Posted on 11/30/2004 2:28:45 PM PST by Lorianne
Let's go back to the freebies. Kids need love. They need it qualitatively and they need it quantitatively. They need it before they head off to school in the morning and they need it when they step off the bus in the afternoon. Its a 24/7 thing. Free.
Kids need guidance. What is the standard admission price to church these days? That's right--nothing. How much does a private Bible tutor cost? Nothing. If you're on shaky ground biblically, like me, learn along with your kids.
Teaching kids good manners doesn't cost a dime but the kids who grow up in a gracious household will reap the rewards later in life. Grace is a gift that keeps on giving.
Kids need exercise so take a ten minute (at least) walk with them every single day, regardless of weather. Can you spare ten minutes for your child, establishing an excellent habit with nothing but rewards?
Like I said, kids are cheap. Parents, on the other hand, cost a bundle. I actually don't think I'll go into that now, maybe save it for Friday's thread. I'm just not in the mood for "But, but but!" Nothing but excuses.
Yes!
No, the cost of GOVERNMENT makes it necessary for both parents to work. Shame on all the greedy free-loaders who want a government check, and the politicians who enable them to get their votes, all at the expense of the children who have really lousy lives. You really don't think that a little one wants to be rousted out of a warm bed at 7:00AM and trundled to face a day of being one of a dozen or more kids competing for the attention of two adults, neither of whom are paid much more than minimum wage. This really should qualify as child abuse.
After a while of grueling deadlines and demanding clients, my husband suggested we hire a housekeeper to come in once a week, and then maybe someone to be home for the boys so that we wouldn't feel so pressured to race home from the city. And then it hit me: I would be working 50-hour weeks so someone could live my life for me - take care of MY kids and MY house.
I quit the next day.
No more posh wardrobe, no more lavish vacations, some serious re-ordering of finances - and absolutely no regrets.
And a major side benefit: as a stay-at-home wife and mother, I found time to get involved with my community and "bond" not only with my children, but with my neighbors as well. I did Meals on Wheels, cooked for a homeless shelter, did advocacy work at the prison, served on the board of a nonprofit organization, started a coffeehouse...
Now that our boys are grown, I work part-time at a pediatricians' office just to earn a little something extra and to reassure myself that I could still hold a job if I had to.
...And I see the effects of dual-career parents on their children. There are some who can manage that exquisite balance of career and family, but it seems to me that most of the time, it is the childen who actually pay the real price for the family lifestyle. Some of those families wise up and opt for the saner and much more modest path - and their children blossom.
A happy life beats a glamorous one any day of the week.
After I had my oldest I absolutely dreaded the idea of returning to work, so I added up how much, approximately, having the baby would cost. Compared to what my husband was making at the time (which wasn't much--$22K annum) the baby wasn't going to cost anything. So why were we living paycheck to paycheck with two incomes before the baby? So I added up how much my husband and I were spending on ourselves. Kept every single receipt for one month, added up our bills, and looked it over with the hubby. We were horrified. In that instant, we stopped being adults (aka "kids who are allowed to smoke and drink") and became parents (aka "people who consider neighborhood association meetings to be free entertainment," aaka "people who consider a midnight drive to Meijers a legitimate vacation"). Never looked back. Never happier.
Preach it, girl.
Wipe that silly smile off your face, Mac, since your font of wisdom’s actual comment on that wise information was as follows: “Ummmm, wrong”
Looking forward to Friday's Table!
I did the daycare/work thing with my oldest, out of divorce-related necessity, and hated it. Totally. Remarried, got out of the work force in '93, subscribed to the "Tightwad Gazette", had a few more children, and the rest is history.
It was hard to get by at first, but like you said, if you really focus on needs, as opposed to wants, it is entirely do-able.
My sister and her husband will soon be adopting a child from China. They own a home (no mortgage), two rentals, three vehicles (Mercedes SUV, Miata, Honda Accord -- all paid for). They own every electronic gizmo ever invented, and both have very good jobs. When they adopt (finally -- sis is 41), she is planning on hiring a nanny to raise their child. WHY BOTHER ADOPTING!!!!! is what I want to scream at her. Sell a friggin' rental or two, give up the insatiable need to own every new "thing" on the market. I am praying that when that precious baby is put in her arms, she and her husband will have a change of heart and priorities.
Re, your tagline: I wonder if sinkEmperor placewd the famous 'sink' inhis massage parlor/library?
Turning the children over to the government.
Year-round school anyone?
THANK YOU!!!!!! Thank you for calling all day school what it is, glorified daycare! It's also a euphemism for full employment for the teacher's union, IMO. My oldest will start Kindergarden in 2 years, and all-day K will be mandatory here that year. Homeschooling is definitely on the table. My 5 yr old shouldn't be forced to attend school all day because somebody else won't leave her "rewarding career" for a couple of years. And spare us all the tripe about how all day K supposedly makes for better students down the line. I'm not buying it. We push too hard and too early, too young -- and still wind up with HS graduates who can barely compete with kids in the 3rd world.
>>>>No, the cost of GOVERNMENT makes it necessary for both parents to work. Shame on all the greedy free-loaders who want a government check, and the politicians who enable them to get their votes, all at the expense of the children who have really lousy lives.
A new phrase to coin, "Political Welfare".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.