Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Money and Finances
Reply to "UMC deep in the negative"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] They have $575K in student loans between the two of them. There are cheaper degrees, or better jobs. But there is no argument that justifies a $300K loan that you will never pay off. They'd have been better off not going to college.[/quote] +1 there are lots of trade jobs out there that need workers, this is what the lower and middle classes should focus on for now.[/quote] If they were making a salary of 28K before law-school they should have continued living on that amount after law school to be able to pay off their debt. It would have been [b]a few years[/b] of deprivation but they would have been free and clear. I think their mentality was that they will should live better because they were making mega bucks. There is NO REASON that they cannot become very frugal and break the cycle. They need to be free of debt so that their children have the advantage of not having to pay for college. [/quote] 28K is hard to live on and get to and from work and dress professionally. In DC, I'm not even sure how you could afford rent + food + commute + clothes for two people on 28K. But they could have done it on 60K, and still made HUGE dents in those numbers.[/quote] Of course it’s hard. The point is that they should have kept their lifestyle the same as prelawschool so they could pay off the loans. No mortgage or kids. [/quote] Ok but the kids are here now. So add childcare for two kids to the list above, and you think that’s feasible on $28k? No way. [/quote] Well they shouldn’t have had them yet. Sorry truth hurts.[/quote] Delaying having kids can also be financially risky depending in age. [/quote] Not really. I assume you’re talking about needing fertility treatments because of age? That’s kind of extreme. We are talking waiting 2-3 years post lawschool after the loans have been paid off. Not waiting until OP was 40. He most likely graduated around age 25-26. They could have had kids at 30 had they both buckled down and worked their butts off to pay off their loans. It’s really hard to get ahead when you have kids and childcare costs and require a larger apartment/home. By not having kids, they could have lived in a cheap studio rental. Kids require more space than that and thousands in childcare expenses and who knows what else. IVF is on average 25k. It’s actually cheaper to have IVF. IVF is about equal to one year of childcare around here. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics