| If you're making $300,000 annually, you most likely can afford to move out to the suburbs with generally better public schools. If you choose to stay closer in to avoid a long commute to your job, or to live in a more urban environment, that's your choice, but certainly not one that I think I, or other past or present donors at our kids' school, should have to subsidize it. It's all about priorities. What kind of job you choose (degree of stress, hours, social utility, pay, location), the type of housing you want and its location, the number of kids you choose to have, whether you and your spouse decide to stay married (at least one parent is making a choice on this one though often not two of course), the value you place on private education as opposed to public, where you're willing to live to get a public that meets your needs, etc. If you're making $300,000 and don't have extraordinary necessary expenses (medical, etc.), I don't want to foot your bill. It's more about choice than necessity. |
One can only guess your score on that elite bubble test. |
Um, no. This poster wasn't serious. That is why she used the eye roll. Symbol. Here. I'll use it again for you, because that will accurately indicate what I am doing right now in response to your response. :roll: |
SAH could return to work if private is a priority. I don't get that reasoning. On a HHI of $120K, I doubt the breadwinner is traveling for work every other week. |
| SAH cannot always return to work. Jobs are not that easy to find, and daycare centres have wait lists. And you need a babysitter to go to job interviews |
| I work so that we can afford private school tuition. I would resent the hell out of my donation dollars going to FA for a family with a SAHM. I agree that if private school is enough of a priority, the SAHM would find a way to go back to work. All of us working moms dealt with childcare waitlists and/or hiring a sitter. It can be done. |
| trust me there are plenty SAH families getting aid. |