You said you don't make much, you fly 800 hrs a year so that means it is very likely you are being paid for it.
You must be young. I used to think that was in my 20's. Now, I'm 41. Somewhere between there and here, I stopped giving a fluck what others thought of my life. I started living my life for me, not looking at what anybody else was doing, whether they knew about what I do, etc. I have a lot of friends who don't know that I fly. If it ever comes up, they will find out. If not, they won't.
Right, details. Just throwing a number out there without the footnotes does more harm than good. Most of the "costs" are optional. No one has to have a 4000 sq ft house and have each kid on three traveling teams, each kid with a 5GB plan with a new phone every year."Lies, damn lies and statistics" - Mark Twain (and others)
The devil is in the details, as often the case. This isn't the 60's or 70's. The article references costs in 2015. There are far more two income families now, which necessitates day-care and summer camps for the kids. The article also says it's cheaper in rural areas, to the tune of 27% cheaper, dropping the annual cost to under $9,500. This is an average, and there are some big dollar spenders, especially in the northeast and California, plus other urban areas.
The biggest portion is housing at 29%. Yes, you may have been crammed into a tiny bedroom with one or more other siblings, but that's less likely today. Still happens, just less likely. Heck the first floor of my house is probably bigger than that home in the 60's and there are no bedrooms on the first floor of my house. My kitchen isn't much smaller than that house (and bigger than many apartments in NYC) and my kids like to tell me about how much bigger some of their friends' homes are.
You didn't have cellphones and laptops for everyone in the house back then either. I don't recall being in activities every day of the week either; we cut back on that quickly as my wife and I were getting worn out taking them to soccer/gymnastics/taekwondo/etc.
The article also references costs getting cheaper with more kids, "For families with three or more children, per child expenses averaged 24% less on each child than on a child in a two-child family."
I just wish the lower income people would get this message and reduce the number of kids they have that the rest of us have to pay for.
"Child support" is a scam, don't get me started.
That's not included.
It's called inheritance: money, company, position, board seat, etc. Unless daddy was in that position, it's not easy to just rise to that level.
If you had five and lived on the dole, they'd be income producers.
Statement usually made by a dummy who didn't know to put a condom on. Can't do the time, don't do the crime.
I don't know where the USDA "study" data came from, and you probably don't either. And why is the USDA commissioning that study? They are farmers. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just not their bailiwick.
Idiot comment. Try again.Statement usually made by a dummy who didn't know to put a condom on. Can't do the time, don't do the crime.
I don't need to try again. I think my first attempt was a greaser.
It's called hard work and being ready when the opportunity presents itself. Also, how old are the occupants compared to you?
That's called the Loser Mentality. It's a cop out. Guess how many people are first generation rich compared to the trust-funders?
Perhaps.
How much is the rent on a 4 BR igloo?
We stopped at 3 when I heard that every 4th child born is Chinese, neither one of us speaks Chinese!
Plus they get a check every year from the state, oil money proceeds! Or at least they did a few years ago, my cousins lived in Anchorage and they also got some type of payment until he moved to Georgia.
Good point.
You too?!
wasist!We stopped at 3 when I heard that every 4th child born is Chinese, neither one of us speaks Chinese!
