Anonymous wrote:I certainly hope that my children, being raised in the 5%, view themselves as among the lucky ones instead of the downtrodden, sacrificing ones. WTF. What a skewed view of life.
Newsflash: Even in this high COL area, $250k is a very high income.
which USC? One is private, one is not...Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:More interesting than lecturing OP on what he or she should do with income is considering the point that while many Wilson kids can get into top tier colleges that do not provide merit aid, many cannot afford to attend but rather choose state or "second-tier" schools. It is important to consider this when using the colleges attended by Wilson grads versus privates as a proxy for the education provided by each.
OP here and this is a very, very good point.
I have three kids on my block who recently graduated from Wilson and all 3 are at good state schools. Turns out that 2 of the 3 were also admitted to top 20 schools (of the Duke, Amherst level) but neither attended. It just wasn't worth it to them to pay $70k/year for those schools vs. $25k/year for places like Madison or USC (after DC Tag money kicks in which is $10K a year).
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.
Honestly, staying at home for the kids sounds like the real sacrifice to me, LOL. Also, depending on where they were living in the midwest....also possibly a sacrifice. And of course, all these sacrifices are available to PP, too. There are plenty of jobs in other, less costly, parts of the country.
I'm puzzled, though, that this bothers some people so much. It "rankles" that PP had to bust her ass at work while someone else did something else and got a similar outcome? Are you just learning now, at your advanced age, that there are no guarantees in life and that things aren't always "fair?" How about the fact that there are other people around who work a helluva lot harder than you ever have, cleaning toilets e.g., but they don't get to live in as nice a house as you do? How come that kind of unfairness doesn't bother you?[/quote]
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.
Honestly, staying at home for the kids sounds like the real sacrifice to me, LOL. Also, depending on where they were living in the midwest....also possibly a sacrifice. And of course, all these sacrifices are available to PP, too. There are plenty of jobs in other, less costly, parts of the country.
I'm puzzled, though, that this bothers some people so much. It "rankles" that PP had to bust her ass at work while someone else did something else and got a similar outcome? Are you just learning now, at your advanced age, that there are no guarantees in life and that things aren't always "fair?" How about the fact that there are other people around who work a helluva lot harder than you ever have, cleaning toilets e.g., but they don't get to live in as nice a house as you do? How come that kind of unfairness doesn't bother you?
Anonymous wrote:More interesting than lecturing OP on what he or she should do with income is considering the point that while many Wilson kids can get into top tier colleges that do not provide merit aid, many cannot afford to attend but rather choose state or "second-tier" schools. It is important to consider this when using the colleges attended by Wilson grads versus privates as a proxy for the education provided by each.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:More interesting than lecturing OP on what he or she should do with income is considering the point that while many Wilson kids can get into top tier colleges that do not provide merit aid, many cannot afford to attend but rather choose state or "second-tier" schools. It is important to consider this when using the colleges attended by Wilson grads versus privates as a proxy for the education provided by each.
+1
Half the graduating class at the Montgomery Blair Math/Science Magnet enrolls at UMD-CP - not because they can't get into highly-ranked schools, but because of the expense of paying full price for those schools.
Anonymous wrote:I certainly hope that my children, being raised in the 5%, view themselves as among the lucky ones instead of the downtrodden, sacrificing ones. WTF. What a skewed view of life.
Newsflash: Even in this high COL area, $250k is a very high income.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay a lot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.
So obviously you should have stayed at home as well. You would have had a lower HHI and reaped the financial aid benefits. For some reason, though, you decided it was worth it to keep working. Why was that? Presumably you received some benefit for doing so that you wouldn't have otherwise.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.
+1. Exactly. In this scenario, you are the only one expected to make a sacrifice....and you'll get the holier-than-thou for thinking otherwise.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with everything you said with one exception. #1 isn't sacrificing anything. They are not making a choice to give something up. Only #2 is expected to do that.
#1 is already living in "Manassas" (or equivalent), drives a junker, and has no $$ for tennis lessons.
And #1 has provided a stable environment for their child so they are capable of pursuing a top-level education. As has #2. Neither #1 or #2 may have any $$$ left at the end of each month. But only #2 is forced to make a sacrifice.
You know, you are welcome to take a lower paying job or move to a different city if you feel so wronged. Also, you could move to PG County or SE DC and still be in close commuting range for a much smaller mortgage.
You've made my point. Only #2 is being asked to make a sacrifice.
So should #1 move to a cardboard box?
Are you suggesting that #1 has no discretionary income, particularly if they live in a place where the cost of living is low? In this example, I'm not suggesting that #1 is at poverty level.
We know a family living in the Midwest. The husband had a job in IT with pay alot lower than around here, and wife decided to "stay at home for the kids". The older kid got a scholarship to a good local private HS, did very well, got admitted into a Top-50 school, also private, and received financial aid. The younger kid went to the state flagship. I don't know if there is fin aid involved.
My kids, from a 2 income family, went to FCPS and the older one did not even consider private colleges. This was partly because we could not justify paying for private given the quality of VA schools (this kid was not Ivy material). Still, it rankled that I had to bust my a$$ at work while this woman sat on hers all those years, and the outcomes are similar.