We had 2 kids who are now 5 and 7 when we were 38 and 39. We are ER (not ERE) since last December. I have tracked all the costs for our kids. Yes, I'm a little bit crazy.
The total was $149,692. This does not include increased premium costs for healthcare or the tax benefit and FSA deductions. It also doesn't include additional costs for food (mostly milk) but does include diapers. We didn't buy a new house but we did buy a new (used) car to have a second car ($13,143). Most of the cost was child care $113,822. We lived in Chicago. This was my Mom caring for them the first 18 months of both their lives and then going to a decent quality day care center. The older one had a couple years of school but still needed aftercare; but that was a lot cheaper.
Lost salary because I took 3 months off for both and ran out of vacation and disability ($9325).
One other note. My second was in the hospital for a month after he was born and needed surgery. We had the equivalent of an HMO at that point and paid zero out of pocket at the hospital. Follow-up visits had a copay and there was some therapy but our out of pocket medical for the kids (not counting premiums) was $2547. There were also ER visits and other random hospital overnights. All of that is very expensive but worked out relatively well for us. Now with catastrophic healthcare coverage we are hoping to stay healthy and lucky but should be able to handle it. Since we moved onto the boat, our kid-related expenses have gone down.
Kids on ERE
Re: Kids on ERE
If you take out child care costs, lost pay, and the car, we averaged about $159 a month over 7 years (with almost 5.5 years covering 2 kids). So that would be assuming a stay-at-home parent. We did used furniture and clothes. Total clothing costs were $1468.Triangle wrote:I'd say $100/mo might be a little low. Depends a lot on circumstances, but $200 should cover the average, I think.
Re: Kids on ERE
So fantastic, Jen10 -thank you! for actual data. Anyway, congrats! You are doing what so many insist is impossible (kid(s) on less than $1k/month). Only $159 in Chicago is indeed impressive.
My cost of living is far less than Chicago, and food production and procurement will be one of my main tasks post ERE... I'd probably get burned at the stake for suggesting this but I think I can raise 2-4 kids on less than $1000/year.
My cost of living is far less than Chicago, and food production and procurement will be one of my main tasks post ERE... I'd probably get burned at the stake for suggesting this but I think I can raise 2-4 kids on less than $1000/year.
Re: Kids on ERE
Hey JohnnyH--thanks for the response. I think less than $1000 is doable, with some diligence and luck, though not easy. Even though our kids have been exposed to friends and have gotten a taste of materialism (toys, games, clothes!, etc.), they are happiest when playing with sticks, sand, and cardboard boxes. Don't underestimate how much they can eat though. When they're going through growth spurts, our boys eat as much as we do now.
Re: Kids on ERE
I have a question that's going to come out snarkier than I intend. Please read this as a genuine question, not as a snark.
I am beginning to realize that there are a lot of young people on this board who want to live their lives differently, who want to make different choices than their parents and/or the generations that have gone before them. You do not want to be wage slaves. I have no problem with this, if that's what you want to do. I think that with effort, and education (not necessarily traditional forms of education) self-awareness and a thick skin/self-inoculation against popular culture, it is entirely possible. Not only is it possible, it has the potential to be hugely rewarding.
That being said- why are you so anxious to bring children into this equation?
As you consider bringing a child into this voluntary lifestyle, think carefully and honestly about the amount of resources your parents invested in you. Do you see a lot of waste there? Are there large chunks of the material infrastructure on which your lives were built that you think you could have lived without? Would have preferred to live without?
I see a lot of references to raising kids to be happy playing with cardboard boxes, sticks and sand and I shudder. Seriously, I shudder. Yes, a child can keep himself occupied with a cardboard box. Yes, it is good and virtuous to encourage children to use their imaginations and their creativity in play as opposed to throwing a bunch of highly marketed plastic at them. I can hear you now saying that instead of the latest video games, your child will have YOU and THAT'S SO MUCH BETTER.
That is true, to a point.
Please remember that play is a child's work. It is how a child learns about the world and all of the things in it. We get one shot at childhood. Whatever is lacking in that childhood tends to go lacking forever. It's hard to get a second shot at childhood.
I don't think it's OK to park a child in front of a video gaming system and use hundreds if not thousands of dollars worth of electronic babysitting. I don't think it's necessary to provide a child with designer labels. I don't think it's wise nor healthy to raise a child immersed in consumer culture.
I also don't think it's OK to park the kid in the back yard and tell him to play with dirt.
No matter how many "free" (paid with tax dollars) or inexpensive (subsidized with tax dollars, purchased second hand, etc.) activities you can access on behalf of your child, it may not be enough to adequately nurture or satisfy a child's growing intellect or curiosity.
No amount of free trips to the art museum is going to take the place of art lessons. No number of free concerts in the park are going to take the place of music lessons. No stash of second hand workbooks are going to take the place of tutoring when it's necessary.
I'm not a proponent of over-scheduling and over-indulging kids, and I certainly wasn't a helicopter parent. My social life didn't revolve around my children's social lives and extracurricular activities. My kids weren't raised in a consumer culture household.
I can't see cutting so close to the bone in terms of providing social and intellectual enrichment for your child, however. I may be wrong, but I sort of doubt that most of you were raised in such a Spartan environment as well.
You are so intent on early retirement and early financial independence that you are willing to live on the margins to do so. Peace. Is it necessary or even advisable to raise children on the margins if you have a viable choice?
I applaud your questioning popular culture in terms of what it takes to successfully raise a child. I perceive, rightly or wrongly, that at least some of you are attempting to replicate the life your parents provided for you for pennies on the dollar. I can applaud that to some extent, but honestly, the numbers you are throwing around here just look, unreal.
Please remember that I am 54 years old, and that I am not looking at it from the perspective of the mother of a 7 year old child, but from the perspective of a mother who raised two kids through college and I am now a grandmother.
Yes, you'll be able to get through many months on a $200/month "kid budget," and even through a handful of years with a $1000/year "kid budget," but over the life of a child, IMHO, those numbers are unrealistic.
If you can raise kids with a $200/month margin in your budget, or for less than $1000/year, and the child is adequately clothed (from Goodwill is fine) fed (on a budget is fine) educated (there are standards, I'm sure you will meet them or people with louder voices than mine and much more authority than I'll ever have will pay you a visit) and enriched (that's between you, your child and whatever higher power to whom you answer) then peace unto you.
I sort of hate to see young people bring another life into the world with the notion that $200/month or $1000/year is an adequate budget for raising a child. I don't know whether I feel worse for you or for the potential child, but it doesn't really matter how I feel about it. Reality has a way of altering the best laid plans.
$1000/year is $18,000/child to reach the age of majority. There are many people on this board who require $18,000/year to live, and that's with conscious and considerable sacrifice.
Yeah, I know, Mr. Money Mustache three people on $18,000/year etc. Please remember, he and his wife and his one child are relatively early in this process. Things will change with time and experience.
In the meantime... mebbe you should take those numbers and sit down with your parents, and ask their opinions and feedback? If nothing else, take an honest look at your own life, at your own collection of life experiences, skill sets, education, hobbies, knowledge base. You weren't born knowing how to play the piano, draw a portrait, speak multiple languages, climb a rock face, swim the 200 meter medley, etc. Someone invested some serious time and resources into your development, enrichment and growth. You won't be able to teach your child about every subject, or to pass onto him every skill set in which he is interested and for which he may have aptitude, and you aren't going to be able to barter with every other skilled/gifted person in the world to teach your kid for pennies on the dollar.
If you can raise a happy, healthy, engaged, enriched little person for $200/month or $1000/year, by all means do that for as long as it works. Just be prepared and able to pay for it when it costs a good deal more than that as well.
/end/
I am beginning to realize that there are a lot of young people on this board who want to live their lives differently, who want to make different choices than their parents and/or the generations that have gone before them. You do not want to be wage slaves. I have no problem with this, if that's what you want to do. I think that with effort, and education (not necessarily traditional forms of education) self-awareness and a thick skin/self-inoculation against popular culture, it is entirely possible. Not only is it possible, it has the potential to be hugely rewarding.
That being said- why are you so anxious to bring children into this equation?
As you consider bringing a child into this voluntary lifestyle, think carefully and honestly about the amount of resources your parents invested in you. Do you see a lot of waste there? Are there large chunks of the material infrastructure on which your lives were built that you think you could have lived without? Would have preferred to live without?
I see a lot of references to raising kids to be happy playing with cardboard boxes, sticks and sand and I shudder. Seriously, I shudder. Yes, a child can keep himself occupied with a cardboard box. Yes, it is good and virtuous to encourage children to use their imaginations and their creativity in play as opposed to throwing a bunch of highly marketed plastic at them. I can hear you now saying that instead of the latest video games, your child will have YOU and THAT'S SO MUCH BETTER.
That is true, to a point.
Please remember that play is a child's work. It is how a child learns about the world and all of the things in it. We get one shot at childhood. Whatever is lacking in that childhood tends to go lacking forever. It's hard to get a second shot at childhood.
I don't think it's OK to park a child in front of a video gaming system and use hundreds if not thousands of dollars worth of electronic babysitting. I don't think it's necessary to provide a child with designer labels. I don't think it's wise nor healthy to raise a child immersed in consumer culture.
I also don't think it's OK to park the kid in the back yard and tell him to play with dirt.
No matter how many "free" (paid with tax dollars) or inexpensive (subsidized with tax dollars, purchased second hand, etc.) activities you can access on behalf of your child, it may not be enough to adequately nurture or satisfy a child's growing intellect or curiosity.
No amount of free trips to the art museum is going to take the place of art lessons. No number of free concerts in the park are going to take the place of music lessons. No stash of second hand workbooks are going to take the place of tutoring when it's necessary.
I'm not a proponent of over-scheduling and over-indulging kids, and I certainly wasn't a helicopter parent. My social life didn't revolve around my children's social lives and extracurricular activities. My kids weren't raised in a consumer culture household.
I can't see cutting so close to the bone in terms of providing social and intellectual enrichment for your child, however. I may be wrong, but I sort of doubt that most of you were raised in such a Spartan environment as well.
You are so intent on early retirement and early financial independence that you are willing to live on the margins to do so. Peace. Is it necessary or even advisable to raise children on the margins if you have a viable choice?
I applaud your questioning popular culture in terms of what it takes to successfully raise a child. I perceive, rightly or wrongly, that at least some of you are attempting to replicate the life your parents provided for you for pennies on the dollar. I can applaud that to some extent, but honestly, the numbers you are throwing around here just look, unreal.
Please remember that I am 54 years old, and that I am not looking at it from the perspective of the mother of a 7 year old child, but from the perspective of a mother who raised two kids through college and I am now a grandmother.
Yes, you'll be able to get through many months on a $200/month "kid budget," and even through a handful of years with a $1000/year "kid budget," but over the life of a child, IMHO, those numbers are unrealistic.
If you can raise kids with a $200/month margin in your budget, or for less than $1000/year, and the child is adequately clothed (from Goodwill is fine) fed (on a budget is fine) educated (there are standards, I'm sure you will meet them or people with louder voices than mine and much more authority than I'll ever have will pay you a visit) and enriched (that's between you, your child and whatever higher power to whom you answer) then peace unto you.
I sort of hate to see young people bring another life into the world with the notion that $200/month or $1000/year is an adequate budget for raising a child. I don't know whether I feel worse for you or for the potential child, but it doesn't really matter how I feel about it. Reality has a way of altering the best laid plans.
$1000/year is $18,000/child to reach the age of majority. There are many people on this board who require $18,000/year to live, and that's with conscious and considerable sacrifice.
Yeah, I know, Mr. Money Mustache three people on $18,000/year etc. Please remember, he and his wife and his one child are relatively early in this process. Things will change with time and experience.
In the meantime... mebbe you should take those numbers and sit down with your parents, and ask their opinions and feedback? If nothing else, take an honest look at your own life, at your own collection of life experiences, skill sets, education, hobbies, knowledge base. You weren't born knowing how to play the piano, draw a portrait, speak multiple languages, climb a rock face, swim the 200 meter medley, etc. Someone invested some serious time and resources into your development, enrichment and growth. You won't be able to teach your child about every subject, or to pass onto him every skill set in which he is interested and for which he may have aptitude, and you aren't going to be able to barter with every other skilled/gifted person in the world to teach your kid for pennies on the dollar.
If you can raise a happy, healthy, engaged, enriched little person for $200/month or $1000/year, by all means do that for as long as it works. Just be prepared and able to pay for it when it costs a good deal more than that as well.
/end/
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
Re: Kids on ERE
Not having kids, I don't really have a dog in this fight.
My only comment is that most mainstream children still end up "average" while having plenty of dollars spent, then is it really a handicap to spend less than "average"?
My only comment is that most mainstream children still end up "average" while having plenty of dollars spent, then is it really a handicap to spend less than "average"?
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17109
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
Re: Kids on ERE
I'll presume that if a given person can figure out how to lead a rich life for a discretionary sum of, say, $1000/year, then their children can also lead a rich life for that sum. Whereas if a given person can't figure it out and lives a life of sacrifice using the same $1000/year, then the same will happen to their children.
I kinda doubt that very many people on these forums aim to sacrifice instead of learning how to spend more efficiently. Usually the "sacrifice" word gets thrown around when contemplating other people who spend less, much like "wasteful" gets thrown around when contemplating other people who spend more.
It's a bit like the difference between being in shape and not being in shape. Getting from out of shape to in shape requires a huge effort, whereas staying in shape requires relatively little effort. Being in shape one can run, say, twice as fast as a person, who is out of shape. Now, the out of shape person may not want to commit to the sacrifice of getting in shape. However, it is a mistake to think that because the inshape person runs twice as fast, that he is still sacrificing.
As for raising children, money only buys so much. Extrovert parents won't be able to pay their way out of interacting with an introvert child. Money will barely compensate here. Non-intellectual parents can't use money to compensate for a generally non-intellectual home atmosphere should they happen to have a bookworm child. At best they can buy a computer and send the kid to private school, but it would be far more helpful to have regular interaction with an intellectual adult.
And so on.
In general, money can only solve a limited amount of problems. It doesn't facilitate much when it comes to personal growth and development. Not nearly as much as the cultural atmosphere that the parents are demonstrating.
Having the best upbringing money can buy doesn't mean much more than having the best friends money can buy.
I kinda doubt that very many people on these forums aim to sacrifice instead of learning how to spend more efficiently. Usually the "sacrifice" word gets thrown around when contemplating other people who spend less, much like "wasteful" gets thrown around when contemplating other people who spend more.
It's a bit like the difference between being in shape and not being in shape. Getting from out of shape to in shape requires a huge effort, whereas staying in shape requires relatively little effort. Being in shape one can run, say, twice as fast as a person, who is out of shape. Now, the out of shape person may not want to commit to the sacrifice of getting in shape. However, it is a mistake to think that because the inshape person runs twice as fast, that he is still sacrificing.
As for raising children, money only buys so much. Extrovert parents won't be able to pay their way out of interacting with an introvert child. Money will barely compensate here. Non-intellectual parents can't use money to compensate for a generally non-intellectual home atmosphere should they happen to have a bookworm child. At best they can buy a computer and send the kid to private school, but it would be far more helpful to have regular interaction with an intellectual adult.
And so on.
In general, money can only solve a limited amount of problems. It doesn't facilitate much when it comes to personal growth and development. Not nearly as much as the cultural atmosphere that the parents are demonstrating.
Having the best upbringing money can buy doesn't mean much more than having the best friends money can buy.
-
jennypenny
- Posts: 6910
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Re: Kids on ERE
@BecaS, I am close to your age. My kids are teens. We are raising our kids in suburbia in the northeast, so a fairly typical middle-class upbringing. I don't think kids need all of those things you describe, and definitely don't cost anywhere near what people say.
What’s wrong with sending the kids out to play? Use a clothesline for a jump rope. A stash of tennis balls means hours of stick ball and other games. Use wire hangers and dish soap to make homemade bubbles. Make ramps to jump over with bikes or skateboards. A collection of used hot wheels, army guys, and camping gear can keep them happy. Honestly, kids don’t really need anything. Mother May I? Red Light Green Light? Capture the Flag? Fun stuff.
I don’t think creativity can be taught. Free play allows for the development of creativity more than any structured activity. When my kids get bored, that’s when they get creative. A couple of years ago they used spare lumber we had to build a trebuchet. They still play with it. (it’s a fun way to dispose of easter eggs
) They spent last summer building an entire city with legos. (another hand-me-down from many different sources) My favorite scene in Apollo 13 is when they dump all of that crap on the table and build an air filter out of it. Do you think they could have done that if they grew up only playing with toys that came with assembly instructions?
They can have all of the material things they need (see the wiki http://earlyretirementextreme.com/wiki/ ... n_%26_Pets ). I just don’t think they have to own something or receive personalized instruction to learn something. When my DD wanted to learn a language, she found a source online. When my boys wanted to build the trebuchet, they found plans in a book on ancient weapons. I taught them how to swim and play soccer. DH lets them take things apart to see how they work. If there is something none of us know, we learn it together. Isn't that how you do it? When I needed to fix my dishwasher I didn’t call a plumber, I watched a video online.
Kids can still play sports and socialize. It just means playing intramural sports instead of those expensive semi-pro travel teams. It might mean picking track or swimming instead of equipment-heavy football and hockey. It means learning how to ice skate on a frozen lake instead of a rink. It means going to youth group instead of the mall, or having movie and pizza night at the house instead of going to the movies. Once they get to middle school and high school the sports and social activities are endless and almost free.
Kids today are less healthy and less intelligent than our generation was at their age. To me, that’s a sign that society is doing something wrong when it comes to parenting. Personally, I think it's a lack of reading, movement, and creativity--all of which are free
What’s wrong with sending the kids out to play? Use a clothesline for a jump rope. A stash of tennis balls means hours of stick ball and other games. Use wire hangers and dish soap to make homemade bubbles. Make ramps to jump over with bikes or skateboards. A collection of used hot wheels, army guys, and camping gear can keep them happy. Honestly, kids don’t really need anything. Mother May I? Red Light Green Light? Capture the Flag? Fun stuff.
I don’t think creativity can be taught. Free play allows for the development of creativity more than any structured activity. When my kids get bored, that’s when they get creative. A couple of years ago they used spare lumber we had to build a trebuchet. They still play with it. (it’s a fun way to dispose of easter eggs
) They spent last summer building an entire city with legos. (another hand-me-down from many different sources) My favorite scene in Apollo 13 is when they dump all of that crap on the table and build an air filter out of it. Do you think they could have done that if they grew up only playing with toys that came with assembly instructions?They can have all of the material things they need (see the wiki http://earlyretirementextreme.com/wiki/ ... n_%26_Pets ). I just don’t think they have to own something or receive personalized instruction to learn something. When my DD wanted to learn a language, she found a source online. When my boys wanted to build the trebuchet, they found plans in a book on ancient weapons. I taught them how to swim and play soccer. DH lets them take things apart to see how they work. If there is something none of us know, we learn it together. Isn't that how you do it? When I needed to fix my dishwasher I didn’t call a plumber, I watched a video online.
Kids can still play sports and socialize. It just means playing intramural sports instead of those expensive semi-pro travel teams. It might mean picking track or swimming instead of equipment-heavy football and hockey. It means learning how to ice skate on a frozen lake instead of a rink. It means going to youth group instead of the mall, or having movie and pizza night at the house instead of going to the movies. Once they get to middle school and high school the sports and social activities are endless and almost free.
Kids today are less healthy and less intelligent than our generation was at their age. To me, that’s a sign that society is doing something wrong when it comes to parenting. Personally, I think it's a lack of reading, movement, and creativity--all of which are free
Re: Kids on ERE
Jacob, by in large I agree with what you said in your reply on this topic.
I speak as an "extroverted introvert," by which I mean that I am mostly an introvert who, by virtue of some choices I have made, is pushed out in front of herself to interact with the world as an extrovert.
I am married to an INTJ male who, by Myers Briggs testing, came out to be the most introverted person in a department of introverted IT professionals. Each person was tested individually but as a part of a department team building exercise. The people in the department were then lined up according to their relative degree of expression of each of the four M-B type indicators. My husband was not only the most introverted person in the IT department- he was so introverted compared to the rest of the introverts, when placed "in the line" the M-B instructors put my husband, not in the actual line up, but out in the hallway by himself. He was very happy out there.
That being said- my husband has developed and finely honed his social skills. People who know him socially would never guess that he is as introverted as he really is.
This is largely an introverted marriage but somebody's got to be the store front. GUESS WHO? Relative to my husband, I *am* THE EXTROVERT because otherwise that part of life would go lacking. Well, maybe not- my husband has honed his social skills- but given the opportunity to delegate it, he will.
The kids are a mixture of introverted and extroverted, much like me. Intellectual? I'd say so.
Now here is the part that we are talking past with each other- trust me, I know this part well. In order for an introvert, particularly an introverted child, to achieve some psychologically healthy, emotionally healthy degree of socialization, there often has to be a structure involved to facilitate it.
An extrovert can socialize purely for socialization's sake. It's not as easy for an introvert.
This experience is the part of me that shudders to think of all you frugal warriors sending your possibly introverted, chip off the old block INTJ or IXXX whatever kids out in the back yard with a soccer ball and calling it good.
Sure, the kid will be happy out there to some extent, but it won't be everything he needs. Or wants, for that matter. Notice that The Husband married me, and sends me out as his infrastructure to fetch up some socialization. Are you, the INTJ parent, prepared to do that for your child? Do you think that will translate well across generations? Is it not healthy for your child to develop some separation from you? A lone soccer ball in the back yard is a poor stand in for a soccer team and a coach and a change of scenery- which may be critical for an introverted child's emotional, psychological and social development.
Even my adult husband does not pull all of his social interactions through me. He pulls some of his social, emotional and psychological supply on his own, as he should as a fully functioning, independent adult- but in order to do so, he relies on structure: service opportunities, common interests, etc. He doesn't just randomly socialize with random people. There has to be an infrastructure to facilitate it.
I encourage all of you INTJ's who contemplate having kids on a shoestring budget to fully examine how you facilitate your social interactions. Then take whatever you spend on your own hobbies and interests and your version of social activities and multiply it by however many kids you think you will have, plus add another factor of one for your spouse. That's what your family expenditure on enrichment will be.
There is no good reason to think that your child's enrichment will cost less than your own. Climbing gear is climbing gear. Little climbing gear is hardly discounted. Besides that, your kid will grow out of junior climbing gear and require larger climbing gear before you take your next breath. Sorta like your kid will grow out of shoes every five minutes.
Maybe you'd better multiply your enrichment costs by a factor of 1.5 for each child to accommodate the "he grew out of it AGAIN" phase.
There are a variety of second hand sports equipment stores and musical instrument stores that cater to this market. Find them before you have your kid. Yes, I know that sounds premature but as soon as your kid enters public kindergarten, the sign up sheets for community soccer and Little League and swim team and dance lessons and music/instrument lessons and drama class and You. Name. It. start coming home in the backpacks. You've got about 5-6 years from Day One in the delivery room to start getting ready for it.
Ask yourself, as you are on your way to your fencing lesson, if it's fair to put your kid outside with a soccer ball, or drop him off at the library on Saturday morning with a library card, and count that as "socialization" or "enrichment."
If you can fund your own enrichment, socialization, hobbies, etc. on $1000/year, and I think that's probably feasible, then multiply that by a factor of number of children. But don't think that you are going to feed that child, clothe him, educate him, *and* socialize/enrich him for $1000/year, or $200/month. That's not realistic. And those are the numbers I see thrown around here.
Again I say, it's more normal than not for kids to eat the majority of the household's monthly budget, including the discretionary budget- and that's true whether you are being thrifty or whether you are overspending on your kids. The difference between thrifty and overspending is the difference between a healthy balance sheet and being butt over tea kettle in debt for most middle income families.
All the thrifty in the world is not going to make raising a child an inexpensive proposition. If you want minimal impact on your ERE goals, get a gold fish. And I do mean, get a gold fish. Don't bother with a tropical tank and for God's sake, don't attempt salt water.
P.S. For those of you introverted parents who are blessed with an extroverted child, don't worry- he won't stay in the back yard by himself for long. He's going over the fence. Keep him busy or be prepared for him to keep himself busy.
I speak as an "extroverted introvert," by which I mean that I am mostly an introvert who, by virtue of some choices I have made, is pushed out in front of herself to interact with the world as an extrovert.
I am married to an INTJ male who, by Myers Briggs testing, came out to be the most introverted person in a department of introverted IT professionals. Each person was tested individually but as a part of a department team building exercise. The people in the department were then lined up according to their relative degree of expression of each of the four M-B type indicators. My husband was not only the most introverted person in the IT department- he was so introverted compared to the rest of the introverts, when placed "in the line" the M-B instructors put my husband, not in the actual line up, but out in the hallway by himself. He was very happy out there.
That being said- my husband has developed and finely honed his social skills. People who know him socially would never guess that he is as introverted as he really is.
This is largely an introverted marriage but somebody's got to be the store front. GUESS WHO? Relative to my husband, I *am* THE EXTROVERT because otherwise that part of life would go lacking. Well, maybe not- my husband has honed his social skills- but given the opportunity to delegate it, he will.
The kids are a mixture of introverted and extroverted, much like me. Intellectual? I'd say so.
Now here is the part that we are talking past with each other- trust me, I know this part well. In order for an introvert, particularly an introverted child, to achieve some psychologically healthy, emotionally healthy degree of socialization, there often has to be a structure involved to facilitate it.
An extrovert can socialize purely for socialization's sake. It's not as easy for an introvert.
This experience is the part of me that shudders to think of all you frugal warriors sending your possibly introverted, chip off the old block INTJ or IXXX whatever kids out in the back yard with a soccer ball and calling it good.
Sure, the kid will be happy out there to some extent, but it won't be everything he needs. Or wants, for that matter. Notice that The Husband married me, and sends me out as his infrastructure to fetch up some socialization. Are you, the INTJ parent, prepared to do that for your child? Do you think that will translate well across generations? Is it not healthy for your child to develop some separation from you? A lone soccer ball in the back yard is a poor stand in for a soccer team and a coach and a change of scenery- which may be critical for an introverted child's emotional, psychological and social development.
Even my adult husband does not pull all of his social interactions through me. He pulls some of his social, emotional and psychological supply on his own, as he should as a fully functioning, independent adult- but in order to do so, he relies on structure: service opportunities, common interests, etc. He doesn't just randomly socialize with random people. There has to be an infrastructure to facilitate it.
I encourage all of you INTJ's who contemplate having kids on a shoestring budget to fully examine how you facilitate your social interactions. Then take whatever you spend on your own hobbies and interests and your version of social activities and multiply it by however many kids you think you will have, plus add another factor of one for your spouse. That's what your family expenditure on enrichment will be.
There is no good reason to think that your child's enrichment will cost less than your own. Climbing gear is climbing gear. Little climbing gear is hardly discounted. Besides that, your kid will grow out of junior climbing gear and require larger climbing gear before you take your next breath. Sorta like your kid will grow out of shoes every five minutes.
Maybe you'd better multiply your enrichment costs by a factor of 1.5 for each child to accommodate the "he grew out of it AGAIN" phase.
There are a variety of second hand sports equipment stores and musical instrument stores that cater to this market. Find them before you have your kid. Yes, I know that sounds premature but as soon as your kid enters public kindergarten, the sign up sheets for community soccer and Little League and swim team and dance lessons and music/instrument lessons and drama class and You. Name. It. start coming home in the backpacks. You've got about 5-6 years from Day One in the delivery room to start getting ready for it.
Ask yourself, as you are on your way to your fencing lesson, if it's fair to put your kid outside with a soccer ball, or drop him off at the library on Saturday morning with a library card, and count that as "socialization" or "enrichment."
If you can fund your own enrichment, socialization, hobbies, etc. on $1000/year, and I think that's probably feasible, then multiply that by a factor of number of children. But don't think that you are going to feed that child, clothe him, educate him, *and* socialize/enrich him for $1000/year, or $200/month. That's not realistic. And those are the numbers I see thrown around here.
Again I say, it's more normal than not for kids to eat the majority of the household's monthly budget, including the discretionary budget- and that's true whether you are being thrifty or whether you are overspending on your kids. The difference between thrifty and overspending is the difference between a healthy balance sheet and being butt over tea kettle in debt for most middle income families.
All the thrifty in the world is not going to make raising a child an inexpensive proposition. If you want minimal impact on your ERE goals, get a gold fish. And I do mean, get a gold fish. Don't bother with a tropical tank and for God's sake, don't attempt salt water.
P.S. For those of you introverted parents who are blessed with an extroverted child, don't worry- he won't stay in the back yard by himself for long. He's going over the fence. Keep him busy or be prepared for him to keep himself busy.
-
jennypenny
- Posts: 6910
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Re: Kids on ERE
Or you could just say no to most of it. They are commercials just like any other ad your kids will see.BecaS wrote: There are a variety of second hand sports equipment stores and musical instrument stores that cater to this market. Find them before you have your kid. Yes, I know that sounds premature but as soon as your kid enters public kindergarten, the sign up sheets for community soccer and Little League and swim team and dance lessons and music/instrument lessons and drama class and You. Name. It. start coming home in the backpacks. You've got about 5-6 years from Day One in the delivery room to start getting ready for it.
I think there are more choices than just alone in the yard or out in a structured environment with other people. Take them to the park when there are other kids around. Arrange play time for them with their friends. If you feel they need structure, then structure their time. There's no need to pay someone to do that for you. They can play sports or dance or play in a band, but they don't need an activity like that every day.BecaS wrote: Ask yourself, as you are on your way to your fencing lesson, if it's fair to put your kid outside with a soccer ball, or drop him off at the library on Saturday morning with a library card, and count that as "socialization" or "enrichment."
And yes, I would call a morning at the library enriching. I don't think enrichment has to be commercialized to count.
-
RealPerson
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:33 pm
Re: Kids on ERE
You'd be surprised how easy it is for your kids to do the stuff you don't want them to do. Even if you don't have a computer, x-box or iPad, their friends do. They will get their hands on these things, whether you want to or not. Then, they can spend countless hours mindlessly wasting away on Facebook, Instagram or the internet in general. So, what is a parent to do? You can try to give them a cardboard box or a box of tennis balls. My kids would drop the box and find their friend's iPod or whatever. I guess you can try and control the situation with parental authority, but that is exhausting and very negative.
We signed the kids up for sports and various activities, such as music lessons. Maybe you don't find these things useful? Then many kids will gravitate to the mind numbing electronics or websites. Mine certainly did. Also, we felt learning music was important for their development. That means instruments, tuition, sheet music, driving to the lessons etc. All of this costs money. Maybe you can avoid these expenses if you live on a remote farm, but for most of us that is not an option. Controlling expenses is very difficult. Just sharing my experience.
We signed the kids up for sports and various activities, such as music lessons. Maybe you don't find these things useful? Then many kids will gravitate to the mind numbing electronics or websites. Mine certainly did. Also, we felt learning music was important for their development. That means instruments, tuition, sheet music, driving to the lessons etc. All of this costs money. Maybe you can avoid these expenses if you live on a remote farm, but for most of us that is not an option. Controlling expenses is very difficult. Just sharing my experience.
Re: Kids on ERE
Bigato, that is truly impressive, and I mean that sincerely. Good for you!
JennyPenny, there is nothing wrong with your kids doing all of those things- in fact, I think it's healthy.
I raised my kids not too far from you.
There's nothing wrong with intermural sports as opposed to the "semi-professional" teams that have sprung up and seem to be de rigueur for raising the modern child. I agree that it is over much.
In fact, right off of the top of my head, I remember kids who grew up with our kids, who rebelled against their parents' strong influence, insistence and proxy competitiveness in signing the kids up for every single thing, or who insisted that their kid continue to pursue those elite activities long after the kid lost interest or worse, was exhausted.
I will tell you that as a child who was largely raised with the "There's the back yard, here's a pail of Legos, go outside, if you are bored you can pull every dandelion in the yard" mentality, whose parents not only chose to skip orthodontics in the name of "the budget" but didn't see the need for team sports, or music lessons, or enrichment outside of six periods of public school, it did have an impact on opportunities that presented themselves to me, or not.
More than the absence of braces on my teeth, more than the absence of designer labels on my clothes, more than the absence of sorority letters on my sweater, more than the absence of a shiny new car just for me in the driveway, the absence of enrichment marked me as a kid whose parents didn't think she was worth the bother. Like it or not, agree with it or not, there is a glass ceiling for kids as well. The kids who are given the enrichment are viewed as cultured, well-rounded, well-educated, and doors open.
I had to scramble- really scramble- to fill in the gaps with activities and achievements that I could cram into the hours I spent at public school, in the hours between when the public school bus dropped me off and the public school bus took me home, because it wasn't in the budget nor in the plan for anyone to pick me up after school if I didn't make the bus.
College applications have entire sections filled with extracurricular activities and interests. Scream that it's not fair all you want- and I may agree with you- but those sections on the applications are still there.
That doesn't mean that you have to sink the budget with professional level gymnastic lessons for Buffy or cart your child all over the globe for some sort of junior soccer league.
It does mean that if you send your kid outside with a hammer, some nails, some boards and a saw and tell him to build a tree fort, that's not going to count as time spent in the Architecture Club or in 4-H. It may be a fine tree fort, but it won't count. Sorry. There has to be something more.
Even if your kid doesn't want to go to college, investing in enrichment opportunities opens the doors to so many possibilities, to so much wisdom from other people, to which your child may not have access otherwise.
It doesn't have to cost a fortune but, over the lifetime of a child, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it's likely to cost more than $1000/year.
I am willing to hear that I have a particular sore spot in this area, based on my own childhood experiences. More than willing to hear it. But I don't think that negates the other points I make.
And I'm not arguing for spending a king's fortune on enrichment for your kids- and I do agree with George the Original One's comment- spending more does not guarantee an above average outcome. Spending less does not guarantee a poor outcome. Not providing enrichment or providing less than adequate enrichment may not give the kid the best outcome either.
Per above, allowing $200/month extra per child in the monthly budget, to include food, clothing, public education fees, enrichment, etc. just doesn't seem like enough money to me.
JennyPenny, there is nothing wrong with your kids doing all of those things- in fact, I think it's healthy.
I raised my kids not too far from you.
There's nothing wrong with intermural sports as opposed to the "semi-professional" teams that have sprung up and seem to be de rigueur for raising the modern child. I agree that it is over much.
In fact, right off of the top of my head, I remember kids who grew up with our kids, who rebelled against their parents' strong influence, insistence and proxy competitiveness in signing the kids up for every single thing, or who insisted that their kid continue to pursue those elite activities long after the kid lost interest or worse, was exhausted.
I will tell you that as a child who was largely raised with the "There's the back yard, here's a pail of Legos, go outside, if you are bored you can pull every dandelion in the yard" mentality, whose parents not only chose to skip orthodontics in the name of "the budget" but didn't see the need for team sports, or music lessons, or enrichment outside of six periods of public school, it did have an impact on opportunities that presented themselves to me, or not.
More than the absence of braces on my teeth, more than the absence of designer labels on my clothes, more than the absence of sorority letters on my sweater, more than the absence of a shiny new car just for me in the driveway, the absence of enrichment marked me as a kid whose parents didn't think she was worth the bother. Like it or not, agree with it or not, there is a glass ceiling for kids as well. The kids who are given the enrichment are viewed as cultured, well-rounded, well-educated, and doors open.
I had to scramble- really scramble- to fill in the gaps with activities and achievements that I could cram into the hours I spent at public school, in the hours between when the public school bus dropped me off and the public school bus took me home, because it wasn't in the budget nor in the plan for anyone to pick me up after school if I didn't make the bus.
College applications have entire sections filled with extracurricular activities and interests. Scream that it's not fair all you want- and I may agree with you- but those sections on the applications are still there.
That doesn't mean that you have to sink the budget with professional level gymnastic lessons for Buffy or cart your child all over the globe for some sort of junior soccer league.
It does mean that if you send your kid outside with a hammer, some nails, some boards and a saw and tell him to build a tree fort, that's not going to count as time spent in the Architecture Club or in 4-H. It may be a fine tree fort, but it won't count. Sorry. There has to be something more.
Even if your kid doesn't want to go to college, investing in enrichment opportunities opens the doors to so many possibilities, to so much wisdom from other people, to which your child may not have access otherwise.
It doesn't have to cost a fortune but, over the lifetime of a child, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it's likely to cost more than $1000/year.
I am willing to hear that I have a particular sore spot in this area, based on my own childhood experiences. More than willing to hear it. But I don't think that negates the other points I make.
And I'm not arguing for spending a king's fortune on enrichment for your kids- and I do agree with George the Original One's comment- spending more does not guarantee an above average outcome. Spending less does not guarantee a poor outcome. Not providing enrichment or providing less than adequate enrichment may not give the kid the best outcome either.
Per above, allowing $200/month extra per child in the monthly budget, to include food, clothing, public education fees, enrichment, etc. just doesn't seem like enough money to me.
-
jennypenny
- Posts: 6910
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Re: Kids on ERE
DD plays the flute. They all do track, boxing, and MMA. DS plays soccer. They have iThings. We own an xbox. We've just worked together as a family to find a way to do it inexpensively. Basically, each kid gets a budget each season to spend how they wish. They have gotten pretty good at budgeting and tracking down used or free equipment from friends to stretch their budgets further. They even trade to save money (DD trades babysitting the instructor's kids for free warrior fit classes).
I know that it sucks to be the one to have to say no, but I don't see saying no to these items as any different than saying no to Happy Meals or plastic crap toys or watching mindless TV. And I'm not talking about saying no to everything. DD started applying to colleges this week. She has plenty of extracurricular activities on her applications.
I don't feel I'm denying them anything. I'm certainly not doing this because I can't be bothered to see to their enrichment. I'm teaching them that social interaction and personal enrichment are not something you go out and purchase.
I know that it sucks to be the one to have to say no, but I don't see saying no to these items as any different than saying no to Happy Meals or plastic crap toys or watching mindless TV. And I'm not talking about saying no to everything. DD started applying to colleges this week. She has plenty of extracurricular activities on her applications.
I don't feel I'm denying them anything. I'm certainly not doing this because I can't be bothered to see to their enrichment. I'm teaching them that social interaction and personal enrichment are not something you go out and purchase.
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17109
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
Re: Kids on ERE
@BecaS -
I think an important part of combining kids with ERE is for the parents to be able to be a much larger part of their children's lives than is the case for the typical full careered parents who simply do not have the time beyond a couple of hours per day. Hence, I don't think it's a choice between dropping the kid off at the $200/month Mandarin-conducted hockey class vs dropping the kid off at the $0/month library/backyard because mom/dad is too busy doing other stuff.
In ERE there's much less "dropping off".
Another difference between ERE and others is the ability to insource instead of outsource. Going with the above suggestions, I can certainly teach a kid enough music lessons (for absolutely free) to figure out whether the kid is actually interested in committing to serious practice that warrants money down for a better teacher or whether it was just a 1-2 year fad. Ditto for swimming, hockey, and fencing. Soccer and basketball can be played in the park. If the kid shows dedication, THEN we can pay for travel-team.
I'll pay for education. I won't pay for entertainment.
If the kid wants a smartphone, they can get a job to pay for it.
Apparently some of the most mature, responsible, and well-adjusted kids are those who go cruising (sailboat) full time with their parents for years---spending their first decade on a boat. They can stand single watch at age 12 and run the boat at age 15. I just have to contrast that with the typical suburban kid many of whom don't seem to mature until they leave college.
Which brings me back to life-skills. An ERE household should have a ton of them practiced by the parents and involving the kids. Conversely, a normal household has almost none. How many kids know how to fry an egg these days? How many adults? How many adults do their own taxes? It's middle school math. And yet most don't know.
So my idea is that rather than dropping the kids of for organized entertainment in the name of cultural enrichment I would involve them in the ERE household (which is a much richer place than the typical consumer household) according to their level of responsibility from a young age. Let them practice being an adult hopefully growing into one.
I think this is a much better solution than the current idea of raising kids which really seems to be more about entertaining kids for the next 20 years to avoid them getting into trouble given a general lack of oversight. That's not to say I'm excluding any organized activities ... just that they will only take up as much time as, say, the children cooking dinner tends to do in a normal household. A mirror image.
I think an important part of combining kids with ERE is for the parents to be able to be a much larger part of their children's lives than is the case for the typical full careered parents who simply do not have the time beyond a couple of hours per day. Hence, I don't think it's a choice between dropping the kid off at the $200/month Mandarin-conducted hockey class vs dropping the kid off at the $0/month library/backyard because mom/dad is too busy doing other stuff.
In ERE there's much less "dropping off".
Another difference between ERE and others is the ability to insource instead of outsource. Going with the above suggestions, I can certainly teach a kid enough music lessons (for absolutely free) to figure out whether the kid is actually interested in committing to serious practice that warrants money down for a better teacher or whether it was just a 1-2 year fad. Ditto for swimming, hockey, and fencing. Soccer and basketball can be played in the park. If the kid shows dedication, THEN we can pay for travel-team.
I'll pay for education. I won't pay for entertainment.
If the kid wants a smartphone, they can get a job to pay for it.
Apparently some of the most mature, responsible, and well-adjusted kids are those who go cruising (sailboat) full time with their parents for years---spending their first decade on a boat. They can stand single watch at age 12 and run the boat at age 15. I just have to contrast that with the typical suburban kid many of whom don't seem to mature until they leave college.
Which brings me back to life-skills. An ERE household should have a ton of them practiced by the parents and involving the kids. Conversely, a normal household has almost none. How many kids know how to fry an egg these days? How many adults? How many adults do their own taxes? It's middle school math. And yet most don't know.
So my idea is that rather than dropping the kids of for organized entertainment in the name of cultural enrichment I would involve them in the ERE household (which is a much richer place than the typical consumer household) according to their level of responsibility from a young age. Let them practice being an adult hopefully growing into one.
I think this is a much better solution than the current idea of raising kids which really seems to be more about entertaining kids for the next 20 years to avoid them getting into trouble given a general lack of oversight. That's not to say I'm excluding any organized activities ... just that they will only take up as much time as, say, the children cooking dinner tends to do in a normal household. A mirror image.
Re: Kids on ERE
"DD plays the flute. They all do track, boxing, and MMA. DS plays soccer. They have iThings. We own an xbox. We've just worked together as a family to find a way to do it inexpensively. Basically, each kid gets a budget each season to spend how they wish. They have gotten pretty good at budgeting and tracking down used or free equipment from friends to stretch their budgets further. They even trade to save money (DD trades babysitting the instructor's kids for free warrior fit classes)."
JennyPenny, that is *awesome.* I wish you were my mom, and I'm not being snarky.
Our kids did track, cross country, swim team, Little League briefly, and community soccer briefly. Swim team ended up being the only sport outside of intramurals.
Our youngest took most of his music lessons through band at school, but we did go outside of school as he grew older to provide some double reed lessons (bassoon) and some additional percussion lessons.
JennyPenny, I think we are more on the same page than not. And I'm not trying to bust anybody's chops here- I just hate to see people walk blindly into "this figure will be enough" when I'm sitting here knowing that it won't. And this is from a woman who cut everybody's hair to save money, and whose kids still cut their own hair as adults to save money.
JennyPenny, that is *awesome.* I wish you were my mom, and I'm not being snarky.
Our kids did track, cross country, swim team, Little League briefly, and community soccer briefly. Swim team ended up being the only sport outside of intramurals.
Our youngest took most of his music lessons through band at school, but we did go outside of school as he grew older to provide some double reed lessons (bassoon) and some additional percussion lessons.
JennyPenny, I think we are more on the same page than not. And I'm not trying to bust anybody's chops here- I just hate to see people walk blindly into "this figure will be enough" when I'm sitting here knowing that it won't. And this is from a woman who cut everybody's hair to save money, and whose kids still cut their own hair as adults to save money.
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17109
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
Re: Kids on ERE
I think the this is the source of the problem. How do you know people walk into it blindly? How do you know it won't be enough?BecaS wrote:And I'm not trying to bust anybody's chops here- I just hate to see people walk blindly into "this figure will be enough" when I'm sitting here knowing that it won't.
Hundreds of people have told me some variation of.---that my annual expense is "not enough to live [well] on" and "therefore my life sucks and is one of sacrifice". This is strictly based on observing my annual expense level and extrapolating their own skills based on that. In reality, say based on pictures, or visiting, or talking about activities, neither I nor them can tell why it is that some of them spend 3--6 times as much as I do for the same standard of living.
What they really mean is that they don't know how to live well on that amount and if they did it would suck and they would have to sacrifice.
I always find myself resorting to stupid metaphors when trying to explain this ... but consider multiplication ...
Suppose most people don't know what 4*9 is without grabbing a pocket calculator or going 9+9 is 18 plus 9 is 27 plus 9 is 36. Adding is time-consuming, so in this world most people use a calculator.
Suppose someone has memorized the answer: 36. This person does not need a calculator. Also he requires no effort to arrive at the answer. Assume that such memorization is quite rare and thus quite unbelievable.
Now, here's what happens. Most people will think that the person who has memorized the table and goes without a calculator is living a life of sacrifice because they think he has to add up all the number 3+3+3+3+3+3... every time he is posed with 3*6. They will say they are not willing to go to the extreme of not using a calculator; that they prefer their higher calculator-standard lifestyle; that they won't sacrifice.
It will be inconceivable to them that someone went through the effort of memorizing the entire table and thus currently do not see multiplication as requiring any effort at all---in fact it's better than using a calculator. It might even be inconceivable that it's possible to memorize 100 numbers.
This divide is very similar when it comes to ERE and dollar figures. It's simply a fact that my dollar goes about four times further on average than my neighbor's. Sometimes it goes ten times further. With no effort on my part. It's just that I know more than he does. Just as someone might know the multiplication table and someone else does not.
So maybe having a kid is like 434*72 ... and we don't have calculators. And you know 434*72 is a big number and seeing that we don't have calculators, you think we might be blind to that number. But we're not.
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
Re: Kids on ERE
LOL, I am the child who went over the fence. Mom was okay with that most of the time.BecaS wrote:P.S. For those of you introverted parents who are blessed with an extroverted child, don't worry- he won't stay in the back yard by himself for long. He's going over the fence. Keep him busy or be prepared for him to keep himself busy.
In 1964, when I was two, I-5 was being built in North Portland. I went across the street and down onto the construction site to play with the big Tonka toys. Gave her a fright because she didn't see me slip out of the house! Yeah, there was a call to the police ... workmen found me and took me to a house on the opposite side of the freeway where some lady fed me cookies.
When I was four, during my bath, mom turned her back for a minute and I went out the window to go play with the kids up the street. She caught me naked on the street before I'd gotten more than a block.
When I was five, I walked on my own across the bridge over the freeway to the Albertson's store and bought myself a slingshot for a dime. Nobody knew I was gone, though I think somebody finally got curious about where the slingshot came from.
Moved to the rural suburb of Aloha, parents divorced, and I learned to ride a bicycle when I was in first grade. Significantly increased my traveling range. With a bicycle, I could go a couple miles in all directions.
By second grade, Mom had enough confidence in me that my basic instructions were "be home on time" and "stay out of trouble". She encouraged independence. Most of the other kids in the neighborhood had similar freedoms. We ranged all over the place, didn't fight much, and generally had a good time with virtually no structure. A lack of structure does work.
Re: Kids on ERE
I don't have kids and never will so my wisdom in this area might be limited.
I turned out okay and never had drawing/music/mandarin lessons. We didn't have money for that. Despite growing up in modest means I speak two languages, obtained a graduate degree (scholarship), have a super fancy title at work (suffer a bit of imposter syndrome). What's the definition of success, the number on your paycheck or the title on a business card? Is it the number of kids one has and their titles and paychecks?
A well-raised child in my mind is one that is smart, self-sufficient and kind (compassionate/empathetic or whatever one might call it).
Assuming I turned out okay they key factors in my case are: smart parents who were always reading and encouraging me to do the same, working to earn money from a young age so I appreciated the value of a dollar (cliche but true) and exposure to ideas and people by living on both the east and west coasts. I caught fish and crabs and sold them to my mother. I helped in the garden and learned about plants. My free time in high school was taken up by theater (both school and community) and I waited tables from the age of 16 until I finished college.
I guess all this is to say that there are a million factors at play as to how a child turns out and store-bought toys and formal lessons are only one way of many to approach it.
I turned out okay and never had drawing/music/mandarin lessons. We didn't have money for that. Despite growing up in modest means I speak two languages, obtained a graduate degree (scholarship), have a super fancy title at work (suffer a bit of imposter syndrome). What's the definition of success, the number on your paycheck or the title on a business card? Is it the number of kids one has and their titles and paychecks?
A well-raised child in my mind is one that is smart, self-sufficient and kind (compassionate/empathetic or whatever one might call it).
Assuming I turned out okay they key factors in my case are: smart parents who were always reading and encouraging me to do the same, working to earn money from a young age so I appreciated the value of a dollar (cliche but true) and exposure to ideas and people by living on both the east and west coasts. I caught fish and crabs and sold them to my mother. I helped in the garden and learned about plants. My free time in high school was taken up by theater (both school and community) and I waited tables from the age of 16 until I finished college.
I guess all this is to say that there are a million factors at play as to how a child turns out and store-bought toys and formal lessons are only one way of many to approach it.
Re: Kids on ERE
Jacob, knowledge is good leverage, and leverage makes a dollar work harder. There is no doubt about that.
You could have used a short cut in your example by comparing a person using an abacus to a person using an algorithm.
An algorithm is typically more powerful than an abacus, due to its cargo carrying capability, i.e. the leverage involved in an algorithm. Understood.
That being said, I'm still not convinced that any amount of thriftiness or cleverness or "cargo carrying capacity" can stretch X number of dollars past a finite cargo carrying capacity. At some point you simply need more money.
Children are, by their very nature, by their very business of growing and growing up, resource consumption intensive.
Beyond that, it's impossible for you to be all things to your child. I'm not a huge proponent of "It Takes a Village" for various reasons, but it does take more intellectual input and more intellectual stimulation than can typically be provided by the child's parents.
You can DIY many, many things. You can DIY many, many aspects of raising a child, and I applaud this. I agree that too many people work too many hours to provide *things* for their kids, when the kids would benefit more from time with parents and most from experiences and intellectual stimulation over things.
However, a bunch of DIY parenting, as valuable as it is, and I am not arguing against that value, will not provide all of the enrichment that a child can absorb in the process of growing up.
And providing that enrichment, in my opinion, plus feeding, clothing, educating, providing medical care for that child is going to cost more than $200/month or $1000/year over the course of that child's life.
You could have used a short cut in your example by comparing a person using an abacus to a person using an algorithm.
An algorithm is typically more powerful than an abacus, due to its cargo carrying capability, i.e. the leverage involved in an algorithm. Understood.
That being said, I'm still not convinced that any amount of thriftiness or cleverness or "cargo carrying capacity" can stretch X number of dollars past a finite cargo carrying capacity. At some point you simply need more money.
Children are, by their very nature, by their very business of growing and growing up, resource consumption intensive.
Beyond that, it's impossible for you to be all things to your child. I'm not a huge proponent of "It Takes a Village" for various reasons, but it does take more intellectual input and more intellectual stimulation than can typically be provided by the child's parents.
You can DIY many, many things. You can DIY many, many aspects of raising a child, and I applaud this. I agree that too many people work too many hours to provide *things* for their kids, when the kids would benefit more from time with parents and most from experiences and intellectual stimulation over things.
However, a bunch of DIY parenting, as valuable as it is, and I am not arguing against that value, will not provide all of the enrichment that a child can absorb in the process of growing up.
And providing that enrichment, in my opinion, plus feeding, clothing, educating, providing medical care for that child is going to cost more than $200/month or $1000/year over the course of that child's life.
Re: Kids on ERE
$200/month is what we pay alone out of pocket for speech therapy costs not covered by insurance for my child with significant special needs.
We have two other children.
You can project and predict, but when you have a child with special needs, it all changes.
We have two other children.
You can project and predict, but when you have a child with special needs, it all changes.