going broke on 300K/year

[scaredyclassic]

why is it socially acceptable for women to bitterly and endlessly complain about their husbands? If guys try that, I think generally they are accused of being ingrates (she raised your children! suck it up!). Wouldn’t it just be cheaper and easier to get rid of her and pay a nanny? Except for the alimony of course.

[cabal]

[quote=DWCAP][quote=Cabal]
In retrospect, I should feel lucky to still be married after 21 years. My wife and I are frugal except with our children which we spoil without hesitation.[/quote]

If you or your friends are ever wondering why the younger generations dont seem to have the same values as your generation did, your answer is right there at the end of your quote.[/quote]

First, don’t presume to know my definition of spoil. Did we buy junior a new beemer for his 16th birthday? No, he got the 7 year old beater with 130K miles. Did we fill their time with enriching activities like little league and soccer, send them to nice summer camps, take them on nice vacations, and buy them too many presents at Christmas ? Yes we did and that’s about the extent of it. As for those parents that really do spoil their kids, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are destined to be self-centered, demanding monsters. What you’re talking about is poor parenting skills and that exists in all generations, past and present.

Second, the point of my post was not to rant on the shortcomings of the X,Y, and Z generation, nor to debate the specific goods & services that men and women bring to the marriage horse trading table, but to point out the entitlement to escalating requirements on the female side in comparison to previous generations. There are exceptions of course. But in general, whether its suzie homemaker or the most blatant golddigger, the bar has been raised so high that disappointment is inevitable. If past generations of women were content with family, home and companionship, many women today wouldn’t even consider that the prerequisite. Financial success and all its perks (house, car,vacations) is just one component. If your not the perfect father, provide 24/7 attention, fit, attractive, sense of humor, dress a certain way, etc then you’re inevitable a disappointment. These expectation are independent of the economy. I suggested two factors possibly fanning these residual entitlement tendencies; recent bubbles (stock & RE) and modern feminism. If you or anyone have other theories, I’m listening.

[cabal]

[quote=DWCAP][quote=Cabal]
In retrospect, I should feel lucky to still be married after 21 years. My wife and I are frugal except with our children which we spoil without hesitation.[/quote]

If you or your friends are ever wondering why the younger generations dont seem to have the same values as your generation did, your answer is right there at the end of your quote.[/quote]

First, don’t presume to know my definition of spoil. Did we buy junior a new beemer for his 16th birthday? No, he got the 7 year old beater with 130K miles. Did we fill their time with enriching activities like little league and soccer, send them to nice summer camps, take them on nice vacations, and buy them too many presents at Christmas ? Yes we did and that’s about the extent of it. As for those parents that really do spoil their kids, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are destined to be self-centered, demanding monsters. What you’re talking about is poor parenting skills and that exists in all generations, past and present.

Second, the point of my post was not to rant on the shortcomings of the X,Y, and Z generation, nor to debate the specific goods & services that men and women bring to the marriage horse trading table, but to point out the entitlement to escalating requirements on the female side in comparison to previous generations. There are exceptions of course. But in general, whether its suzie homemaker or the most blatant golddigger, the bar has been raised so high that disappointment is inevitable. If past generations of women were content with family, home and companionship, many women today wouldn’t even consider that the prerequisite. Financial success and all its perks (house, car,vacations) is just one component. If your not the perfect father, provide 24/7 attention, fit, attractive, sense of humor, dress a certain way, etc then you’re inevitable a disappointment. These expectation are independent of the economy. I suggested two factors possibly fanning these residual entitlement tendencies; recent bubbles (stock & RE) and modern feminism. If you or anyone have other theories, I’m listening.

[cabal]

[quote=DWCAP][quote=Cabal]
In retrospect, I should feel lucky to still be married after 21 years. My wife and I are frugal except with our children which we spoil without hesitation.[/quote]

If you or your friends are ever wondering why the younger generations dont seem to have the same values as your generation did, your answer is right there at the end of your quote.[/quote]

First, don’t presume to know my definition of spoil. Did we buy junior a new beemer for his 16th birthday? No, he got the 7 year old beater with 130K miles. Did we fill their time with enriching activities like little league and soccer, send them to nice summer camps, take them on nice vacations, and buy them too many presents at Christmas ? Yes we did and that’s about the extent of it. As for those parents that really do spoil their kids, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are destined to be self-centered, demanding monsters. What you’re talking about is poor parenting skills and that exists in all generations, past and present.

Second, the point of my post was not to rant on the shortcomings of the X,Y, and Z generation, nor to debate the specific goods & services that men and women bring to the marriage horse trading table, but to point out the entitlement to escalating requirements on the female side in comparison to previous generations. There are exceptions of course. But in general, whether its suzie homemaker or the most blatant golddigger, the bar has been raised so high that disappointment is inevitable. If past generations of women were content with family, home and companionship, many women today wouldn’t even consider that the prerequisite. Financial success and all its perks (house, car,vacations) is just one component. If your not the perfect father, provide 24/7 attention, fit, attractive, sense of humor, dress a certain way, etc then you’re inevitable a disappointment. These expectation are independent of the economy. I suggested two factors possibly fanning these residual entitlement tendencies; recent bubbles (stock & RE) and modern feminism. If you or anyone have other theories, I’m listening.

[cabal]

[quote=DWCAP][quote=Cabal]
In retrospect, I should feel lucky to still be married after 21 years. My wife and I are frugal except with our children which we spoil without hesitation.[/quote]

If you or your friends are ever wondering why the younger generations dont seem to have the same values as your generation did, your answer is right there at the end of your quote.[/quote]

First, don’t presume to know my definition of spoil. Did we buy junior a new beemer for his 16th birthday? No, he got the 7 year old beater with 130K miles. Did we fill their time with enriching activities like little league and soccer, send them to nice summer camps, take them on nice vacations, and buy them too many presents at Christmas ? Yes we did and that’s about the extent of it. As for those parents that really do spoil their kids, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are destined to be self-centered, demanding monsters. What you’re talking about is poor parenting skills and that exists in all generations, past and present.

Second, the point of my post was not to rant on the shortcomings of the X,Y, and Z generation, nor to debate the specific goods & services that men and women bring to the marriage horse trading table, but to point out the entitlement to escalating requirements on the female side in comparison to previous generations. There are exceptions of course. But in general, whether its suzie homemaker or the most blatant golddigger, the bar has been raised so high that disappointment is inevitable. If past generations of women were content with family, home and companionship, many women today wouldn’t even consider that the prerequisite. Financial success and all its perks (house, car,vacations) is just one component. If your not the perfect father, provide 24/7 attention, fit, attractive, sense of humor, dress a certain way, etc then you’re inevitable a disappointment. These expectation are independent of the economy. I suggested two factors possibly fanning these residual entitlement tendencies; recent bubbles (stock & RE) and modern feminism. If you or anyone have other theories, I’m listening.

[cabal]

[quote=DWCAP][quote=Cabal]
In retrospect, I should feel lucky to still be married after 21 years. My wife and I are frugal except with our children which we spoil without hesitation.[/quote]

If you or your friends are ever wondering why the younger generations dont seem to have the same values as your generation did, your answer is right there at the end of your quote.[/quote]

First, don’t presume to know my definition of spoil. Did we buy junior a new beemer for his 16th birthday? No, he got the 7 year old beater with 130K miles. Did we fill their time with enriching activities like little league and soccer, send them to nice summer camps, take them on nice vacations, and buy them too many presents at Christmas ? Yes we did and that’s about the extent of it. As for those parents that really do spoil their kids, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are destined to be self-centered, demanding monsters. What you’re talking about is poor parenting skills and that exists in all generations, past and present.

Second, the point of my post was not to rant on the shortcomings of the X,Y, and Z generation, nor to debate the specific goods & services that men and women bring to the marriage horse trading table, but to point out the entitlement to escalating requirements on the female side in comparison to previous generations. There are exceptions of course. But in general, whether its suzie homemaker or the most blatant golddigger, the bar has been raised so high that disappointment is inevitable. If past generations of women were content with family, home and companionship, many women today wouldn’t even consider that the prerequisite. Financial success and all its perks (house, car,vacations) is just one component. If your not the perfect father, provide 24/7 attention, fit, attractive, sense of humor, dress a certain way, etc then you’re inevitable a disappointment. These expectation are independent of the economy. I suggested two factors possibly fanning these residual entitlement tendencies; recent bubbles (stock & RE) and modern feminism. If you or anyone have other theories, I’m listening.

[patientrenter]

To the other guys here who are still complaining here about what they see as an an imbalance against them in the male/female roles in society today: you are wasting your own time.

Women know that times have changed since the 1950’s, and they know what they can get now. It’s like home prices – one buyer may think they should be lower, but that does not matter a jot to the seller who knows the current market prices. The market is what it is, and all you can do is make your own personal choices in response.

[patientrenter]

To the other guys here who are still complaining here about what they see as an an imbalance against them in the male/female roles in society today: you are wasting your own time.

Women know that times have changed since the 1950’s, and they know what they can get now. It’s like home prices – one buyer may think they should be lower, but that does not matter a jot to the seller who knows the current market prices. The market is what it is, and all you can do is make your own personal choices in response.

[patientrenter]

To the other guys here who are still complaining here about what they see as an an imbalance against them in the male/female roles in society today: you are wasting your own time.

Women know that times have changed since the 1950’s, and they know what they can get now. It’s like home prices – one buyer may think they should be lower, but that does not matter a jot to the seller who knows the current market prices. The market is what it is, and all you can do is make your own personal choices in response.

[patientrenter]

To the other guys here who are still complaining here about what they see as an an imbalance against them in the male/female roles in society today: you are wasting your own time.

Women know that times have changed since the 1950’s, and they know what they can get now. It’s like home prices – one buyer may think they should be lower, but that does not matter a jot to the seller who knows the current market prices. The market is what it is, and all you can do is make your own personal choices in response.

[patientrenter]

To the other guys here who are still complaining here about what they see as an an imbalance against them in the male/female roles in society today: you are wasting your own time.

Women know that times have changed since the 1950’s, and they know what they can get now. It’s like home prices – one buyer may think they should be lower, but that does not matter a jot to the seller who knows the current market prices. The market is what it is, and all you can do is make your own personal choices in response.

[fredo4]

[quote=scaredycat]why is it socially acceptable for women to bitterly and endlessly complain about their husbands? If guys try that, I think generally they are accused of being ingrates (she raised your children! suck it up!). Wouldn’t it just be cheaper and easier to get rid of her and pay a nanny? Except for the alimony of course.[/quote]

I absolutely agree, however, I think that the types of women that tend to complain are the ones who marry a certain type of man (Tom Lykis, e.g.). They are matched sets. These types, both the men and the women are out for what THEY can get and only that.
There’s no sense of trying to do what will make the other person happy.
Then there are those who figure that they’ll just keep dating and not marry so that both will stay in the “trying to please mode”, but that isn’t the answer either. There’s no depth to a relationship that’s hanging so tenuously without any real commitment. It’s especially bad for children if you do it that way because there is no sense of security. Plus it teaches the kids that it’s ok to flit from person to person (usually scattering illegitimate children along the way).
I think the answer is in choosing a quality person whose values match yours and then both working really hard to make the OTHER person’s life better. If people went into marriage with that philosophy every marriage would be great.

[fredo4]

[quote=scaredycat]why is it socially acceptable for women to bitterly and endlessly complain about their husbands? If guys try that, I think generally they are accused of being ingrates (she raised your children! suck it up!). Wouldn’t it just be cheaper and easier to get rid of her and pay a nanny? Except for the alimony of course.[/quote]

I absolutely agree, however, I think that the types of women that tend to complain are the ones who marry a certain type of man (Tom Lykis, e.g.). They are matched sets. These types, both the men and the women are out for what THEY can get and only that.
There’s no sense of trying to do what will make the other person happy.
Then there are those who figure that they’ll just keep dating and not marry so that both will stay in the “trying to please mode”, but that isn’t the answer either. There’s no depth to a relationship that’s hanging so tenuously without any real commitment. It’s especially bad for children if you do it that way because there is no sense of security. Plus it teaches the kids that it’s ok to flit from person to person (usually scattering illegitimate children along the way).
I think the answer is in choosing a quality person whose values match yours and then both working really hard to make the OTHER person’s life better. If people went into marriage with that philosophy every marriage would be great.

[fredo4]

[quote=scaredycat]why is it socially acceptable for women to bitterly and endlessly complain about their husbands? If guys try that, I think generally they are accused of being ingrates (she raised your children! suck it up!). Wouldn’t it just be cheaper and easier to get rid of her and pay a nanny? Except for the alimony of course.[/quote]

I absolutely agree, however, I think that the types of women that tend to complain are the ones who marry a certain type of man (Tom Lykis, e.g.). They are matched sets. These types, both the men and the women are out for what THEY can get and only that.
There’s no sense of trying to do what will make the other person happy.
Then there are those who figure that they’ll just keep dating and not marry so that both will stay in the “trying to please mode”, but that isn’t the answer either. There’s no depth to a relationship that’s hanging so tenuously without any real commitment. It’s especially bad for children if you do it that way because there is no sense of security. Plus it teaches the kids that it’s ok to flit from person to person (usually scattering illegitimate children along the way).
I think the answer is in choosing a quality person whose values match yours and then both working really hard to make the OTHER person’s life better. If people went into marriage with that philosophy every marriage would be great.

[fredo4]

[quote=scaredycat]why is it socially acceptable for women to bitterly and endlessly complain about their husbands? If guys try that, I think generally they are accused of being ingrates (she raised your children! suck it up!). Wouldn’t it just be cheaper and easier to get rid of her and pay a nanny? Except for the alimony of course.[/quote]

I absolutely agree, however, I think that the types of women that tend to complain are the ones who marry a certain type of man (Tom Lykis, e.g.). They are matched sets. These types, both the men and the women are out for what THEY can get and only that.
There’s no sense of trying to do what will make the other person happy.
Then there are those who figure that they’ll just keep dating and not marry so that both will stay in the “trying to please mode”, but that isn’t the answer either. There’s no depth to a relationship that’s hanging so tenuously without any real commitment. It’s especially bad for children if you do it that way because there is no sense of security. Plus it teaches the kids that it’s ok to flit from person to person (usually scattering illegitimate children along the way).
I think the answer is in choosing a quality person whose values match yours and then both working really hard to make the OTHER person’s life better. If people went into marriage with that philosophy every marriage would be great.

[Author]

Posts