Wives... were you glad pubs weren't open today

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

My parents (and aunts and uncles) expected my grandparents to do the childminding of me and my siblings, cousins etc so why would it be different when my generation has kids?

Ah you're just making stuff up now to be annoying as you tend to do in all forums, work away, not taking the bait any longer.

meeeeh

pilly wrote: »

Ah you're just making stuff up now to be annoying as you tend to do in all forums, work away, not taking the bait any longer.

Oh that's an old subject. Nox got a lot of mileage out of that one already.

whatdoicare

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

I know lots of people who's parents do all the childmiding it's very common (in my circle anyway including my oh's parents for her nieces/nephews).

You didn't answer my question - what if they're not able to do it? Or they just flat out refuse? Or, y'know, not alive?

Cyrus wrote: »

The point im making is that one person shouldnt have way more disposable income than the other, but what they do with the residual money is up to them.

Why, everyones disposable income varies I see no reason why it has to be artificially equalled rather then just facing the reality that some people have more than others.

Its like people who say salaries should be capped and everyone earn a similar wage regardless of role, experience, responsibility etc.

pilly wrote: »

Ah you're just making stuff up now to be annoying as you tend to do in all forums, work away, not taking the bait any longer.

I'm telling the truth 100% why would you doubt it? if you are saying its not fairly common for grandparents to do the childminding then you are living in dream land.

This post has been deleted.

pilly wrote: »

Ah you're just making stuff up now to be annoying as you tend to do in all forums, work away, not taking the bait any longer.

meeeeh wrote: »

Oh that's an old subject. Nox got a lot of mileage out of that one already.

I think he speaks the truth of his locality. Thing is, I also have a very rural upbringing and even thirty years ago, none of the grandparents (mine or friends) constantly minded the kids. I'd spend a day or two a week with my granny during the summer holidays, that was it. And that was only when I was over five and not needing to be constantly supervised. Back then, a lot of mammies in my locality only worked part time or not at all. So I don't see how someone could say full time minding of grandkids was extensive because I doubt it happened very much. Then in the late 80s and early 90s, playschools and creches started to proliferate where I grew up, as more and more women entered the workforce full time. This shows to me that grandparents were generally not down with the whole full-time minding thing. When I see how knackered my in-laws are after a couple of days of minding their cherished grandkids, there is no way I'd foist my children on either set of grandparents full-time.

Cyrus

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

Yes i agree with the money if you have it, I don't give a ****e about the money if we can afford it then who cares who spends it.

It was the his - hers comment (maybe that was related to money only if so sorry) I see no reason why you still can't have somethings that are his and hers just because your married not everything has to be equal.

yes i meant money only, i just dont think its fair for one person in a marriage to have access to a lot more disposable income than the other, thats all im trying to get across

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

Why, everyones disposable income varies I see no reason why it has to be artificially equalled rather then just facing the reality that some people have more than others.

Its like people who say salaries should be capped and everyone earn a similar wage regardless of role, experience, responsibility etc.

I'm telling the truth 100% why would you doubt it? if you are saying its not fairly common for grandparents to do the childminding then you are living in dream land.

Yeah yeah, carry on. I'll watch an episode of Postman Pat.

Cyrus

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

Why, everyones disposable income varies I see no reason why it has to be artificially equalled rather then just facing the reality that some people have more than others.

Its like people who say salaries should be capped and everyone earn a similar wage regardless of role, experience, responsibility etc.

but we are talking about a husband and wife, not everyone

artificially equalled, you are an old romantic :pac:

RuMan

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

I'm telling the truth 100% why would you doubt it? if you are saying its not fairly common for grandparents to do the childminding then you are living in dream land.

Maybe but anyone doing that is being subsidised by mommy and daddy. Kind of undermines your argument about continuing to live your lifestyle if you have to get mommy and daddy to provide free childcare.

Why don't you just move back in with the parents full time ?

This post has been deleted.

whatdoicare wrote: »

You didn't answer my question - what if they're not able to do it? Or they just flat out refuse? Or, y'know, not alive?

My thoughts too. Obviously the hope is that they'll remain hale and hearty, but what if the grandparents have health issues that make it tough to mind children full-time or, god forbid, they aren't around to mind them?

Anyone who has children absolutely needs to budget for paid-for childcare. It would be foolhardy to not factor it into the budget, for if the unforeseen happens.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's a pretty extreme example though, the reality for most is going to be very different.

If for example one person has 1k disposable and another has 2k disposable so both can comfortably afford what they want why should the person with the higher disposable have to pool it?

Winterlong

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

its a pretty extreme example though, the reality for most is going to be very different.

But you do agree that in the case of the OP her husband is taking the piss (based on the facts as she has presented)?

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

Let it ring away, if you want to have a nice lifestyle, be able to afford things you want and not just be living purely to pay the mortgage and feed the family then two incomes are almost always required.

Kids should be an addition to your life not change everything and prevent you doing things you did before, buying things you bought before, saving etc.

Good luck with that!

Kids cost money, therefore disposable income is less.

Kids also take up a lot of time - so, lifestyle changes are a necessity - unless you have a partner who is willing to give up their own lifestyles completely.

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

My parents (and aunts and uncles) expected my grandparents to do the childminding of me and my siblings, cousins etc so why would it be different when my generation has kids?

A: Have you asked your parents whether they're willing to sacrifice their lifestyles for your decision to have kids?

Will you yourself give up your own lifestyle for your grandchildren? Especially since you don't seem willing to do it for your own (future) kids?

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

What are yous talking about.

The chap keeps his money, she keeps her money after the bills are paid. That's their agreement. I'm sure if either got stuck both of them would take on the financial commitments over the other one and continue on as normal until the other one gets sorted. And I doubt he/she will be looking for it back with interest.

If shes broke and needs something or vice versa I'm sure they would help each other out.

He's not going backpacking around the world.

He's not depriving his girlfriend of food or shelter because she got pregnant and suddenly can't afford half the mortgage.

He's not letting her starve because she lost her job and can't go halves on some mince for the dinner.

He's not going to let her die just because she couldn't afford half the health insurance.

Some ****e being spouted here.

No. He's not doing any of those things.

He has, however, stated that where her income is reduced for whatever reason, the disposable income won't necessarily be shared 50/50....

whatdoicare wrote: »

Grandparents looking after his kids fulltime??? What do you do if they say "fup off, I've done my child rearing" or you know things like old age and not being fit to mind children? haha, I think that dude is living in cloud cuckoo land. My folks wouldn't sign up for that in a dying fit and the husbands parents died 14 years ago, what am I supposed to do to have my lavish lifestyle!?:pac: What if the grandfolk are busy living their own lavish lifestyle to mind his kids?

I look after my grandson for a few hours, 5 days a week.

I don't intend to do it for the rest of my life, though.... nor am I expected to!

Pac1Man

Come on Nox, a bit of communism never hurt anyone.

Are everyone's parents unemployed around here that they're available for full time child minding?

This post has been deleted.

This post has been deleted.

Winterlong wrote: »

But you do agree that in the case of the OP her husband is taking the piss (based on the facts as she has presented)?

Financially it looks like the ops husband is being unfair, the unknown is the mortgage though. If the mortgage roughly equalled the ops outgoings on all other stuff then it wouldn't be as bad as is being made out.

For the pub visits I'd argue one visit a week would be perfectly fair, though with the added knowledge that the kids are teens rather then young children two visits some weeks isn't overly bad.

So overall there is probably room for some rearrangements to the ops situation.

pilly wrote: »

Are everyone's parents unemployed around here that they're available for full time child minding?

Retired mostly I would imagine with most people being in their 30's having kids nowadays.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What ever the person who earns it wants to do with it. Save it, drink it, buy a new car and use it to for the loan repayment, buy a set of golf clubs for their child if they have one etc etc

From what I've gathered elsewhere Nox's family background seems very traditional and conservative - I don't doubt that his mother would be minding them.

Deleted User wrote: »

Will you yourself give up your own lifestyle for your grandchildren? Especially since you don't seem willing to do it for your own (future) kids?

Great question!

This post has been deleted.

0ph0rce0

Deleted User wrote: »

Will you yourself give up your own lifestyle for your grandchildren? Especially since you don't seem willing to do it for your own (future) kids?

This keeps getting said, What lifestyle changes do you have to give up for your kids?

I have two kids and still do the same things I did before I had kids.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I was trying to demonstrate that managing finances the way I describe is not as "evil" as some appear to think.

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

This keeps getting said, What lifestyle changes do you have to give up for your kids?

I have two kids and still do the same things I did before I had kids.

You must have had a quiet life then before you had kids.

This post has been deleted.

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

I was trying to demonstrate that managing finances the way I describe is not as "evil" as some appear to think.

Will you be budgeting for the possbility that full-time minding by grandparents might not happen? (and that could be the case for a multitude of reasons, even if the will of the grandparents is there)

This post has been deleted.