What makes kids so expensive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PS: If your net worth is $1.5 million AND both you and your DH work in low-income, low-pressure jobs, then your money clearly doesn't come from your efforts. Perhaps you were lucky to buy a property in DC pre-bubble. Perhaps your family kicks in the money. No one builds up $1.5 million from not making money.

$95k per year is NOT low income. (Seriously, what planet do you live on??!)

NP here, 95k is not much at all and I don't even live in dc.
If TWO people are working to make a total of 95k it's pathetic.
We spend 10 k on travel annually.
We make 250k and I don't feel well off at all, plus in only work part time.

And you, my dear, represent everything that is wrong with this world.

Do explain.

You really have no idea? Let's start with the fact that the average household income in the United States is $50k. But you think that it's ok to come here and boast that you spend $10k on vacations a year as if that's something to boast about and that you think that a family with an income of twice the national average is "pathetic".

No, you are pathetic. I hope that your pathetic selves lose your pathetic jobs and you gain a sense of perspective.

You don't live in an area with an average cost of living or cost of housing. If it's OK for you to call people freaking nutty Stepford wives and claim that you are superior, then I think the label of pathetic for you is more than deserved.

There are several people posting on this thread.

I'm sorry, I didn't specifically reference the DC median household income. I just checked - it's $63k per the census. Is that better? My point still stands. The average is $63k - ergo it is desperately out of touch and, frankly, offensive, when you state that $95k is "pathetic". You need to better understand just how fortunate you are and how the rest of the country, and indeed the word, lives.

Then why bring up the net worth of $1.5 million?

[Anonymous]

It's not out of touch to note that the household income of 95K in DC isn't enough to buy a house in a good school district. That is an actual fact of life. What's out of touch is pretending this gets you anywhere in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not out of touch to note that the household income of 95K in DC isn't enough to buy a house in a good school district. That is an actual fact of life. What's out of touch is pretending this gets you anywhere in DC.

That's completely different from saying that it's "pathetic".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not out of touch to note that the household income of 95K in DC isn't enough to buy a house in a good school district. That is an actual fact of life. What's out of touch is pretending this gets you anywhere in DC.

That's completely different from saying that it's "pathetic".

I'm not the person who called it pathetic. I also don't happen to think it's a good income in WDC.

[Anonymous]

11:05 - I'm the poster who stopped funding my Roth. I still max out my 401K, and my house will be paid off by the time I retire. (It is currently worth about $750K.) I will also have a small pension from work. I'm not overly concerned about the effect of saving $4K less per year for a few years while I get my daughter's college savings started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not out of touch to note that the household income of 95K in DC isn't enough to buy a house in a good school district. That is an actual fact of life. What's out of touch is pretending this gets you anywhere in DC.

Someone who has 1.5M in the bank but 95k income has very different experience and constraints than someone who actually has to live on 95k, and plan for a future retirement and college expenses. It's often the case of people who have backstop wealth (family to bail them out, huge savings, etc) they are just unaware of the feeling of BEING they line between truly poor and making it. If we make bad choices or take too big risk, not only do we and our children suffer, but also siblings and out parents we help support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:05 - I'm the poster who stopped funding my Roth. I still max out my 401K, and my house will be paid off by the time I retire. (It is currently worth about $750K.) I will also have a small pension from work. I'm not overly concerned about the effect of saving $4K less per year for a few years while I get my daughter's college savings started.

Please max out retirement for your daughter sake. You can always borrow for school; no one lends money for retirement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PS: If your net worth is $1.5 million AND both you and your DH work in low-income, low-pressure jobs, then your money clearly doesn't come from your efforts. Perhaps you were lucky to buy a property in DC pre-bubble. Perhaps your family kicks in the money. No one builds up $1.5 million from not making money.

$95k per year is NOT low income. (Seriously, what planet do you live on??!)

NP here, 95k is not much at all and I don't even live in dc.
If TWO people are working to make a total of 95k it's pathetic.
We spend 10 k on travel annually.
We make 250k and I don't feel well off at all, plus in only work part time.

And you, my dear, represent everything that is wrong with this world.

Do explain.

You really have no idea? Let's start with the fact that the average household income in the United States is $50k. But you think that it's ok to come here and boast that you spend $10k on vacations a year as if that's something to boast about and that you think that a family with an income of twice the national average is "pathetic".

No, you are pathetic. I hope that your pathetic selves lose your pathetic jobs and you gain a sense of perspective.

You don't live in an area with an average cost of living or cost of housing. If it's OK for you to call people freaking nutty Stepford wives and claim that you are superior, then I think the label of pathetic for you is more than deserved.

There are several people posting on this thread.

I'm sorry, I didn't specifically reference the DC median household income. I just checked - it's $63k per the census. Is that better? My point still stands. The average is $63k - ergo it is desperately out of touch and, frankly, offensive, when you state that $95k is "pathetic". You need to better understand just how fortunate you are and how the rest of the country, and indeed the word, lives.

Then why bring up the net worth of $1.5 million?

I don't understand how your question follows from the post above, but I was the one who mentioned our net worth and if you followed the thread -- or even just that post -- it was very clear. I mentioned it in response to a poster who said that our approach to child rearing was "making virtue out of necessity". I mentioned our net worth to prove that if we wanted to pay $50k a year for private school or $10k per summer for summer camps or $200 a month for violin/lacrosse/ice skating lessons we could -- if that was what was important to us.

But other than that, our net worth isn't really relevant here. We don't live off it, we live off our income and we save. And to answer other questions, about $300k was an inheritance -- that money is not currently accessible though I did include it in the total. The remaining $1.2 million WAS accumulated solely by us through a combination of hard work, regular investments/savings, the passage of time (we are in our early 40s, so have 20 years of accumulated savings and growth), some very well placed/timed/researched investments, luck and market performance. We continue to save the max for retirement, have a robust emergency fund and are on track with college savings. AND we do that on a sub-$100k salary. (Without clipping coupons, which I'm not against doing, but really, who has the time!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not out of touch to note that the household income of 95K in DC isn't enough to buy a house in a good school district. That is an actual fact of life. What's out of touch is pretending this gets you anywhere in DC.

Someone who has 1.5M in the bank but 95k income has very different experience and constraints than someone who actually has to live on 95k, and plan for a future retirement and college expenses. It's often the case of people who have backstop wealth (family to bail them out, huge savings, etc) they are just unaware of the feeling of BEING they line between truly poor and making it. If we make bad choices or take too big risk, not only do we and our children suffer, but also siblings and out parents we help support.

Agree. Though $1.5m net worth is not the same as "1.5m in the bank". If it's largely split between retirement and home equity it's not exactly liquid. And if you don't have the income to support it you can't tap home equity without selling your home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PS: If your net worth is $1.5 million AND both you and your DH work in low-income, low-pressure jobs, then your money clearly doesn't come from your efforts. Perhaps you were lucky to buy a property in DC pre-bubble. Perhaps your family kicks in the money. No one builds up $1.5 million from not making money.

$95k per year is NOT low income. (Seriously, what planet do you live on??!)

NP here, 95k is not much at all and I don't even live in dc.
If TWO people are working to make a total of 95k it's pathetic.
We spend 10 k on travel annually.
We make 250k and I don't feel well off at all, plus in only work part time.

And you, my dear, represent everything that is wrong with this world.

Do explain.

You really have no idea? Let's start with the fact that the average household income in the United States is $50k. But you think that it's ok to come here and boast that you spend $10k on vacations a year as if that's something to boast about and that you think that a family with an income of twice the national average is "pathetic".

No, you are pathetic. I hope that your pathetic selves lose your pathetic jobs and you gain a sense of perspective.

You don't live in an area with an average cost of living or cost of housing. If it's OK for you to call people freaking nutty Stepford wives and claim that you are superior, then I think the label of pathetic for you is more than deserved.

There are several people posting on this thread.

I'm sorry, I didn't specifically reference the DC median household income. I just checked - it's $63k per the census. Is that better? My point still stands. The average is $63k - ergo it is desperately out of touch and, frankly, offensive, when you state that $95k is "pathetic". You need to better understand just how fortunate you are and how the rest of the country, and indeed the word, lives.

Then why bring up the net worth of $1.5 million?

I don't understand how your question follows from the post above, but I was the one who mentioned our net worth and if you followed the thread -- or even just that post -- it was very clear. I mentioned it in response to a poster who said that our approach to child rearing was "making virtue out of necessity". I mentioned our net worth to prove that if we wanted to pay $50k a year for private school or $10k per summer for summer camps or $200 a month for violin/lacrosse/ice skating lessons we could -- if that was what was important to us.

But other than that, our net worth isn't really relevant here. We don't live off it, we live off our income and we save. And to answer other questions, about $300k was an inheritance -- that money is not currently accessible though I did include it in the total. The remaining $1.2 million WAS accumulated solely by us through a combination of hard work, regular investments/savings, the passage of time (we are in our early 40s, so have 20 years of accumulated savings and growth), some very well placed/timed/researched investments, luck and market performance. We continue to save the max for retirement, have a robust emergency fund and are on track with college savings. AND we do that on a sub-$100k salary. (Without clipping coupons, which I'm not against doing, but really, who has the time!)

When did you buy your first home? Home much of that was proceeds from buying pre-housing boom? B/c stocks have been flat for a decade (the lost decade and all that) until recently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't understand how your question follows from the post above, but I was the one who mentioned our net worth and if you followed the thread -- or even just that post -- it was very clear. I mentioned it in response to a poster who said that our approach to child rearing was "making virtue out of necessity". I mentioned our net worth to prove that if we wanted to pay $50k a year for private school or $10k per summer for summer camps or $200 a month for violin/lacrosse/ice skating lessons we could -- if that was what was important to us!

I am the poster who was fortunate enough to have the pleasure of music and figure skating training. From the viewpoint of a child, I am grateful my parents did not think like you. I cherish my years at the piano and on the ice. I love the feeling of freedom and expression you get out of mastering this. You aren't providing this for your children. That's fine. The thing is this: you aren't better than anyone who is. You aren't superior. Certainly not to my parents. Camping and climbing trees mean nothing to me. You are pretending that you are a better parent because you avoid activities that cost money. And you aren't. Not at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't understand how your question follows from the post above, but I was the one who mentioned our net worth and if you followed the thread -- or even just that post -- it was very clear. I mentioned it in response to a poster who said that our approach to child rearing was "making virtue out of necessity". I mentioned our net worth to prove that if we wanted to pay $50k a year for private school or $10k per summer for summer camps or $200 a month for violin/lacrosse/ice skating lessons we could -- if that was what was important to us!

I am the poster who was fortunate enough to have the pleasure of music and figure skating training. From the viewpoint of a child, I am grateful my parents did not think like you. I cherish my years at the piano and on the ice. I love the feeling of freedom and expression you get out of mastering this. You aren't providing this for your children. That's fine. The thing is this: you aren't better than anyone who is. You aren't superior. Certainly not to my parents. Camping and climbing trees mean nothing to me. You are pretending that you are a better parent because you avoid activities that cost money. And you aren't. Not at all.

I come from a state where winters were long and ice skating was nowhere near $200 a month. The school offered flute amd clarinet lessons for very little too.
I got the same as you but without the price tag. I suspect your private school was also not as good as the public I attended

But I do not have the superiority complex

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't understand how your question follows from the post above, but I was the one who mentioned our net worth and if you followed the thread -- or even just that post -- it was very clear. I mentioned it in response to a poster who said that our approach to child rearing was "making virtue out of necessity". I mentioned our net worth to prove that if we wanted to pay $50k a year for private school or $10k per summer for summer camps or $200 a month for violin/lacrosse/ice skating lessons we could -- if that was what was important to us!

I am the poster who was fortunate enough to have the pleasure of music and figure skating training. From the viewpoint of a child, I am grateful my parents did not think like you. I cherish my years at the piano and on the ice. I love the feeling of freedom and expression you get out of mastering this. You aren't providing this for your children. That's fine. The thing is this: you aren't better than anyone who is. You aren't superior. Certainly not to my parents. Camping and climbing trees mean nothing to me. You are pretending that you are a better parent because you avoid activities that cost money. And you aren't. Not at all.

I come from a state where winters were long and ice skating was nowhere near $200 a month. The school offered flute amd clarinet lessons for very little too.
I got the same as you but without the price tag. I suspect your private school was also not as good as the public I attended

But I do not have the superiority complex

No, actually it sounds like you have an inferiority complex.

[Anonymous]

I am the poster who was fortunate enough to have the pleasure of music and figure skating training. From the viewpoint of a child, I am grateful my parents did not think like you. I cherish my years at the piano and on the ice. I love the feeling of freedom and expression you get out of mastering this. You aren't providing this for your children. That's fine. The thing is this: you aren't better than anyone who is. You aren't superior. Certainly not to my parents. Camping and climbing trees mean nothing to me. You are pretending that you are a better parent because you avoid activities that cost money. And you aren't. Not at all.

Saying "I am grateful my parents did not think like you" is rather condescending. Also "you aren't providing this for your children"??? Really? Who are you to judge that someone is not providing the feeling of freedom and expression to their children? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am the poster who was fortunate enough to have the pleasure of music and figure skating training. From the viewpoint of a child, I am grateful my parents did not think like you. I cherish my years at the piano and on the ice. I love the feeling of freedom and expression you get out of mastering this. You aren't providing this for your children. That's fine. The thing is this: you aren't better than anyone who is. You aren't superior. Certainly not to my parents. Camping and climbing trees mean nothing to me. You are pretending that you are a better parent because you avoid activities that cost money. And you aren't. Not at all.

Saying "I am grateful my parents did not think like you" is rather condescending. Also "you aren't providing this for your children"??? Really? Who are you to judge that someone is not providing the feeling of freedom and expression to their children? Wow.

She's on record saying she doesn't provide music or skating lessons for her children because they cost money.

What's so condescending to say I'm grateful my parents didn't think like her? I am.