Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Status

This is a new thing, centered around major metropolitan cities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recommend an HHI of at least 150K per child.

Too high. I think 75k HHI per kid is plenty. We have 4 and HHI is $300k and we drive paid off cars, live in Virginia, and send kids to public school. One beach vacation and one ski vacation a year.

WTF?? We have four kids and make 100k combined. We live in the DC area. Our car is paid off and we go on vacations. 150k per child? 75k per child? You guys are nuts.

Nuts is right!! Your family sounds just like our family. Four kids, income 120K, cars paid off, vacations, activities etc.

I'd love to know how you make this work! We're in DC, our HHI is just over $200k, and I can't stop panicking about how we are going to have zero money when our baby comes later this fall and we have to start paying for childcare. We're pretty thrifty too - very rarely eat out, don't have cable, buy clothes sparingly, coupon and shop the sales at the grocery store, have one 10 year old (paid off) car. We haven't been on a "vacation" since before we got married - we occasionally travel (mostly by car) to do a long weekend with friends/family here and there, or fly to attend the occasional wedding, but that's it. How do you save for college, retirement, etc?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recommend an HHI of at least 150K per child.

Too high. I think 75k HHI per kid is plenty. We have 4 and HHI is $300k and we drive paid off cars, live in Virginia, and send kids to public school. One beach vacation and one ski vacation a year.

WTF?? We have four kids and make 100k combined. We live in the DC area. Our car is paid off and we go on vacations. 150k per child? 75k per child? You guys are nuts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recommend an HHI of at least 150K per child.

Too high. I think 75k HHI per kid is plenty. We have 4 and HHI is $300k and we drive paid off cars, live in Virginia, and send kids to public school. One beach vacation and one ski vacation a year.

WTF?? We have four kids and make 100k combined. We live in the DC area. Our car is paid off and we go on vacations. 150k per child? 75k per child? You guys are nuts.

Nuts is right!! Your family sounds just like our family. Four kids, income 120K, cars paid off, vacations, activities etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recommend an HHI of at least 150K per child.

Too high. I think 75k HHI per kid is plenty. We have 4 and HHI is $300k and we drive paid off cars, live in Virginia, and send kids to public school. One beach vacation and one ski vacation a year.

WTF?? We have four kids and make 100k combined. We live in the DC area. Our car is paid off and we go on vacations. 150k per child? 75k per child? You guys are nuts.

Anonymous wrote:Because they aren't as smart and responsible as you, OP.

Now that you have the answer you were looking for, let's end the thread, shall we?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recommend an HHI of at least 150K per child.

Too high. I think 75k HHI per kid is plenty. We have 4 and HHI is $300k and we drive paid off cars, live in Virginia, and send kids to public school. One beach vacation and one ski vacation a year.

Anonymous wrote:Assuming this is a first marriage (i.e. no children from previous relationships), why would you and your husband decide to have more than just 2 children?
When I was a kid, all my friends had usually just one sibling. Now, I see families with more than 2 kids all the time. Usually 3+. Obviously, having one sibling is better than being a single child. But why more?

I teach my children that it is highly irresponsible to replace two people with more than just two. I also think it is much better for a family life (less activities to go to, more time to spend as a family, less financially demanding, less stressful, etc.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here.... I don't check the board very often, just once a day.

Several observations:

1) Of course, if you end up being pregnant with multiples, congratulations, such is life. If you end up merging families, such is life. If an "accident" happens, such is life. If you end divorcing with children but remarrying a spouse without children, I do understand that you might want to have a child with the spouse. And yes, adopting is a wonderful thing. There are many children in need of loving families. I wish I could just adopt INSTEAD of having my own children, but my longing to have my own biological children was stronger.
It is difficult to provide an exhaustive list of all variables in the introductory paragraph of a new post. You know what I meant when I said "decide." A well-thought through decision between a man and a woman about their family future.

2) I am not judging. I am just asking. I am not telling anyone how to reproduce. "Why do I care?" I just want to know, because I see large families everywhere around me, and it is different from what I was seeing around me growing up.

3) I understand what the replacement fertility rate is. But I also know that the world population is growing constantly. Ideally, every family would have between 2 and 3 children. This way, the world population would remain stable. We all know that some people don't have any kids, while some have 10+. But overall, people are having more kids than what is needed. For those posters, who were offended by my "highly irresponsible" remark, I understand that how many children to have is mostly an emotional, not a rational decision. I don't think you are having 3 kids because the replacement fertility rate is 2.1 children per family. You couldn't care less what the rate is.

4) To all offended mothers of singletons: What I meant was, for a child, having a sibling at home is better. A peer, a playmate, a confidant, a competitor (i.e. you are not the center of the universe), etc. If you disagree, fine, this is not the point of my post. You are not contributing to the world's overpopulation.

5) I also understand that growing up in a large family and generally being surrounded by a large family is an important factor: it is what you know, like, and cannot think of changing. I also understand that if you were one of two children and "hated" it, you decide not to have two children (maybe none, maybe only one, maybe more than 2). Again, I see this as an emotional, not a rational reason.

6) The "what if one sibling dies and there is a lot of pressure and reliance from parents on this one child only" argument is ridiculous. This is a reasoning from 1900s, when families had 5+ children because they knew that one diphtheria outbreak can wipe them all out in one short week.

7) The "status" or "luxury" observation is interesting. Maybe the reason why I am seeing it here more is the fact that this is very a very affluent area.

Decisions can only be made by a man and a woman? Apparently single folks and gay couples can't be parents.

Tell us more about how enlightened and non-judgmental you are, OP.