Cost v's number of children

Lotta_Littlies

black-saturn wrote:

Have you ever noticed how the working parent relies on the stay at home parent to be able to work (i.e. a childminder). If it werent for the SAHM no one with children would be able to work at all.

So you agree that your previous quote isn't correct?

Lotta

black-saturn

I agree this thread has got way out of hand. I agree that people say such nasty things on here and I don't think the amount of children the OP wants to have is anyone elses business.

teb_2

black-saturn wrote:

I agree this thread has got way out of hand. I agree that people say such nasty things on here and I don't think the amount of children the OP wants to have is anyone elses business.

Nor is it the OP's business how many children anyone else has either. Which if I'm not mistaken, was where most of us came in (and why).

liney

Perhaps it would be good idea to open up a debate forum?

That way people can avoid participating in that forum if they do not like having their views challenged, and if you just wanted a sympathetic ear you can chose not to post in there.

viktory

Scarlett1 wrote:

unfortunately its turned into playground bullying and I see that a few posters have come out of the woodwork to join in, where is the boardguide cause I think this witch hunt should now come to a close :rolleyes:

A witch hunt against whom? Who is bullying whom? All I have seen is some very heated debate. This is an public forum and the OP left herself open to criticism (and support) by posting on such a forum.

The old saying about heat and kitchens springs to mind here.

viktory

black-saturn wrote:

I agree this thread has got way out of hand. I agree that people say such nasty things on here and I don't think the amount of children the OP wants to have is anyone elses business.

The OP has made it our business by posting on an open forum! Unfortuntately for the OP's sister, we also know her business as that has also been discussed on an open forum! I wonder if she knows?

krisskross

Katinkka wrote:

If you do ever get one, remember its Alfa Romeo not 'alpha'. I have a 147 and costs me a fortune. 22mpg and group 14 insurance


.

It was the most expensive luxury i could think of:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Apart from children of course :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

krisskross

black-saturn wrote:

I agree this thread has got way out of hand. I agree that people say such nasty things on here and I don't think the amount of children the OP wants to have is anyone elses business.

Not enough people agreeing with you then?

As well as heat and kitchen, pot , kettle and black spring to mind.

pandas66

black-saturn wrote:

Have you ever noticed how the working parent relies on the stay at home parent to be able to work (i.e. a childminder). If it werent for the SAHM no one with children would be able to work at all.

Are you a SAHM B-S or a work from home (with hours to suit) mum?

pandas66

black-saturn wrote:

In that case then the people who have children whilst on benefit will pay towards the system in the future. I worked for 8 years before having children and then spent 5 years on benefit. Now I am working again and paying into the tax system again. How is that different to how you explain you are going to pay for your pension?

not necesarily will they go into work, glad to hear you gave 8 years in.I realise most of the posts (re)directed to B-S can be construde as 'bullying' as repeatly posters ask for a reply to previous posts. I have fallen in the trap once again, still beats working!