important part of a childs life... its not about holidays and big fancy houses to a child.
You admitted yourself that most of your family (and America) makes stupid family and financial decisions. I would definitely put starting out as a single parent in that category (and I suspect you would, too). And as I suspect you would agree...single parenting often creates an endless vicious cycle of intergenerational poverty and poor decision making. Because one person typically can't do it all, no matter how hard they try. There just isn't enough time in the day to work and raise kids at the same time and do a good job at both.
100% agree
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
You can call someone who's a stay at home spouse spoiled and privileged.
I was comparing the situation of a SAHM whose husband is making well into six figures and they live in a low COL with let's say, no more than 3 kids. SAHMs in this situation claiming that they "work hard" haven't seen "hard work" unless they go into the inner city and live the life of a single mother for a month. It was just a comparison provided to get women in these situations to stop "whining" about "how hard they are working" when in actuality, they have it pretty good.
But again, this was way before the conversation got on the chick with a family of 5 and 6 animals making less than $25k a year. I don't see that as a good situation at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
I call it favoring quality over quantity. Interestingly enough, people who manage their money well can often afford to have a stay at home spouse on fairly modest incomes (assuming they don't live in expensive coastal metro areas of the NE or West Coasts).
But most of the chicks speaking in this thread do not even have modest household incomes. They are at or under the poverty level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
You deride your own family and America at large for making stupid decisions in these areas.... yet you also deride people making apparently smarter decisions as "spoiled and privileged". Um maybe these people have the privilege of staying home with kids precisely because they did marriage, then kids (in that order) and managed their money carefully.
I think you mentioned that you don't have kids, correct? Do you think it's a GOOD financial decision to make less than $25,000 a year after taxes, but have a family of 5 along with the addition of 6 animals? That puts your family under the poverty line, do you think that's a PRUDENT financial decision?
Despite the rosy picture painted by the SAHMs, YOU know the math doesn't add up.
I've always wondered about this, I worked for 18 years minding pre fives in a nursery, and wondered about parents missing those first steps.. first words.. and not being there... why bother to have them if you want someone else to rear them.. make you millions first then have the children ... from a baby to five is the most important part of a childs life... its not about holidays and big fancy houses to a child.
I was comparing the situation of a SAHM whose husband is making well into six figures and they live in a low COL with let's say, no more than 3 kids. SAHMs in this situation claiming that they "work hard" haven't seen "hard work" unless they go into the inner city and live the life of a single mother for a month. It was just a comparison provided to get women in these situations to stop "whining" about "how hard they are working" when in actuality, they have it pretty good. .
You were responding to OHKY's post and it sure did look like a personal attack to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jotucker99
But again, this was way before the conversation got on the chick with a family of 5 and 6 animals making less than $25k a year. I don't see that as a good situation at all. .
I don't recall that particular post, but in general, I don't think 25K per year would not be that great a life, but everyone's situation is different.
I also saw people give lowish income ranges of raising kids, but their kids may have been grown adults for a decade or more...so their lowish sounding incomes went further 10 or 20 years ago than that same income would now...but it seems like you missed that aspect in a couple of your posts.
But most of the chicks speaking in this thread do not even have modest household incomes. They are at or under the poverty level. .[/quote]
Eh, I'm not sure how you know that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jotucker99
I think you mentioned that you don't have kids, correct? Do you think it's a GOOD financial decision to make less than $25,000 a year after taxes, but have a family of 5 along with the addition of 6 animals? That puts your family under the poverty line, do you think that's a PRUDENT financial decision?.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jotucker99
Despite the rosy picture painted by the SAHMs, YOU know the math doesn't add up.
In general, no. But as I said I don't recall that specific post. I was responding to the one by OHKY. Some people have cheap housing costs and can make it work, though.
And others here have done a good job explaining how the income hurdle for having a 2nd income be worthwhile is actually pretty high because:
--Daycare for 1 kid can be $1000 per month (which means you need to clear more than that in gross earnings)
--The secondary earner's income is essentially taxed at the higher marginal tax rate.
--The opportunity costs of working means you don't have the time/energy to economize in other ways...You eat out more, don't get as good a deal on your groceries, don't have as much time/energy to shop for major purchases, etc. Your transportation costs are higher because both are working, etc.
--The primary earner often doesn't do as well in his (usually it's the guy who's the primary earner) career when the wife is working because if both are working full time, he doesn't have the ability to focus on his career like he otherwise could....Division of labor is usually more efficient.
And these are just the dollar and cent calculations...none of the quality of life calculations. So I actually think the income hurdle for a secondary earner with kids is a pretty high bar to clear.
So I haven't changed my mind. I think you want it both ways. It's like you have a split personality or something. On one hand these high income women are spoiled and on the other most of the stay at home mom crowd is in poverty.
You're just all over the map (and I don't think I'm the only poster who thinks that...so maybe when more than one person tells you the same thing, it's a clue that maybe there's something to what's being said).
Question 2 can be just as much of an issue. I have seen and been in a family where limited financial and non-financial (ie parents' time/energy) are spread too thin between the kids.
I am a great believer that a parent should afford their kids as much opportunity as possible. "I can't pay for three college tuitions" or "I can't afford Sport A for you and Sport B for your sister" is a depressing reality for too many families. Even in my own family, all of us would have been better off if either myself or my sister were an only child. Why does this matter?
(Private) High School and college admissions. "Smart" doesn't cut it and extra-curriculars separate "merely talented" from the "exceptional." However,developing talent in sports and the arts in addition to "voluntourism" in the developing world requires unrelenting support in parents' time and money. How many episodes of The Simpsons feature the family unable to nurture Lisa's talent due to cost? That's the reality for talented children not born into the privileged classes.
All of this matters in college admissions as higher ranking schools have better connections for work, academia, and entrepreneurship. The Mr Money Moustache article about the American road to material success (or security, as I see it) Ivy League Pre-school syndrome pooh-poohs the "need" to invest/push in this manner, but the US/global economy (and the credentialling system to function in it) is becoming more competitive, and it's not "right" for parents to put in glass ceilings.
Question 2 can be just as much of an issue. I have seen and been in a family where limited financial and non-financial (ie parents' time/energy) are spread too thin between the kids.
I am a great believer that a parent should afford their kids as much opportunity as possible. "I can't pay for three college tuitions" or "I can't afford Sport A for you and Sport B for your sister" is a depressing reality for too many families. Even in my own family, all of us would have been better off if either myself or my sister were an only child. Why does this matter?
(Private) High School and college admissions. "Smart" doesn't cut it and extra-curriculars separate "merely talented" from the "exceptional." However,developing talent in sports and the arts in addition to "voluntourism" in the developing world requires unrelenting support in parents' time and money. How many episodes of The Simpsons feature the family unable to nurture Lisa's talent due to cost? That's the reality for talented children not born into the privileged classes.
All of this matters in college admissions as higher ranking schools have better connections for work, academia, and entrepreneurship. The Mr Money Moustache article about the American road to material success (or security, as I see it) Ivy League Pre-school syndrome pooh-poohs the "need" to invest/push in this manner, but the US/global economy (and the credentialling system to function in it) is becoming more competitive, and it's not "right" for parents to put in glass ceilings.
/rant over
Mr. Money Mustache also address this as well. I am not 100% in agreement with him here as some people are just not computer people, but more of us certainly could be:
So I haven't changed my mind. I think you want it both ways. It's like you have a split personality or something. On one hand these high income women are spoiled and on the other most of the stay at home mom crowd is in poverty.
The chick I'm referring to (and that you are referring to, OHKY) posted her numbers. All you have to do is go back and review the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
You're just all over the map (and I don't think I'm the only poster who thinks that...so maybe when more than one person tells you the same thing, it's a clue that maybe there's something to what's being said).
Let me tell you something, just because a group of people repeat the same crap....doesn't mean they are correct. If I was a Democrat in a room full of Republicans, everybody would be repeating the same crap and I'd be the odd man out. If I was a Republican in a room full of Democrats, everybody would be repeating the same crap and I'll be the odd man out.
Don't feed me the lines of "everybody is saying it so it must be true". Go to a Trump Rally, Trump is King. Go to a Bernie Rally, Trump is Satan.
If you go through and READ what I said, take your BIAS out of the equation, it's clear as day the points that I was making. I even just explained it BACK to you in the prior post.
You go look at OHKY's numbers, review the response I made to her, and YOU tell me based on MATH.....how does her story add up to where on $24k a year, 5 people to feed and 6 animals, how is she able to do everything she claims while also have savings, save for her kids college fund, take the kids to recreational places, etc.
Just show me the MATH...I really don't give a damn about how you personally feel about me. It's irrelevant.
$2,000 / month is $24k / year, the average household income in our township. There are many families who are raising children in our town on that level of income.
Some may get assistance, and some do not.
My children are grown and gone. My primary income today is my pension, about $18k/year. A lot of our friends around here make less than I do.
But again, this was way before the conversation got on the chick with a family of 5 and 6 animals making less than $25k a year. I don't see that as a good situation at all.
I think you mentioned that you don't have kids, correct? Do you think it's a GOOD financial decision to make less than $25,000 a year after taxes, but have a family of 5 along with the addition of 6 animals? That puts your family under the poverty line, do you think that's a PRUDENT financial decision?
Despite the rosy picture painted by the SAHMs, YOU know the math doesn't add up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jotucker99
The chick I'm referring to (and that you are referring to, OHKY) posted her numbers. All you have to do is go back and review the thread.
You go look at OHKY's numbers, review the response I made to her, and YOU tell me based on MATH.....how does her story add up to where on $24k a year, 5 people to feed and 6 animals, how is she able to do everything she claims while also have savings, save for her kids college fund, take the kids to recreational places, etc.
Just show me the MATH...I really don't give a damn about how you personally feel about me. It's irrelevant.
LEAVE ME ALONE! Now you are PERSONALLY ATTACKING ME.
The chick I'm referring to (and that you are referring to, OHKY) posted her numbers. All you have to do is go back and review the thread.
Let me tell you something, just because a group of people repeat the same crap....doesn't mean they are correct. If I was a Democrat in a room full of Republicans, everybody would be repeating the same crap and I'd be the odd man out. If I was a Republican in a room full of Democrats, everybody would be repeating the same crap and I'll be the odd man out.
Don't feed me the lines of "everybody is saying it so it must be true". Go to a Trump Rally, Trump is King. Go to a Bernie Rally, Trump is Satan.
If you go through and READ what I said, take your BIAS out of the equation, it's clear as day the points that I was making. I even just explained it BACK to you in the prior post.
You go look at OHKY's numbers, review the response I made to her, and YOU tell me based on MATH.....how does her story add up to where on $24k a year, 5 people to feed and 6 animals, how is she able to do everything she claims while also have savings, save for her kids college fund, take the kids to recreational places, etc.
Just show me the MATH...I really don't give a damn about how you personally feel about me. It's irrelevant.
You actually questioned many people with incomes ranging from 25-60k and then narrowed in on the lowest earner. Talk about disingenuous, you were calling on multiple people to show you the math or they were liars and now you've backed it down to the lowest earners without acknowledging it. That shows a lack of integrity especially when you said "I didn't not say that" in reference to "98% of Americans struggle or live paycheck to paycheck" and then your previous statements were quoted showing you said that exactly and you don't acknowledge it. I'm not sure how you feel you can make so many character calls when you sir are clearly lacking it
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.
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.
You clearly have nothing better to do Jotucker99
