Liquid Sapphire, I am *not* biting your head off, I swear I am not.
I agree, $1000/month sounds like a lot for a 4 year old child. As a parent who raised two kids, I'm here to tell you that it's not a lot of money.
That's $12,000/year to support another little person. There are many people on this ERE forum who have yet to master supporting themselves in $12k/year- and that's as adults who can DIY their way through life.
A four year old can hardly DIY his life. Even though the parents can DIY much of their parenting, many of the big ticket items are decidedly NOT DIY (medical care, etc.) I could go on and on and ON, but as nonsensical as it may seem, I could make a very strong argument that supporting a 4 year old (especially while the adult with sole custody works full time) is much more expensive than supporting an adult.
$12k is 18% of a $67k income. Speaking as a parent who raised two kids, that seems like a bargain to me.
I have some sympathy for those of you who are apprehensive/frustrated that a fully enfranchised adult could have access to the money that you earned individually, through a legal social contract such as marriage. I understand that from where you stand, simply entering this arbitrary social agreement with legal supports should not entitle any random person access to and a portion of assets that that person did not work to earn. Got it. I can shoot holes in it all day long (great post, Avni1) but I do understand the sentiment.
There's hardly any way, IMHO, that one can hold a child that one created to the same standards. The child didn't ask you to create him. The child cannot support himself. The child cannot choose to be ERE.
Be careful not to extend your frustration with an ex-spouse to the child.
Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Man, this sure turned into hell-in-a-hand-basket, although I guess you could say it kind of started there, too.
I had a trusts and estates professor in law school who, although he was a Catholic priest, was very much in favor of prenuptial agreements. In every divorce case we studied he would exclaim in a sarcastic hi-pitched voice-- "And WHY didn't they have a prenuptial agreement? Because they were IN LOVE!" (and he would wave his arms with a flourish on the "in love" part).
His point was that from a legal perspective, marriage was historically, and still is by and large, intended to be a financial and legal relationship. That's why they used to be arranged and still are in some cultures.
But today people either forget or were never taught that -- so they fail to analyze it as an investment and only look upon it as an emotional and/or physical-satisfaction related commitment.
The basic rules that everyone should know are:
1. If you bring it into the marriage, it is subject to being split unless you have made some kind of agreement.
2. What you earn/accumulate after marriage is subject to being split, with the more financially flush partner likely paying the other one.
3. If you have kids, expect to pay for them whether you remained married or not.
4. Divorce is like cancer - i.e., no one is immune. No one. You can lessen your odds, but it could still strike you.
5. Divorce justice is rough justice. Very rough.
You can all whine about the rules and their consequences, but life is no more fair/unfair in this venue than any other. You can gain or lose in the financial markets and you can gain or lose in the marriage markets, and often due to factors you cannot know or foresee ahead of time.
In contemplating marriage, you should always ask -- would I be willing to stay married to this person if/when we can't or don't want to make love anymore? If the answer is "no" for whatever reason, you should probably just say no or get yourself a really fat prenup.
For my own part I've been married almost 20 years -- and count myself very lucky.
I had a trusts and estates professor in law school who, although he was a Catholic priest, was very much in favor of prenuptial agreements. In every divorce case we studied he would exclaim in a sarcastic hi-pitched voice-- "And WHY didn't they have a prenuptial agreement? Because they were IN LOVE!" (and he would wave his arms with a flourish on the "in love" part).
His point was that from a legal perspective, marriage was historically, and still is by and large, intended to be a financial and legal relationship. That's why they used to be arranged and still are in some cultures.
But today people either forget or were never taught that -- so they fail to analyze it as an investment and only look upon it as an emotional and/or physical-satisfaction related commitment.
The basic rules that everyone should know are:
1. If you bring it into the marriage, it is subject to being split unless you have made some kind of agreement.
2. What you earn/accumulate after marriage is subject to being split, with the more financially flush partner likely paying the other one.
3. If you have kids, expect to pay for them whether you remained married or not.
4. Divorce is like cancer - i.e., no one is immune. No one. You can lessen your odds, but it could still strike you.
5. Divorce justice is rough justice. Very rough.
You can all whine about the rules and their consequences, but life is no more fair/unfair in this venue than any other. You can gain or lose in the financial markets and you can gain or lose in the marriage markets, and often due to factors you cannot know or foresee ahead of time.
In contemplating marriage, you should always ask -- would I be willing to stay married to this person if/when we can't or don't want to make love anymore? If the answer is "no" for whatever reason, you should probably just say no or get yourself a really fat prenup.
For my own part I've been married almost 20 years -- and count myself very lucky.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
@BecaS: This is an entirely different subject, but based on previous discussions I'm guessing you are very much in the minority on this site in terms of what you think it costs to raise a child.
Off the top of my head, the Mr. Money Mustache family lives on about $18,000 a year. That's for three people: father, mother, and child.
Off the top of my head, the Mr. Money Mustache family lives on about $18,000 a year. That's for three people: father, mother, and child.
Avni1's post appears to support that sentiment, as I just explained.I can shoot holes in it all day long (great post, Avni1) but I do understand the sentiment.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Great post, Sapphire. Thanks! and hope all works out for you.
So kids costs more than adults because they can't DIY?... Seems to me their inability to DIY, aka spend money, would make them far less expensive, not more. Shelter is provided, so $12,000 a year on tiny portions of food, or designer baby clothes?BecaS wrote:I agree, $1000/month sounds like a lot for a 4 year old child. As a parent who raised two kids, I'm here to tell you that it's not a lot of money.
That's $12,000/year to support another little person. There are many people on this ERE forum who have yet to master supporting themselves in $12k/year- and that's as adults who can DIY their way through life.
One, or both, of the parents are working so medical is not a big ticket item.BecaS wrote:Even though the parents can DIY much of their parenting, many of the big ticket items are decidedly NOT DIY (medical care, etc.)
Please do, I and probably most here, would challenge you on this assumption... I wouldn't argue that day care is expensive. And perhaps detrimental, which is why it saddens me to see people discount the value of two parents.BecaS wrote: could go on and on and ON, but as nonsensical as it may seem, I could make a very strong argument that supporting a 4 year old (especially while the adult with sole custody works full time) is much more expensive than supporting an adult.
More like 30% after taxes, perhaps up to 40% after associated costs of working. It's like double income taxes for 2 decades that basically becomes the disposable income of the other parent, which in LS's ex's case seems to be wasteful and indulgent.BecaS wrote: $12k is 18% of a $67k income. Speaking as a parent who raised two kids, that seems like a bargain to me.
Who are these independent spendthrift children you're talking about? The children cannot chose to be ERE, they are ERE and have no say in it...BecaS wrote: There's hardly any way, IMHO, that one can hold a child that one created to the same standards. The child didn't ask you to create him. The child cannot support himself. The child cannot choose to be ERE.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Yeah, I'm familiar w/ MMM. He has lots of good content. I understand why you bring him forward as an example.
He is all of that, and only that: an example. His particular situation works well for him and his family. This is NOT to take anything away from his efforts and his resultant lifestyle; he's done well.
I'm betting though, that if MMM and Mrs.MM were to get divorced, the finances would change. We used to say that "two could live as cheaply as one." If one is frugal that's still pretty much true, although on a higher level.
Spread that same income out over two households raising the same child and by default it doesn't go as far.
I'd be willing to bet that on more months than not, depending on the child's age, it costs more to fund the child than it does to fund Mr. and Mrs. Money Mustache.
The reasons are varied and pedestrian, but it boils down to the differences between children and adults. Children are much more kinetic in their biological imperative; adults are much more static. We reach a certain age and most of our growth, development of personal infrastructure, etc. happens between our ears. We can cleverly figure out ways to fund this growth cheaply.
It can be done with children as well but not as fully nor as easily. Children are physically, biologically, and as a result of these things, financially demanding- that's their biological imperative. They demand resources. We all did, in the process of developing from fetuses into fully functioning, mostly autonomous adults.
There are lots of examples, per above I could go on and on and ON- but as just one example, think about how many times per year you buy clothes. Now multiply that by at least 4. Kids can grow out of clothing at an alarming rate. What fits early this spring will not fit by this summer, and certainly not by next late winter/ early spring. Yes to thrift stores and consignment stores, Freecycle, Craigslist and countless venues for hand me downs. a. Clothes do wear out. b. Kids are tough on clothes and they should be (otherwise you have hermetically sealed your child- not healthy.) Kids' clothes wear out faster than yours. c. You will be competing with all of the other parents in your area for the same pool of used clothing. Buying used clothing and anything else you can reasonably, hygienically incorporate helps, but it does not completely offset the higher cost and consumption inherent in raising kids.
How many times a year do you go to the dr.? Multiply that too, by varying factors. Even if the child remains perfectly healthy all year (good luck on that!) there are inoculations, well baby/well child check ups, etc.
MMM and Mrs. Money Mustache are both stay at home parents for the most part. Child care is huge. I do understand that the $1000/month does not cover child care costs, but there is a ripple effect associated with child care. If the parent who has sole custody, alone, works outside of the home (and in many cases, even if he/she works inside of the home) then the hours that parent has to devote to creating income are pretty much constrained to the hours that child care is available. It can be very difficult for the sole custody parent to generate additional income as needed, in cases of emergency or a heavy expense month, etc. More infrastructure costs then get shifted to the $1000/month child support.
Etc.
Children have a synergistic effect on budgets that goes far beyond the portion of the budget that is actually spent on the child.
There are many, many more examples.
He is all of that, and only that: an example. His particular situation works well for him and his family. This is NOT to take anything away from his efforts and his resultant lifestyle; he's done well.
I'm betting though, that if MMM and Mrs.MM were to get divorced, the finances would change. We used to say that "two could live as cheaply as one." If one is frugal that's still pretty much true, although on a higher level.
Spread that same income out over two households raising the same child and by default it doesn't go as far.
I'd be willing to bet that on more months than not, depending on the child's age, it costs more to fund the child than it does to fund Mr. and Mrs. Money Mustache.
The reasons are varied and pedestrian, but it boils down to the differences between children and adults. Children are much more kinetic in their biological imperative; adults are much more static. We reach a certain age and most of our growth, development of personal infrastructure, etc. happens between our ears. We can cleverly figure out ways to fund this growth cheaply.
It can be done with children as well but not as fully nor as easily. Children are physically, biologically, and as a result of these things, financially demanding- that's their biological imperative. They demand resources. We all did, in the process of developing from fetuses into fully functioning, mostly autonomous adults.
There are lots of examples, per above I could go on and on and ON- but as just one example, think about how many times per year you buy clothes. Now multiply that by at least 4. Kids can grow out of clothing at an alarming rate. What fits early this spring will not fit by this summer, and certainly not by next late winter/ early spring. Yes to thrift stores and consignment stores, Freecycle, Craigslist and countless venues for hand me downs. a. Clothes do wear out. b. Kids are tough on clothes and they should be (otherwise you have hermetically sealed your child- not healthy.) Kids' clothes wear out faster than yours. c. You will be competing with all of the other parents in your area for the same pool of used clothing. Buying used clothing and anything else you can reasonably, hygienically incorporate helps, but it does not completely offset the higher cost and consumption inherent in raising kids.
How many times a year do you go to the dr.? Multiply that too, by varying factors. Even if the child remains perfectly healthy all year (good luck on that!) there are inoculations, well baby/well child check ups, etc.
MMM and Mrs. Money Mustache are both stay at home parents for the most part. Child care is huge. I do understand that the $1000/month does not cover child care costs, but there is a ripple effect associated with child care. If the parent who has sole custody, alone, works outside of the home (and in many cases, even if he/she works inside of the home) then the hours that parent has to devote to creating income are pretty much constrained to the hours that child care is available. It can be very difficult for the sole custody parent to generate additional income as needed, in cases of emergency or a heavy expense month, etc. More infrastructure costs then get shifted to the $1000/month child support.
Etc.
Children have a synergistic effect on budgets that goes far beyond the portion of the budget that is actually spent on the child.
There are many, many more examples.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
P.S. My turn to give a standing ovation- to Dragline. Well said!
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
@BecaS: As you put it, I could shoot holes in your argument all day long, but suffice it to say--as I already did--I think you're both wrong and kinda off-topic. The point is that child support payments are decided by an uninvolved third party and have zero bearing on what the parents were actually spending or would have spent. As a parent, the sum I am required to pay to support my own child is no longer in my control. That is called (you guessed it): risk!
I just want to note the irony that this entire discussion originally began in a thread called "ERE and kids" where most people argued that having kids is not that expensive.
We've come full circle.
I just want to note the irony that this entire discussion originally began in a thread called "ERE and kids" where most people argued that having kids is not that expensive.
We've come full circle.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
I find MMM's lifestyle, while skilled, to be perhaps too luxuriant!... I wouldn't argue with you; a divorce would upend their family and their finances. Divorce blows all around, seems like everyone here agrees.
Ok, there are a lot of words there and threats of going on and on, but the only answers I see are clothes and Dr. visits and child care... Child care is for single parents, which I wouldn't wish on any parent or child and I'll do my best to avoid.
I'm pretty much going to dress my kids in rags and ironic joke shirts. Because why not? They're [stupid] babies. Clothes are cheap, and beyond abundant. I'm not taking my kid to the Dr. unless something is truly life threatening. One parent working (her), so not a big deal... Inoculations? Nope.
As far as demanding resources (like what, toys?), I don't really care. They're probably not going to get it until they can use their logic to justify it... Pretty much anything fascinates little kids (here's a twig/box/sock), cost is irrelevant. When they're no longer little kids, the outdoors and books were my favorite activities, both nearly zero cost items.
Ok, there are a lot of words there and threats of going on and on, but the only answers I see are clothes and Dr. visits and child care... Child care is for single parents, which I wouldn't wish on any parent or child and I'll do my best to avoid.
I'm pretty much going to dress my kids in rags and ironic joke shirts. Because why not? They're [stupid] babies. Clothes are cheap, and beyond abundant. I'm not taking my kid to the Dr. unless something is truly life threatening. One parent working (her), so not a big deal... Inoculations? Nope.
As far as demanding resources (like what, toys?), I don't really care. They're probably not going to get it until they can use their logic to justify it... Pretty much anything fascinates little kids (here's a twig/box/sock), cost is irrelevant. When they're no longer little kids, the outdoors and books were my favorite activities, both nearly zero cost items.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Wait a minute. Wow. WOW. Is it a NEWS FLASH for you that in any average budget month, the greater portion of the household budget will go either directly toward the support of the child or children in the household? Is this NEWS to you? a new idea? O.M.G. I need to be more selective in my choice of internet forums. I think I may be too old for this one.
OK, so while we are delivering NEWS FLASHES: YOUR PARENTS WERE "NOT COOL" (not hip, not trendy, whatever) NOT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO BE COOL (hip, trendy, current with the latest greatest must have electronic gadget etc.)
YOUR PARENTS FELL OUT OF STEP/OUT OF STYLE/WHATEVER BECAUSE THEY SPENT ALL OF THE AVAILABLE HOUSEHOLD BUDGET (and some) LAST MONTH (and the month before that, and the month before that, and the month before that... ) KEEPING YOU FROM DYING OF CROUP, BURSTING YOUR EAR DRUM WITH YET ANOTHER EAR INFECTION, PUTTING BRACES ON YOUR TEETH, BUYING YET ANOTHER PAIR OF PRESCRIPTION GLASSES, AND CLOTHING YOUR NAKEDNESS SINCE YOU PERSIST IN GROWING OUT OF CLOTHING AT AN UNREASONABLE RATE.
Egad. It's a new idea here that kids take up more of the monthly budget in any given household than the adults?
I'm in Never Land.
OK, so while we are delivering NEWS FLASHES: YOUR PARENTS WERE "NOT COOL" (not hip, not trendy, whatever) NOT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO BE COOL (hip, trendy, current with the latest greatest must have electronic gadget etc.)
YOUR PARENTS FELL OUT OF STEP/OUT OF STYLE/WHATEVER BECAUSE THEY SPENT ALL OF THE AVAILABLE HOUSEHOLD BUDGET (and some) LAST MONTH (and the month before that, and the month before that, and the month before that... ) KEEPING YOU FROM DYING OF CROUP, BURSTING YOUR EAR DRUM WITH YET ANOTHER EAR INFECTION, PUTTING BRACES ON YOUR TEETH, BUYING YET ANOTHER PAIR OF PRESCRIPTION GLASSES, AND CLOTHING YOUR NAKEDNESS SINCE YOU PERSIST IN GROWING OUT OF CLOTHING AT AN UNREASONABLE RATE.
Egad. It's a new idea here that kids take up more of the monthly budget in any given household than the adults?
I'm in Never Land.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
News flash: Are you aware you are at Early Retirement Extreme.com, not Average Monthly Budget of Dumb Consumeristic Parents.com?
(Also, what JohnnyH said.)
(Also, what JohnnyH said.)
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Also, can we keep the ad hominems limited to my own person, please? My parents were quite cool, thank you very much.BecaS wrote:NEWS FLASHES: YOUR PARENTS WERE "NOT COOL"
(Just kidding... sorta.)
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
I'm neither dumb nor consumer culture, Spartan. And it's apparent to me that you are not a parent. Neither is JohnnyH. We are speaking different languages and it has nothing to do with "dumb" or "consumeristic." It has to do with life experience.
You'll get yours. I'll get the rest of mine. We'll all learn.
In the meantime, WHOOSH! out of here! Things to do. As always, great discussion, thank you for your participation, have a great day!
You'll get yours. I'll get the rest of mine. We'll all learn.
In the meantime, WHOOSH! out of here! Things to do. As always, great discussion, thank you for your participation, have a great day!
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
...Perfect! Back to ad hominems against me, just as I asked.BecaS wrote:It has to do with life experience.
Yes, I'm sure I'm just too lacking in life experience to understand why a fully dependent being 1/4 my size living in my house under my rules would somehow spend more than 100% of my own personal budget ($12,000+/yr), despite all indications (and indeed, testimony from other users on this very site) to the contrary.Have a nice day.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
You have indeed stumbled down a rabbit hole... It is NOT a new idea that a tiny, dependent humans require more expenditures than [hopefully] two mature, independent humans. It's common knowledge... But I (like most here, I'd wager) think nearly all financial common knowledge should be questioned and almost always fully rejected.BecaS wrote:It's a new idea here that kids take up more of the monthly budget in any given household than the adults?
I'm in Never Land.
I am still waiting for the justification of what exactly costs so much... I guess I'll keep waiting because when I ask otherwise rational people why this little naked kid costs so much money they usually reply "You're not a parent! You don't know." I can't imagine? I don't understand basic math, apparently. I guess it touches a nerve to ask figures, because they know they're wasting a lot of money, and often time as well.
So parents who are not cool and have "fallen behind" are good parents? By being in a constant state of rush and poverty they proved their devotion and love? Parents who are "cool" and have leisure time and money for hobbies are therefore selfish bad parents?
-
LiquidSapphire
- Posts: 510
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:40 pm
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
@BecaS - I guess we agree to disagree. I'd really like to see a typical month of spending for a kid where it would regularly exceed $1K/mo not including child care (which is figured separately).
Here's mine:
Food: For two adults we spend $400/mo. The kid is full after half a banana. I think $100/mo would be a pretty accurate estimate, she can eat what we eat. We eat well.
Housing: Cost of an extra bedroom - $200/mo. After all - you'd still have the first bedroom, kitchen, bathroom, etc whether or not you had a kid, right? Our utilities range from $140-$240/month and that includes the extra bedroom. Turning on an extra light bulb and running the bath a few extra times might cost what, an extra $20/mo?
Health Insurance: $0-$100 depending on if it's subsidized through work. The little girl rarely gets sick. She went to urgent care one time last year for the stomach flu. Some kids get sick. A lot. And that's expensive. A lot of kids don't. Ours doesn't. So to make such a blanket statement like that is just not true. It's like saying, "I can't retire because HEALTH INSURANCE!!! WAAAA!" without really investigating what that's all about. I guess you can amortize that to like an extra $20/month for copays or whatever.
Toys/Incidentals/Entertainment/Education: You say kids wear out their clothes. In my experience, not any faster than they grow out of them. And let's say you're right about the clothes thing even. I personally shop at Goodwill. I love it there. I buy all my clothes there except highly specialized stuff which comes from eBay (I just bought a corset for $17 - 4 year olds don't need corsets.) So what's good enough for me isn't good enough for my kid? Am I failing at life if I don't go to Osh Kosh to outfit my kid every 3 months? I don't think so. I go to free city events like county fairs, etc all the time. There's always kid stuff to do for free. And what's wrong with Goodwill toys, etc? I could even buy her something new every single time we go.
Transportation: Well I bike everywhere. I can get a bike trailer. Also the town has a radius of about 5 miles. I figure maybe $25/mo in gas/wear/tear to just drive the kid around. (We'd spend the money if she's just coming somewhere we'd go anyway, and of course insurance $ doesn't change, registration, repairs, etc)
If you add an extra $100 for "shit happens" like school supplies, new shoes, extra medical costs, car seats and other one time expenses like upgrading furniture, I calculate TOTAL COST of around $600 and everything else is extra. So in my scenario, Mom profits $400/mo tax free that, if she doesn't get it, one call to the state and he gets his wages garnished. She doesn't have to spend a single penny on her own kid. Now trips to Europe sound pretty feasible.
And the kid can be ERE because I choose her/him to live the ERE life. Why wouldn't I want to impart my values on my kid? That's basic parenting to show him that life's more than money. I actively WANT the kid to live my ERE life. Maybe she can avoid the mistakes I made in my teens and 20s.
Here's mine:
Food: For two adults we spend $400/mo. The kid is full after half a banana. I think $100/mo would be a pretty accurate estimate, she can eat what we eat. We eat well.
Housing: Cost of an extra bedroom - $200/mo. After all - you'd still have the first bedroom, kitchen, bathroom, etc whether or not you had a kid, right? Our utilities range from $140-$240/month and that includes the extra bedroom. Turning on an extra light bulb and running the bath a few extra times might cost what, an extra $20/mo?
Health Insurance: $0-$100 depending on if it's subsidized through work. The little girl rarely gets sick. She went to urgent care one time last year for the stomach flu. Some kids get sick. A lot. And that's expensive. A lot of kids don't. Ours doesn't. So to make such a blanket statement like that is just not true. It's like saying, "I can't retire because HEALTH INSURANCE!!! WAAAA!" without really investigating what that's all about. I guess you can amortize that to like an extra $20/month for copays or whatever.
Toys/Incidentals/Entertainment/Education: You say kids wear out their clothes. In my experience, not any faster than they grow out of them. And let's say you're right about the clothes thing even. I personally shop at Goodwill. I love it there. I buy all my clothes there except highly specialized stuff which comes from eBay (I just bought a corset for $17 - 4 year olds don't need corsets.) So what's good enough for me isn't good enough for my kid? Am I failing at life if I don't go to Osh Kosh to outfit my kid every 3 months? I don't think so. I go to free city events like county fairs, etc all the time. There's always kid stuff to do for free. And what's wrong with Goodwill toys, etc? I could even buy her something new every single time we go.
Transportation: Well I bike everywhere. I can get a bike trailer. Also the town has a radius of about 5 miles. I figure maybe $25/mo in gas/wear/tear to just drive the kid around. (We'd spend the money if she's just coming somewhere we'd go anyway, and of course insurance $ doesn't change, registration, repairs, etc)
If you add an extra $100 for "shit happens" like school supplies, new shoes, extra medical costs, car seats and other one time expenses like upgrading furniture, I calculate TOTAL COST of around $600 and everything else is extra. So in my scenario, Mom profits $400/mo tax free that, if she doesn't get it, one call to the state and he gets his wages garnished. She doesn't have to spend a single penny on her own kid. Now trips to Europe sound pretty feasible.
And the kid can be ERE because I choose her/him to live the ERE life. Why wouldn't I want to impart my values on my kid? That's basic parenting to show him that life's more than money. I actively WANT the kid to live my ERE life. Maybe she can avoid the mistakes I made in my teens and 20s.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
@LS: Great post once again. I hope you take it as a compliment when I say you're exactly the type of woman I hope to not-marry someday.
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Back for a minute- sorry guys, not being deliberately absent; I don't mind a spirited debate. (Per above, we all learn.)
My "kids" are 30 and 28, and our oldest has his own family now. Details of budget-eating expenses will escape me, sorry. It's been a few years. I do remember what it's like to have more month than money, however, and not because I was a dumb consumer.
To give context, I cloth diapered and breast fed 30 years ago.
We had the first babies and the first grandbabies on either side of the family. Hand me down baby stuff was not falling from the sky onto us like manna. There were some venues for buying used clothing and goods but it was mostly yard sale hit or miss. I am happy that there are many, many more and more viable venues for used baby/kids' goods now. Our son and his wife are using them quite successfully.
I wasn't, am not, a "hobby shopper." To reference the MMM article that Bigato linked above (which, incidentally, was light on numbers as well) I was not strolling down the aisles at Target looking for something cute to buy for my baby.
We were young, we were actually not too long out of college, we were both working, and we had not had a chance to accumulate a nest egg when our kids were born 22 months apart. (We are poster children for the fact that even conscientiously applied birth control can fail. In our case, that was OK. We were happy to start our family young albeit it was somewhat financially challenging.)
We did take a child care expense hit to the budget. That's huge and if you can avoid it, good for you.
Otherwise, expenses were as follows:
Clothing, even cloth diapering when laundered at home, will be an ongoing expense. I don't know what the current thinking is, but I pre-soaked my cloth diapers and washed them in hot water, so that's an expense. Clothing doesn't have to be a huge expense, but it will be ongoing. You'd like to think that you will raise children who are immune to the fashion bullies and to a great extent, you can do so. We did. It is somewhat of a challenge but it can be managed- not without some frustration, however. I encourage you to do so but be prepared for some tearing of hair and gnashing of teeth. And be prepared for that to begin much, much earlier than adolescence. I don't know how or why elementary school children are so consumer products/advertising driven but they were, even 25 years ago. You'll be surprised. Teaching children that they can survive without designer tags is a great lesson that will carry them well through life.
All bets are off when your male children grow into adult sized shoes and grow out of them faster than they can wear them out. That expense was, at times, mind blowing- and we aren't talking about trendy footwear here- we're talking about basic no name tennis shoes and a pair of not tennis shoes from any discount shoe retailer.
"Free public education" is far from it. You'll find out. Fees and fees and fees and some more fees and supplies and field trips and fees. If you home school, your tax dollars will not subsidize your child's education, and you will still have to supply the curriculum and materials. (There may be some tax breaks/rebates for home schoolers, I don't know.)
Medical costs, even with insurance, just for pedestrian illnesses, can sink a monthly budget. The average first grader gets 10 upper respiratory infections per year. That's an average. On a particularly bad year, the number can go higher. Now space two kids 22 months apart. At one point I was on the phone with my pediatrician, in tears, because as soon as one kid got over an ear infection with a fever, the other kid came down with one. I don't think we got clear of ear infections all year that year. The pediatrician pulled my kids' charts and counted up the number of URI's and ear infections we'd had to date as of that teary phone call. We'd not yet hit 20 visits to the pediatrician since the fall began, so we were still below the average number. My boss wasn't particularly receptive to that fact.
Ear infections *hurt.* An ear infection with a fever needs to be seen and treated. I hear you when you say that you won't take your kid to the dr. except in cases of serious illness. There's a big gray area between pedestrian illnesses and viruses that simply need the tincture of time and perhaps some OTC meds, and serious illnesses that obviously need intervention. In that gray area lies the common childhood illnesses that used to kill children, much to our modern horror, as well as the simple medical interventions we enjoy today. Make no mistake- routine illnesses can and do still kill children. Drainage from an ear infection can turn into bronchitis can turn into pneumonia in a baby or a child quicker than you think. You'll be at the pediatrician's office more often than you can imagine.
However- every trip to the dr. is a co-pay or a deductible. Every prescription costs something out of pocket. (Bonus round if you have high deductible/catastrophic type illness policies.) Day cares and schools typically won't take/keep children who are running a fever (and really, if the kid is sick enough that he has a fever, he feels lousy, he needs to be at home.) So there's a day of work that *somebody* is going to miss- mom or dad- unless there is one full-time stay at home parent. (Again, if you can do that, peace.)
Both of our kids had to have surgery to correct basic anatomical issues with their ears and throats. These are structural issues that seem to run on my husband's side of the family. So there's the co-pay for hospital and surgical costs, anesthesia costs, etc.
Both of our kids had inguinal hernias as children- my side of the family. Again, surgical and hospital co-pays.
And these are the "happy correctable" ailments that a lot of families would be thrilled to have as opposed to the health issues with which they must cope.
Bonus round prescription glasses- the child's head is growing, ergo the eyes are growing and changing shape- so vision changes quickly. Prescriptions change quickly. Glasses need to be replaced often. And that's without the kid stepping on them or sitting on them or losing them.
Bonus round orthodontics- our youngest son inherited my overcrowding issues, which my parents chose not to treat in me. I had to have that overcrowding addressed/fixed both surgically and with orthodontics while I was putting myself through college a decade later. (Yeah. I paid for that.) Waiting that decade to treat the problem meant that I lost teeth. I am 54 years old and while I have a beautiful smile, I am still and I will continue to deal with the residual effects of the choice to not pursue orthodontics during the window when my mouth and my skull were malleable and growing. Orthodontic treatment is not all about cosmetics. When I saw that my child had inherited the same mouth, we listened when the dentist referred us to the orthodontist. That child had two rounds of orthodontic treatment, with the first round beginning at 8 years old, the second round beginning at age 12? I think? 13?
Set aside a budget line item for retainers. You'll buy plenty. No matter how much you scream and threaten to glue that retainer to his teeth, the kid will still lose the retainer- and what are you going to do? Let the teeth you just paid thousands of dollars to move drift out of place again? No, you will buy another retainer. Telling your 9 year old to get a job to pay for another retainer doesn't work so well. Yes, you can give your kid "chores" to "help pay for the next retainer" and that may or may not keep him from throwing the next retainer in the trash can with his milk carton at lunch, but it certainly won't bring any more money into your budget.
So limiting sweets and encouraging brushing and flossing will not eliminate nor even mitigate the need for interventional dental care- and dental insurance, typically, is not as comprehensive as medical insurance. (Neither is vision insurance, while we are on that topic.)
Also factor in active kids and ER visits. We were fortunate- our pediatrician happily stitched up our boys in his office, thus saving us the added expense of the ER. Sometimes you can't avoid the ER, however. You just gotta go. Also, pediatricians typically don't treat broken bones. You'll be at the orthopedists for that.
And you'll be at the ENT dr. for ear tubes/ear surgeries.
And at the pediatric surgeon's office for inguinal hernias.
And at the optometrist/opthamologist/optician's office for glasses.
Allergies complicate the stew. Seasonal/pollen allergies are common, and complicate what should be a simple cold. Now it's a cold that won't clear up. HEY! I KNOW! ADD ASTHMA TO THE MIX! Now you are putting an elementary school kid through a series of allergy tests, trying to sort out asthma (which he will hopefully grow out of) from seasonal/pollen/dander/dust allergies. Cue allergy dr. Add a nebulizer and those meds to the mix. Plan on sleeping on the floor next to your child every spring and fall for a number of years so that you will be right there to listen to his breathing, just in case the nebulizer delivered meds aren't taking care of it tonight. If not, you're on your way to the ER for a stronger treatment and perhaps an epinephrine shot. There's another bill.
Speaking of unexpected expenses, HAVE LARGE LARGE FUN WITH YOUR FIRST EXPERIENCE WITH HEAD LICE. You'll need some OTC medication to get rid of the lice. You may need more than one round of more than one type of medication, because lice have become resistant. Your utility bills will spike that month because you will wash everything you own in hot water and bake it in the dryer. Here's hoping that you get rid of the lice in one fell swoop. Here's hoping that all of your child's classmates get rid of the lice all at once as well- OR YOU'RE TREATING FOR LICE AGAIN. Have fun with that!
Lessee, what else?
We haven't even gotten to the "enrichments" category that everyone loves to nail as "consumer driven." Sports, extracurricular activities, pets, etc.
Swim team was a great physical exercise for our son with pediatric/exertional asthma, and both kids enjoyed it. Cue swim suits, goggles, fees, championship fees, and 100 years of your life sitting beside a pool somewhere. Also gas money to drive to pools within a 25 mile radius at least a couple of times a week.
Ditto soccer, football, ballet, whatever.
Yes, parents over-schedule/over-stimulate/over-indulge their kids.
It's probably a good thing, however, in the name of basic socialization, for your kid to have access to some sort of extracurricular involvement, group activity, team sport, etc. Your cost will vary but it will exist.
Kid is having some problem academically? Cue tutoring. You can do it- you can try- we did. We didn't avail ourselves of the corporate tutoring services, and although I can't remember for absolutely sure, I don't think we hired a private tutor for either kid. (Both kids did well academically.) But for those occasional academic challenges, you may find yourself shelling out even more money for your "free public education." One of our kids struggled with either geometry. He almost failed that course that year. He took it again in summer school and got an A. (Go figure.) Summer school, as I recall, wasn't free. And then there were the logistics of summer school- nothing is free. If you are going out of the routine to accommodate a change, rest assured it's going to cost you something- transportation, etc.
Food- not a huge expense when the child is very young but you will be surprised at the amount of calories your kids will consume- looooong before adolescence. Looooong before then.
Notice that we've barely made it to middle school here? We aren't talking about high school. We aren't talking about driving. We aren't talking about the hit to your car insurance when teenagers start driving. We aren't talking about battling high school level peer pressure. We aren't talking about the cost of high school level extra-curricular activities. We sure aren't talking about college. We've barely made it out of elementary school.
Also notice that we are covering very pedestrian topics. There is no catastrophe here- this is every day life.
And that is a less than comprehensive list of the things that occur to me off of the top of my head, years after the fact.
My "kids" are 30 and 28, and our oldest has his own family now. Details of budget-eating expenses will escape me, sorry. It's been a few years. I do remember what it's like to have more month than money, however, and not because I was a dumb consumer.
To give context, I cloth diapered and breast fed 30 years ago.
We had the first babies and the first grandbabies on either side of the family. Hand me down baby stuff was not falling from the sky onto us like manna. There were some venues for buying used clothing and goods but it was mostly yard sale hit or miss. I am happy that there are many, many more and more viable venues for used baby/kids' goods now. Our son and his wife are using them quite successfully.
I wasn't, am not, a "hobby shopper." To reference the MMM article that Bigato linked above (which, incidentally, was light on numbers as well) I was not strolling down the aisles at Target looking for something cute to buy for my baby.
We were young, we were actually not too long out of college, we were both working, and we had not had a chance to accumulate a nest egg when our kids were born 22 months apart. (We are poster children for the fact that even conscientiously applied birth control can fail. In our case, that was OK. We were happy to start our family young albeit it was somewhat financially challenging.)
We did take a child care expense hit to the budget. That's huge and if you can avoid it, good for you.
Otherwise, expenses were as follows:
Clothing, even cloth diapering when laundered at home, will be an ongoing expense. I don't know what the current thinking is, but I pre-soaked my cloth diapers and washed them in hot water, so that's an expense. Clothing doesn't have to be a huge expense, but it will be ongoing. You'd like to think that you will raise children who are immune to the fashion bullies and to a great extent, you can do so. We did. It is somewhat of a challenge but it can be managed- not without some frustration, however. I encourage you to do so but be prepared for some tearing of hair and gnashing of teeth. And be prepared for that to begin much, much earlier than adolescence. I don't know how or why elementary school children are so consumer products/advertising driven but they were, even 25 years ago. You'll be surprised. Teaching children that they can survive without designer tags is a great lesson that will carry them well through life.
All bets are off when your male children grow into adult sized shoes and grow out of them faster than they can wear them out. That expense was, at times, mind blowing- and we aren't talking about trendy footwear here- we're talking about basic no name tennis shoes and a pair of not tennis shoes from any discount shoe retailer.
"Free public education" is far from it. You'll find out. Fees and fees and fees and some more fees and supplies and field trips and fees. If you home school, your tax dollars will not subsidize your child's education, and you will still have to supply the curriculum and materials. (There may be some tax breaks/rebates for home schoolers, I don't know.)
Medical costs, even with insurance, just for pedestrian illnesses, can sink a monthly budget. The average first grader gets 10 upper respiratory infections per year. That's an average. On a particularly bad year, the number can go higher. Now space two kids 22 months apart. At one point I was on the phone with my pediatrician, in tears, because as soon as one kid got over an ear infection with a fever, the other kid came down with one. I don't think we got clear of ear infections all year that year. The pediatrician pulled my kids' charts and counted up the number of URI's and ear infections we'd had to date as of that teary phone call. We'd not yet hit 20 visits to the pediatrician since the fall began, so we were still below the average number. My boss wasn't particularly receptive to that fact.
Ear infections *hurt.* An ear infection with a fever needs to be seen and treated. I hear you when you say that you won't take your kid to the dr. except in cases of serious illness. There's a big gray area between pedestrian illnesses and viruses that simply need the tincture of time and perhaps some OTC meds, and serious illnesses that obviously need intervention. In that gray area lies the common childhood illnesses that used to kill children, much to our modern horror, as well as the simple medical interventions we enjoy today. Make no mistake- routine illnesses can and do still kill children. Drainage from an ear infection can turn into bronchitis can turn into pneumonia in a baby or a child quicker than you think. You'll be at the pediatrician's office more often than you can imagine.
However- every trip to the dr. is a co-pay or a deductible. Every prescription costs something out of pocket. (Bonus round if you have high deductible/catastrophic type illness policies.) Day cares and schools typically won't take/keep children who are running a fever (and really, if the kid is sick enough that he has a fever, he feels lousy, he needs to be at home.) So there's a day of work that *somebody* is going to miss- mom or dad- unless there is one full-time stay at home parent. (Again, if you can do that, peace.)
Both of our kids had to have surgery to correct basic anatomical issues with their ears and throats. These are structural issues that seem to run on my husband's side of the family. So there's the co-pay for hospital and surgical costs, anesthesia costs, etc.
Both of our kids had inguinal hernias as children- my side of the family. Again, surgical and hospital co-pays.
And these are the "happy correctable" ailments that a lot of families would be thrilled to have as opposed to the health issues with which they must cope.
Bonus round prescription glasses- the child's head is growing, ergo the eyes are growing and changing shape- so vision changes quickly. Prescriptions change quickly. Glasses need to be replaced often. And that's without the kid stepping on them or sitting on them or losing them.
Bonus round orthodontics- our youngest son inherited my overcrowding issues, which my parents chose not to treat in me. I had to have that overcrowding addressed/fixed both surgically and with orthodontics while I was putting myself through college a decade later. (Yeah. I paid for that.) Waiting that decade to treat the problem meant that I lost teeth. I am 54 years old and while I have a beautiful smile, I am still and I will continue to deal with the residual effects of the choice to not pursue orthodontics during the window when my mouth and my skull were malleable and growing. Orthodontic treatment is not all about cosmetics. When I saw that my child had inherited the same mouth, we listened when the dentist referred us to the orthodontist. That child had two rounds of orthodontic treatment, with the first round beginning at 8 years old, the second round beginning at age 12? I think? 13?
Set aside a budget line item for retainers. You'll buy plenty. No matter how much you scream and threaten to glue that retainer to his teeth, the kid will still lose the retainer- and what are you going to do? Let the teeth you just paid thousands of dollars to move drift out of place again? No, you will buy another retainer. Telling your 9 year old to get a job to pay for another retainer doesn't work so well. Yes, you can give your kid "chores" to "help pay for the next retainer" and that may or may not keep him from throwing the next retainer in the trash can with his milk carton at lunch, but it certainly won't bring any more money into your budget.
So limiting sweets and encouraging brushing and flossing will not eliminate nor even mitigate the need for interventional dental care- and dental insurance, typically, is not as comprehensive as medical insurance. (Neither is vision insurance, while we are on that topic.)
Also factor in active kids and ER visits. We were fortunate- our pediatrician happily stitched up our boys in his office, thus saving us the added expense of the ER. Sometimes you can't avoid the ER, however. You just gotta go. Also, pediatricians typically don't treat broken bones. You'll be at the orthopedists for that.
And you'll be at the ENT dr. for ear tubes/ear surgeries.
And at the pediatric surgeon's office for inguinal hernias.
And at the optometrist/opthamologist/optician's office for glasses.
Allergies complicate the stew. Seasonal/pollen allergies are common, and complicate what should be a simple cold. Now it's a cold that won't clear up. HEY! I KNOW! ADD ASTHMA TO THE MIX! Now you are putting an elementary school kid through a series of allergy tests, trying to sort out asthma (which he will hopefully grow out of) from seasonal/pollen/dander/dust allergies. Cue allergy dr. Add a nebulizer and those meds to the mix. Plan on sleeping on the floor next to your child every spring and fall for a number of years so that you will be right there to listen to his breathing, just in case the nebulizer delivered meds aren't taking care of it tonight. If not, you're on your way to the ER for a stronger treatment and perhaps an epinephrine shot. There's another bill.
Speaking of unexpected expenses, HAVE LARGE LARGE FUN WITH YOUR FIRST EXPERIENCE WITH HEAD LICE. You'll need some OTC medication to get rid of the lice. You may need more than one round of more than one type of medication, because lice have become resistant. Your utility bills will spike that month because you will wash everything you own in hot water and bake it in the dryer. Here's hoping that you get rid of the lice in one fell swoop. Here's hoping that all of your child's classmates get rid of the lice all at once as well- OR YOU'RE TREATING FOR LICE AGAIN. Have fun with that!
Lessee, what else?
We haven't even gotten to the "enrichments" category that everyone loves to nail as "consumer driven." Sports, extracurricular activities, pets, etc.
Swim team was a great physical exercise for our son with pediatric/exertional asthma, and both kids enjoyed it. Cue swim suits, goggles, fees, championship fees, and 100 years of your life sitting beside a pool somewhere. Also gas money to drive to pools within a 25 mile radius at least a couple of times a week.
Ditto soccer, football, ballet, whatever.
Yes, parents over-schedule/over-stimulate/over-indulge their kids.
It's probably a good thing, however, in the name of basic socialization, for your kid to have access to some sort of extracurricular involvement, group activity, team sport, etc. Your cost will vary but it will exist.
Kid is having some problem academically? Cue tutoring. You can do it- you can try- we did. We didn't avail ourselves of the corporate tutoring services, and although I can't remember for absolutely sure, I don't think we hired a private tutor for either kid. (Both kids did well academically.) But for those occasional academic challenges, you may find yourself shelling out even more money for your "free public education." One of our kids struggled with either geometry. He almost failed that course that year. He took it again in summer school and got an A. (Go figure.) Summer school, as I recall, wasn't free. And then there were the logistics of summer school- nothing is free. If you are going out of the routine to accommodate a change, rest assured it's going to cost you something- transportation, etc.
Food- not a huge expense when the child is very young but you will be surprised at the amount of calories your kids will consume- looooong before adolescence. Looooong before then.
Notice that we've barely made it to middle school here? We aren't talking about high school. We aren't talking about driving. We aren't talking about the hit to your car insurance when teenagers start driving. We aren't talking about battling high school level peer pressure. We aren't talking about the cost of high school level extra-curricular activities. We sure aren't talking about college. We've barely made it out of elementary school.
Also notice that we are covering very pedestrian topics. There is no catastrophe here- this is every day life.
And that is a less than comprehensive list of the things that occur to me off of the top of my head, years after the fact.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Can I respectfully request that we move the discussion of child care costs to the original "ERE and Kids" thread (as linked to in the first post of this thread) or start a new thread?
I am interested in the topic of what it costs to raise a child, and I can see how it vaguely relates to this thread, but ultimately I think it's a separate discussion. I don't even want to start responding to your post, @BecaS, because there's so much content there that I'm sure it would continue to derail the thread if I responded properly. (I also think that conversation would benefit from participants who have long since given up on this particular thread.)
Regardless of what child care actually costs, in the context of this thread, can we agree that in the event of divorce the cost of child care payments is decided arbitrarily by an uninvolved third party and is not at all related to what the parents were actually spending or would have spent? Therefore, as a parent, the sum I pay to support my own child is no longer in my control as it would be without a divorce.
Can we agree that that is a valid risk in the event of divorce?
I am interested in the topic of what it costs to raise a child, and I can see how it vaguely relates to this thread, but ultimately I think it's a separate discussion. I don't even want to start responding to your post, @BecaS, because there's so much content there that I'm sure it would continue to derail the thread if I responded properly. (I also think that conversation would benefit from participants who have long since given up on this particular thread.)
Regardless of what child care actually costs, in the context of this thread, can we agree that in the event of divorce the cost of child care payments is decided arbitrarily by an uninvolved third party and is not at all related to what the parents were actually spending or would have spent? Therefore, as a parent, the sum I pay to support my own child is no longer in my control as it would be without a divorce.
Can we agree that that is a valid risk in the event of divorce?
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
Sure. Move my post/this part of the thread to whatever part of the forum you deem appropriate. Delete it if you wish.
JohnnyH said that he was still waiting for an explanation as to why children are so expensive, with some actual numbers.
I no longer have the numbers but I was able to pull up a handful of examples without much thought.
The scary thing is, that's the abridged version. God help us all if I'd gone for the details. Right off the top of my head I am aware of the various larger expenses that I didn't address because it would have been waaay too much.
If I sat and thought and thought I'd come up with even more examples.
Liquid Sapphire, again, I am not intentionally picking on you- but per my "Cliff's Notes" examples above, you can easily see why $100/month for incidentals/unexpected expenses could get blown out of the water on the first day.
If anything, I hope that those of you at the beginning of this process can augment your planning such that these "regular life events" (and it was all pedestrian, trust me, these are not the horror stories by a wide margin) won't blow up your financial planning too much.
Also, Spartan, you are asking and asking why the courts seem to weigh in heavily on the side of women and children. Extrapolate a little bit. If the mother has custody, or even if there is joint custody, can you see how the courts may pressure the higher wage earner/deeper assets partner (former partner) to ante up? Not because they are being gender biased or simply evil but because expenses can be far greater than you would believe. What you consider to be an unfair amount might simply be what it takes to get through the month, should anything at all go other than planned.
Also, let me gently remind you, JohnnyH asked, and you sent a barb armed with the term Dumb Consumeristic Parents in my general direction.
Our budget challenges and the fact that our children's needs often ate the majority of the monthly budget had little to do with dumb consumerism.
But move my response to any thread you deem appropriate, or delete it if you like. I am not emotionally wedded to this thread.
JohnnyH said that he was still waiting for an explanation as to why children are so expensive, with some actual numbers.
I no longer have the numbers but I was able to pull up a handful of examples without much thought.
The scary thing is, that's the abridged version. God help us all if I'd gone for the details. Right off the top of my head I am aware of the various larger expenses that I didn't address because it would have been waaay too much.
If I sat and thought and thought I'd come up with even more examples.
Liquid Sapphire, again, I am not intentionally picking on you- but per my "Cliff's Notes" examples above, you can easily see why $100/month for incidentals/unexpected expenses could get blown out of the water on the first day.
If anything, I hope that those of you at the beginning of this process can augment your planning such that these "regular life events" (and it was all pedestrian, trust me, these are not the horror stories by a wide margin) won't blow up your financial planning too much.
Also, Spartan, you are asking and asking why the courts seem to weigh in heavily on the side of women and children. Extrapolate a little bit. If the mother has custody, or even if there is joint custody, can you see how the courts may pressure the higher wage earner/deeper assets partner (former partner) to ante up? Not because they are being gender biased or simply evil but because expenses can be far greater than you would believe. What you consider to be an unfair amount might simply be what it takes to get through the month, should anything at all go other than planned.
Also, let me gently remind you, JohnnyH asked, and you sent a barb armed with the term Dumb Consumeristic Parents in my general direction.
Our budget challenges and the fact that our children's needs often ate the majority of the monthly budget had little to do with dumb consumerism.
But move my response to any thread you deem appropriate, or delete it if you like. I am not emotionally wedded to this thread.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down
I don't have any authority to move anything. I'm just saying we could continue this in a different thread. But I'm also too lazy to start one.
Forgive the dumb consumerist parent comment. That was beneath me. My patience and corresponding filter expired somewhere around page 8 of the constant similar "subtle" ad hominems directed at me. Likewise why I'm in no hurry to start another thread.
I'm just here for the ride at this point.
Forgive the dumb consumerist parent comment. That was beneath me. My patience and corresponding filter expired somewhere around page 8 of the constant similar "subtle" ad hominems directed at me. Likewise why I'm in no hurry to start another thread.
No. Sorry. I still in no way accept that you are correct about what constitutes reasonable costs for children. Some of it struck me as legit (e.g. orthodontia), but a lot of what you mentioned are the very same things that adults complain about and cite as impossible barriers to ERE lifestyles. Correspondingly, these expenses can be reduced for children by the same techniques we use as adults. I could go line by line and pick apart everything you said (Kids' shoes? Please, I just bought new sneakers for $10. Prescription glasses? Get em online, $20. Washing diapers in hot water? Maybe $5/mo increased electricity/water. Also, my sister and I were never near as sick as your kids! I might've gone to the doctor three or four times a year, and even less when I reached school age. Et cetera...) but like I said, that was a lot of content, and I don't think it relates directly to the thread--although, as you say, it was requested. If that's the direction this is going, why not.BecaS wrote:Not because they are being gender biased or simply evil but because expenses can be far greater than you would believe. What you consider to be an unfair amount might simply be what it takes to get through the month, should anything at all go other than planned.
I'm just here for the ride at this point.