- This topic has 615 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 3 months ago by
saiine.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 12, 2011 at 6:35 AM #677446March 12, 2011 at 6:37 AM #676300
sdrealtor
Participantparamount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.March 12, 2011 at 6:37 AM #676358Participantparamount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.March 12, 2011 at 6:37 AM #676968Participantparamount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.March 12, 2011 at 6:37 AM #677103Participantparamount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.March 12, 2011 at 6:37 AM #677451Participantparamount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.March 12, 2011 at 9:07 AM #676330bearishgurl
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]paramount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.[/quote]Actually, the lending standards of “yesteryear” seem to be back in vogue today, with even MORE scrutiny than ever before. And rightly they should. ;=}
March 12, 2011 at 9:07 AM #676387Participant[quote=sdrealtor]paramount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.[/quote]Actually, the lending standards of “yesteryear” seem to be back in vogue today, with even MORE scrutiny than ever before. And rightly they should. ;=}
March 12, 2011 at 9:07 AM #676995Participant[quote=sdrealtor]paramount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.[/quote]Actually, the lending standards of “yesteryear” seem to be back in vogue today, with even MORE scrutiny than ever before. And rightly they should. ;=}
March 12, 2011 at 9:07 AM #677131Participant[quote=sdrealtor]paramount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.[/quote]Actually, the lending standards of “yesteryear” seem to be back in vogue today, with even MORE scrutiny than ever before. And rightly they should. ;=}
March 12, 2011 at 9:07 AM #677480Participant[quote=sdrealtor]paramount
Talk to a good mortgage guy or gal before following that advice. Lending standards change constantly and what was 20 years ago may not be true today. Even if its true today, it may not be true tomorrow.[/quote]Actually, the lending standards of “yesteryear” seem to be back in vogue today, with even MORE scrutiny than ever before. And rightly they should. ;=}
March 12, 2011 at 9:37 AM #676350davelj
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Brian and BG,
I never said it was for everyone, I asked how he would know without living it.[SNIP]
Not saying its for everyone but how would you know if you never experienced something?[/quote]
Pardon me if I butt in on this for a second.
On the one hand, I kinda sorta agree with what you’re trying to get at here. On the other hand, this particular argument is not logically consistent.
I’ve never put my hand on top of a burning stove but I’m quite sure that I don’t want to experience it. My point is that while the direct day-to-day experience of raising children clearly gives one greater insight into the act itself, watching other folks do it sheds a great deal of light on it as well. One does not necessarily need to directly experience something to know whether it’s going to be enjoyable to them or not.
Most parents are so emotionally attached to their children that they are incapable of being objective about raising them and/or what the advantages and disadvantages are. [That’s the very nature of emotion – it’s illogical.] Most parents of killers, for example, still love their murderous offspring. Parents are not objective about their children so anything they say about them must be taken with a grain of salt.
My brother has twin boys and I really enjoy spending time with them. I enjoy being an uncle, so I’m glad he decided to have kids. But if I had to raise those little buggers – or any other children – eventually there would be a murder suicide. It’s just not for me. My brother is glad he has kids – as most parents are – but does not describe his life as “richer,” he describes it as “different.” Sometimes it’s richer and sometimes it’s horrible.
At the end of the day, it’s a trade off. I’m fully aware that I’m “missing something” by not having children of my own. The trade off is that I have all sorts of things that I enjoy doing that I have time to do precisely because I don’t have kids. For my cranial wiring, not having kids is the better choice. Most folks want or need the emotional stuff that comes with having kids. I and many others don’t. And when I want the fun stuff associated with children… that’s what my bother’s kids are for. I’m happy to freeride off him in this area.
March 12, 2011 at 9:37 AM #676407Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Brian and BG,
I never said it was for everyone, I asked how he would know without living it.[SNIP]
Not saying its for everyone but how would you know if you never experienced something?[/quote]
Pardon me if I butt in on this for a second.
On the one hand, I kinda sorta agree with what you’re trying to get at here. On the other hand, this particular argument is not logically consistent.
I’ve never put my hand on top of a burning stove but I’m quite sure that I don’t want to experience it. My point is that while the direct day-to-day experience of raising children clearly gives one greater insight into the act itself, watching other folks do it sheds a great deal of light on it as well. One does not necessarily need to directly experience something to know whether it’s going to be enjoyable to them or not.
Most parents are so emotionally attached to their children that they are incapable of being objective about raising them and/or what the advantages and disadvantages are. [That’s the very nature of emotion – it’s illogical.] Most parents of killers, for example, still love their murderous offspring. Parents are not objective about their children so anything they say about them must be taken with a grain of salt.
My brother has twin boys and I really enjoy spending time with them. I enjoy being an uncle, so I’m glad he decided to have kids. But if I had to raise those little buggers – or any other children – eventually there would be a murder suicide. It’s just not for me. My brother is glad he has kids – as most parents are – but does not describe his life as “richer,” he describes it as “different.” Sometimes it’s richer and sometimes it’s horrible.
At the end of the day, it’s a trade off. I’m fully aware that I’m “missing something” by not having children of my own. The trade off is that I have all sorts of things that I enjoy doing that I have time to do precisely because I don’t have kids. For my cranial wiring, not having kids is the better choice. Most folks want or need the emotional stuff that comes with having kids. I and many others don’t. And when I want the fun stuff associated with children… that’s what my bother’s kids are for. I’m happy to freeride off him in this area.
March 12, 2011 at 9:37 AM #677015Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Brian and BG,
I never said it was for everyone, I asked how he would know without living it.[SNIP]
Not saying its for everyone but how would you know if you never experienced something?[/quote]
Pardon me if I butt in on this for a second.
On the one hand, I kinda sorta agree with what you’re trying to get at here. On the other hand, this particular argument is not logically consistent.
I’ve never put my hand on top of a burning stove but I’m quite sure that I don’t want to experience it. My point is that while the direct day-to-day experience of raising children clearly gives one greater insight into the act itself, watching other folks do it sheds a great deal of light on it as well. One does not necessarily need to directly experience something to know whether it’s going to be enjoyable to them or not.
Most parents are so emotionally attached to their children that they are incapable of being objective about raising them and/or what the advantages and disadvantages are. [That’s the very nature of emotion – it’s illogical.] Most parents of killers, for example, still love their murderous offspring. Parents are not objective about their children so anything they say about them must be taken with a grain of salt.
My brother has twin boys and I really enjoy spending time with them. I enjoy being an uncle, so I’m glad he decided to have kids. But if I had to raise those little buggers – or any other children – eventually there would be a murder suicide. It’s just not for me. My brother is glad he has kids – as most parents are – but does not describe his life as “richer,” he describes it as “different.” Sometimes it’s richer and sometimes it’s horrible.
At the end of the day, it’s a trade off. I’m fully aware that I’m “missing something” by not having children of my own. The trade off is that I have all sorts of things that I enjoy doing that I have time to do precisely because I don’t have kids. For my cranial wiring, not having kids is the better choice. Most folks want or need the emotional stuff that comes with having kids. I and many others don’t. And when I want the fun stuff associated with children… that’s what my bother’s kids are for. I’m happy to freeride off him in this area.
March 12, 2011 at 9:37 AM #677151Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Brian and BG,
I never said it was for everyone, I asked how he would know without living it.[SNIP]
Not saying its for everyone but how would you know if you never experienced something?[/quote]
Pardon me if I butt in on this for a second.
On the one hand, I kinda sorta agree with what you’re trying to get at here. On the other hand, this particular argument is not logically consistent.
I’ve never put my hand on top of a burning stove but I’m quite sure that I don’t want to experience it. My point is that while the direct day-to-day experience of raising children clearly gives one greater insight into the act itself, watching other folks do it sheds a great deal of light on it as well. One does not necessarily need to directly experience something to know whether it’s going to be enjoyable to them or not.
Most parents are so emotionally attached to their children that they are incapable of being objective about raising them and/or what the advantages and disadvantages are. [That’s the very nature of emotion – it’s illogical.] Most parents of killers, for example, still love their murderous offspring. Parents are not objective about their children so anything they say about them must be taken with a grain of salt.
My brother has twin boys and I really enjoy spending time with them. I enjoy being an uncle, so I’m glad he decided to have kids. But if I had to raise those little buggers – or any other children – eventually there would be a murder suicide. It’s just not for me. My brother is glad he has kids – as most parents are – but does not describe his life as “richer,” he describes it as “different.” Sometimes it’s richer and sometimes it’s horrible.
At the end of the day, it’s a trade off. I’m fully aware that I’m “missing something” by not having children of my own. The trade off is that I have all sorts of things that I enjoy doing that I have time to do precisely because I don’t have kids. For my cranial wiring, not having kids is the better choice. Most folks want or need the emotional stuff that comes with having kids. I and many others don’t. And when I want the fun stuff associated with children… that’s what my bother’s kids are for. I’m happy to freeride off him in this area.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.