- This topic has 615 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by
saiine.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 12, 2011 at 9:37 AM #677500March 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM #676355
davelj
Participant[quote=paramount]
To each their own, however as for me and my family we will serve our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yes, we are Catholic.[/quote][quote=paramount]
By the way, as I recently mentioned I was approved for a new mortgage – on top of the one I already have. The problem is, I want to move to San Elijo Hills. I don’t qualify for the property I would like to buy in SEH, primarily b/c I am not allowed to count what would be my rental income from my house in Temecula.There has to be a way to get this done, I need to qualify for about 100k more. Any ideas?[/quote]
Prayer?
Given his benevolence and vast powers, this should be a pretty simple task for your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I’m just spitballin’.
March 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM #676412Participant[quote=paramount]
To each their own, however as for me and my family we will serve our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yes, we are Catholic.[/quote][quote=paramount]
By the way, as I recently mentioned I was approved for a new mortgage – on top of the one I already have. The problem is, I want to move to San Elijo Hills. I don’t qualify for the property I would like to buy in SEH, primarily b/c I am not allowed to count what would be my rental income from my house in Temecula.There has to be a way to get this done, I need to qualify for about 100k more. Any ideas?[/quote]
Prayer?
Given his benevolence and vast powers, this should be a pretty simple task for your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I’m just spitballin’.
March 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM #677020Participant[quote=paramount]
To each their own, however as for me and my family we will serve our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yes, we are Catholic.[/quote][quote=paramount]
By the way, as I recently mentioned I was approved for a new mortgage – on top of the one I already have. The problem is, I want to move to San Elijo Hills. I don’t qualify for the property I would like to buy in SEH, primarily b/c I am not allowed to count what would be my rental income from my house in Temecula.There has to be a way to get this done, I need to qualify for about 100k more. Any ideas?[/quote]
Prayer?
Given his benevolence and vast powers, this should be a pretty simple task for your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I’m just spitballin’.
March 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM #677156Participant[quote=paramount]
To each their own, however as for me and my family we will serve our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yes, we are Catholic.[/quote][quote=paramount]
By the way, as I recently mentioned I was approved for a new mortgage – on top of the one I already have. The problem is, I want to move to San Elijo Hills. I don’t qualify for the property I would like to buy in SEH, primarily b/c I am not allowed to count what would be my rental income from my house in Temecula.There has to be a way to get this done, I need to qualify for about 100k more. Any ideas?[/quote]
Prayer?
Given his benevolence and vast powers, this should be a pretty simple task for your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I’m just spitballin’.
March 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM #677505Participant[quote=paramount]
To each their own, however as for me and my family we will serve our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yes, we are Catholic.[/quote][quote=paramount]
By the way, as I recently mentioned I was approved for a new mortgage – on top of the one I already have. The problem is, I want to move to San Elijo Hills. I don’t qualify for the property I would like to buy in SEH, primarily b/c I am not allowed to count what would be my rental income from my house in Temecula.There has to be a way to get this done, I need to qualify for about 100k more. Any ideas?[/quote]
Prayer?
Given his benevolence and vast powers, this should be a pretty simple task for your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I’m just spitballin’.
March 12, 2011 at 10:40 AM #676365bearishgurl
Participant[quote=davelj][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… 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…[/quote]
davelj, good analogy. At least you and brian KNOW yourselves and are not contributing to overpopulation.
I made my (OT) response post here for two reasons:
1) I’ve worked on a few lengthy dissolution cases and have repeatedly seen one party (the party who considers it their “role” to be the main caregiver of everyone in the family) end up living in poverty after separation and eventual finalization of the case. If they recieved a settlement, they usually went thru it quickly trying to live as they always had while married. Throughout the marriage, these (usually moms) never attempted to get an education and only had sporadic work experience, if any. CA domestic law is not set up to provide for these people, only to give them a “leg up,” if feasible, in order to begin making their own living. Many squander the “leg up” or do not even have that to begin with, due to the marital community being in debt. I personally don’t think women should completely lapse into the “mommy track” in this day and age. The “mommy track” has trapped millions of women in generations past who never obtained any relief from this self-made prison unless their spouse predeceased them. All kinds of things happen in life and taking an extended “mommy track” while young severely limits the future options of its participants, IMHO.
2) It seemed to me that 90% of active Piggs already were or seemed to want to live in a nondescript suburban or exurban tract where every 5th house has the same floor plan. They seem to be making their purchase decisions based upon a local school attendance-area only and their “perception” of those schools and “perception” of the area. For the areas they “perceive” to be acceptable, they are often willing to pay dearly in the form of MR and HOA dues. There’s nothing wrong with this. We are all free to make our own choices.
But, from what I’ve read here, some of this mindset appears to have to do with an innate desire to be a “helicopter parent” while their children are still babies and in some cases, even before they are born. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, as long as these “helicopter parents” aren’t attempting to run public schools to their liking who already have qualified, employed professionals there to run it according to district and state standards.
This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.
I understand that the bulk of the current “active Pigg” group is not representative of the general population. It’s a group that is currently in its most active “homebuying years,” thus the reason why they are active Piggs :=]
However, it’s always refreshing to have other viewpoints around here. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.
March 12, 2011 at 10:40 AM #676422Participant[quote=davelj][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… 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…[/quote]
davelj, good analogy. At least you and brian KNOW yourselves and are not contributing to overpopulation.
I made my (OT) response post here for two reasons:
1) I’ve worked on a few lengthy dissolution cases and have repeatedly seen one party (the party who considers it their “role” to be the main caregiver of everyone in the family) end up living in poverty after separation and eventual finalization of the case. If they recieved a settlement, they usually went thru it quickly trying to live as they always had while married. Throughout the marriage, these (usually moms) never attempted to get an education and only had sporadic work experience, if any. CA domestic law is not set up to provide for these people, only to give them a “leg up,” if feasible, in order to begin making their own living. Many squander the “leg up” or do not even have that to begin with, due to the marital community being in debt. I personally don’t think women should completely lapse into the “mommy track” in this day and age. The “mommy track” has trapped millions of women in generations past who never obtained any relief from this self-made prison unless their spouse predeceased them. All kinds of things happen in life and taking an extended “mommy track” while young severely limits the future options of its participants, IMHO.
2) It seemed to me that 90% of active Piggs already were or seemed to want to live in a nondescript suburban or exurban tract where every 5th house has the same floor plan. They seem to be making their purchase decisions based upon a local school attendance-area only and their “perception” of those schools and “perception” of the area. For the areas they “perceive” to be acceptable, they are often willing to pay dearly in the form of MR and HOA dues. There’s nothing wrong with this. We are all free to make our own choices.
But, from what I’ve read here, some of this mindset appears to have to do with an innate desire to be a “helicopter parent” while their children are still babies and in some cases, even before they are born. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, as long as these “helicopter parents” aren’t attempting to run public schools to their liking who already have qualified, employed professionals there to run it according to district and state standards.
This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.
I understand that the bulk of the current “active Pigg” group is not representative of the general population. It’s a group that is currently in its most active “homebuying years,” thus the reason why they are active Piggs :=]
However, it’s always refreshing to have other viewpoints around here. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.
March 12, 2011 at 10:40 AM #677030Participant[quote=davelj][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… 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…[/quote]
davelj, good analogy. At least you and brian KNOW yourselves and are not contributing to overpopulation.
I made my (OT) response post here for two reasons:
1) I’ve worked on a few lengthy dissolution cases and have repeatedly seen one party (the party who considers it their “role” to be the main caregiver of everyone in the family) end up living in poverty after separation and eventual finalization of the case. If they recieved a settlement, they usually went thru it quickly trying to live as they always had while married. Throughout the marriage, these (usually moms) never attempted to get an education and only had sporadic work experience, if any. CA domestic law is not set up to provide for these people, only to give them a “leg up,” if feasible, in order to begin making their own living. Many squander the “leg up” or do not even have that to begin with, due to the marital community being in debt. I personally don’t think women should completely lapse into the “mommy track” in this day and age. The “mommy track” has trapped millions of women in generations past who never obtained any relief from this self-made prison unless their spouse predeceased them. All kinds of things happen in life and taking an extended “mommy track” while young severely limits the future options of its participants, IMHO.
2) It seemed to me that 90% of active Piggs already were or seemed to want to live in a nondescript suburban or exurban tract where every 5th house has the same floor plan. They seem to be making their purchase decisions based upon a local school attendance-area only and their “perception” of those schools and “perception” of the area. For the areas they “perceive” to be acceptable, they are often willing to pay dearly in the form of MR and HOA dues. There’s nothing wrong with this. We are all free to make our own choices.
But, from what I’ve read here, some of this mindset appears to have to do with an innate desire to be a “helicopter parent” while their children are still babies and in some cases, even before they are born. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, as long as these “helicopter parents” aren’t attempting to run public schools to their liking who already have qualified, employed professionals there to run it according to district and state standards.
This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.
I understand that the bulk of the current “active Pigg” group is not representative of the general population. It’s a group that is currently in its most active “homebuying years,” thus the reason why they are active Piggs :=]
However, it’s always refreshing to have other viewpoints around here. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.
March 12, 2011 at 10:40 AM #677165Participant[quote=davelj][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… 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…[/quote]
davelj, good analogy. At least you and brian KNOW yourselves and are not contributing to overpopulation.
I made my (OT) response post here for two reasons:
1) I’ve worked on a few lengthy dissolution cases and have repeatedly seen one party (the party who considers it their “role” to be the main caregiver of everyone in the family) end up living in poverty after separation and eventual finalization of the case. If they recieved a settlement, they usually went thru it quickly trying to live as they always had while married. Throughout the marriage, these (usually moms) never attempted to get an education and only had sporadic work experience, if any. CA domestic law is not set up to provide for these people, only to give them a “leg up,” if feasible, in order to begin making their own living. Many squander the “leg up” or do not even have that to begin with, due to the marital community being in debt. I personally don’t think women should completely lapse into the “mommy track” in this day and age. The “mommy track” has trapped millions of women in generations past who never obtained any relief from this self-made prison unless their spouse predeceased them. All kinds of things happen in life and taking an extended “mommy track” while young severely limits the future options of its participants, IMHO.
2) It seemed to me that 90% of active Piggs already were or seemed to want to live in a nondescript suburban or exurban tract where every 5th house has the same floor plan. They seem to be making their purchase decisions based upon a local school attendance-area only and their “perception” of those schools and “perception” of the area. For the areas they “perceive” to be acceptable, they are often willing to pay dearly in the form of MR and HOA dues. There’s nothing wrong with this. We are all free to make our own choices.
But, from what I’ve read here, some of this mindset appears to have to do with an innate desire to be a “helicopter parent” while their children are still babies and in some cases, even before they are born. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, as long as these “helicopter parents” aren’t attempting to run public schools to their liking who already have qualified, employed professionals there to run it according to district and state standards.
This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.
I understand that the bulk of the current “active Pigg” group is not representative of the general population. It’s a group that is currently in its most active “homebuying years,” thus the reason why they are active Piggs :=]
However, it’s always refreshing to have other viewpoints around here. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.
March 12, 2011 at 10:40 AM #677515Participant[quote=davelj][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… 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…[/quote]
davelj, good analogy. At least you and brian KNOW yourselves and are not contributing to overpopulation.
I made my (OT) response post here for two reasons:
1) I’ve worked on a few lengthy dissolution cases and have repeatedly seen one party (the party who considers it their “role” to be the main caregiver of everyone in the family) end up living in poverty after separation and eventual finalization of the case. If they recieved a settlement, they usually went thru it quickly trying to live as they always had while married. Throughout the marriage, these (usually moms) never attempted to get an education and only had sporadic work experience, if any. CA domestic law is not set up to provide for these people, only to give them a “leg up,” if feasible, in order to begin making their own living. Many squander the “leg up” or do not even have that to begin with, due to the marital community being in debt. I personally don’t think women should completely lapse into the “mommy track” in this day and age. The “mommy track” has trapped millions of women in generations past who never obtained any relief from this self-made prison unless their spouse predeceased them. All kinds of things happen in life and taking an extended “mommy track” while young severely limits the future options of its participants, IMHO.
2) It seemed to me that 90% of active Piggs already were or seemed to want to live in a nondescript suburban or exurban tract where every 5th house has the same floor plan. They seem to be making their purchase decisions based upon a local school attendance-area only and their “perception” of those schools and “perception” of the area. For the areas they “perceive” to be acceptable, they are often willing to pay dearly in the form of MR and HOA dues. There’s nothing wrong with this. We are all free to make our own choices.
But, from what I’ve read here, some of this mindset appears to have to do with an innate desire to be a “helicopter parent” while their children are still babies and in some cases, even before they are born. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, as long as these “helicopter parents” aren’t attempting to run public schools to their liking who already have qualified, employed professionals there to run it according to district and state standards.
This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.
I understand that the bulk of the current “active Pigg” group is not representative of the general population. It’s a group that is currently in its most active “homebuying years,” thus the reason why they are active Piggs :=]
However, it’s always refreshing to have other viewpoints around here. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.
March 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM #676394sdrealtor
ParticipantJust one quickie:
“This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.”
It is not the generation, it is the culture. I was raised this way as were all my relatives who are older than you. To my knowledge all have good common sense, good careers and are thriving rather than merely surviving in the “real” world. Some cultures are “child centric” and others arent. Lets leave it at that.
March 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM #676451ParticipantJust one quickie:
“This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.”
It is not the generation, it is the culture. I was raised this way as were all my relatives who are older than you. To my knowledge all have good common sense, good careers and are thriving rather than merely surviving in the “real” world. Some cultures are “child centric” and others arent. Lets leave it at that.
March 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM #677061ParticipantJust one quickie:
“This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.”
It is not the generation, it is the culture. I was raised this way as were all my relatives who are older than you. To my knowledge all have good common sense, good careers and are thriving rather than merely surviving in the “real” world. Some cultures are “child centric” and others arent. Lets leave it at that.
March 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM #677195ParticipantJust one quickie:
“This indulgent “child-centric” lifestyle not the way my generation was raised so we don’t have those values, nor did I raise my own children with them. My children (except one, still in HS) are on their own, debt free, self-sufficient and paying their own bills. Most importantly, they all have common sense and can survive in the “real world” (which is where EVERY kid ends up after college). In my mind, that is the ultimate goal of child rearing.”
It is not the generation, it is the culture. I was raised this way as were all my relatives who are older than you. To my knowledge all have good common sense, good careers and are thriving rather than merely surviving in the “real” world. Some cultures are “child centric” and others arent. Lets leave it at that.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.