can i say something snarky back

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why do you care? And why do you think you deserve an answer to your questions?

Because OP opened the door to the question. That's why. Piss off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

[Anonymous]

Just ignore. I'd distance myself. She's clearly insecure and jealous

[Anonymous]

My sister is like this sometimes but it never occurs to me to be snarky back because I'm not offended by the stuff she says. I know I'm making the right choices for my family. Plus, I don't even judge her for her choices! I think they are probably the right choices for HER family. All families are different. I think her behavior towards me stems from some longheld competitive with me that I've never really felt with her, and I feel bad for her that she can't just be happy with her own life. I also think she misperceives a lot about my life -- she thinks we work longer hours than we actually do, and also assumes we have a lot more money than we actually do. So her assessments aren't even based in reality and really have very little to do with me.

I get that stuff like this is annoying over time when it doesn't stop, but you can also just choose to spend less time with her if she struggles so much to just be pleasant around you. I would not hang out around someone who was always making snide remarks around me. And I have no problem missing family gatherings if I think they will be miserable for me or my immediate family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

Oh. Another “our way is the only/right way” poster. Something you never see on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why is that anyone else's business? Couldn't OP ask why her sister chooses to have a mediocre job or no job at all while whining continuously about what she can't afford? We all get to make our own choices and it's no one else's business what we choose unless those choices somehow impact someone else. How might OP's choices do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why do you care? And why do you think you deserve an answer to your questions?

Because OP opened the door to the question. That's why. Piss off.

No she didn’t. She asked for ideas on how to handle her sisters comments. Not questions/judgments from a$$holes like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

We ARE doing it for the money 100% - but not for fancy clothes and art and ridiculous restaurants. its to bank it to buy ourselves full flexibility later. my husband may be missing dinners now - but when the kids are teens we'll be able to spend the whole summer with them hiking through colorado with them (or whatever we feel like) vs a one week vacation at ocean city. I may get home just in time for dinner now, but when they're preteens i can be the one doing all drop offs and pickups to not miss any problems that may be brewing etc. We are sacrificing some family time now for the ability to have so much flexibility in 10 years. Not saying that's a better or worse choice than anyone else for a family, its just ours

There are lots of "ifs" and "whens" and suppositions in your response. Trust me -- when your kids are teenagers they're not going to want to spend all summer hiking Colorado with you. They're going to want to be with their friends. That's likely to be the case no matter what, but even more in your situation -- the less you are with them now, the less they're going to want to be with you later because they will have formed closer relationships with others in your absence. I am afraid you are really in for a very rude awakening. You can put money in the bank. You can't put time in the bank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why do you care? And why do you think you deserve an answer to your questions?

Because OP opened the door to the question. That's why. Piss off.

No she didn’t. She asked for ideas on how to handle her sisters comments. Not questions/judgments from a$$holes like you.

Well, my response is that she "handle her sister's comments" but looking inward and thinking about how maybe her sister has a point. And you're not the boss of me. So I can respond however I want.

I guess you neglect your kids too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My sister regularly makes comments about how she'd NEVER sacrifice the family time etc for her or her husband to have the demanding / high income jobs my husband and I have. Things like "well i'd NEVER want to not be the one waiting for my kids when they get home from school" or "I'd never want my husband to regularly miss dinner". She acts like we're making these tradeoffs just to buy fancy clothes (we don't) or some other silly materialistic reason

Yet she also makes kind of rueful "must be nice" comments about all the actual upside of our choices (long vacations without having to penny pinch on them in ways that add stress, my potentially leaving the workforce for a few years, both of our retiring by 50, ability to afford housing close to our offices to not have long commutes etc)

I make absolutely no judgments about her choices, i'm happy she's living the life she wanted to, but the next time she makes some "must be nice" type comment I kind of just want to bluntly say back "yeah...it will be nice to retire at 50, thats why we're putting in the hours now. i'd NEVER make the choice to have to grind at an unfulfilling job until 65+ when I could work harder now and spend 15 more good years traveling, volunteering, spending lots of time with my kids, and whatever else I feel like doing"

I should just keep my mouth shut though......right?

No need fir snark. "You do what makes things work for you and your family Sis" and when she says must be nice you say "it is!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

Good for you. In this area - most people do. On my street a normal 3,000 sqft home is $1.7M. The entire street is young parents in their 30s to 40s with kids between newborn to 8/10. To afford that you need a household income of at least $400K. Preferably higher and that's not even considering the costs of nannies, daycares, and/or private education. So you need to be strivers. If you live somewhere that's not the case, good for you. If only one of your partners makes $400K by themselves, also good for you. That's rare. We do what we have to have the lifestyle and opportunities we desire for our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why do you care? And why do you think you deserve an answer to your questions?

Because OP opened the door to the question. That's why. Piss off.

NP. I though OP's question was if she should respond back to her sister, not whether her career and family choices were appropriate. I'm sure you'll tell me to piss off too, but it doesn't change the fact that you sound judgmental and green with envy. Can't she have more than one priority, and why do you feel like YOU get to put them in order?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why do you care? And why do you think you deserve an answer to your questions?

Because OP opened the door to the question. That's why. Piss off.

No she didn’t. She asked for ideas on how to handle her sisters comments. Not questions/judgments from a$$holes like you.

Well, my response is that she "handle her sister's comments" but looking inward and thinking about how maybe her sister has a point. And you're not the boss of me. So I can respond however I want.

I guess you neglect your kids too?

Hit a nerve??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

Oh. Another “our way is the only/right way” poster. Something you never see on DCUM.

Never said there's only one right way. I do think that there's definitely a clear wrong way, though -- and that's for parents who are never there for their kids because they're too busy making money and "self-fulfilling." Why bother having kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

We ARE doing it for the money 100% - but not for fancy clothes and art and ridiculous restaurants. its to bank it to buy ourselves full flexibility later. my husband may be missing dinners now - but when the kids are teens we'll be able to spend the whole summer with them hiking through colorado with them (or whatever we feel like) vs a one week vacation at ocean city. I may get home just in time for dinner now, but when they're preteens i can be the one doing all drop offs and pickups to not miss any problems that may be brewing etc. We are sacrificing some family time now for the ability to have so much flexibility in 10 years. Not saying that's a better or worse choice than anyone else for a family, its just ours

There are lots of "ifs" and "whens" and suppositions in your response. Trust me -- when your kids are teenagers they're not going to want to spend all summer hiking Colorado with you. They're going to want to be with their friends. That's likely to be the case no matter what, but even more in your situation -- the less you are with them now, the less they're going to want to be with you later because they will have formed closer relationships with others in your absence. I am afraid you are really in for a very rude awakening. You can put money in the bank. You can't put time in the bank.

I'm not. My kids have me from 6am - 8:30am every morning and 5pm - bedtime every night. The demanding part comes in in that i pick up work after their bedtime and work late into the night instead of having hobbies or downtime. I have no qualms about the time I spend with my kids even if its less than my sister does. But also not the point of this post.