Middle Class Crisis as Middle Classes Forced into Crisis By Nannies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

RichardD1970 wrote: »

If you (as a couple) aren't willing to make a sacrifice for YOUR kids then what is the point of having them? .

That's an incredibly bizarre attitude to have.

Why should it be compulsory to give up a career to have kids?

It's quite possible to do both, have children AND a career, while still raising the kids in a loving/stable environment.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That's an incredibly bizarre attitude to have.

It's not, really.

If you don't have kids it's difficult to understand. I don't mean this in a derogatory way, I was the same.

Once you have children, for most, their whole attitude changes. What once seemed important now seems less so. You now have something far more important than you can ever have imagined it to be.

And that is why kids come before max earnings, as I say, for most.

Generali

RichardD1970 wrote: »

They should be YOUR (as a couple) primary concern not POSSIBLE future earnings.

I'm not sure why you see these things as mutually exclusive.

I would like my children to have as good an education as possible as I believe my primary responsibilities to my kids are to send them into the world well educated, well mannered and able to look after themselves.

The first part will mean sending them to a fee paying school. As I don't have a trust fund that will mean both of us working in order to afford it. That means we both need to build a career so we are earning enough to maintain the payment of school fees.

You may think that's 'posh' or some such and if you do that's great. I moved away from the UK to avoid the Class War so anyone that feels that way is perfectly welcome to stick it up their Aris.

RichardD1970

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That's an incredibly bizarre attitude to have.

Why should it be compulsory to give up a career to have kids?

It's quite possible to do both, have children AND a career, while still raising the kids in a loving/stable environment.

It's bizarre to be willing to make sacrifices for your kids?

Now that is a bizarre attitude.

I would make any sacrifices needed for my kids, ANY at all.

No one has said it is compulsory to give up a career, I was just curious about why someone would pay $10,000 more in child care than they earned for the sake of potential future earnings, live life for now, kids only grow up once.

Kennyboy66

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

It's a very good thing. Everyone should have a pension and started at a good early age. It's another good policy from the Conservatives.

Blimey, what next the Tories claiming credit for the minimum wage and setting up the NHS.

This was Labour policy & legislation and the 2008 Pensions Act was brought in under Labour (automatic enrolment, NEST, compulsory employer contributions) - with the start date of Oct 2012 which eventually make employers put in 3% by 2017

However, at least the coalition have not reversed this, as it's about the only decent legislation on pensions by all parties in the last 35 years.

CLAPTON

RichardD1970 wrote: »

It's bizarre to be willing to make sacrifices for your kids?

Now that is a bizarre attitude.

I would make any sacrifices needed for my kids, ANY at all.

No one has said it is compulsory to give up a career, I was just curious about why someone would pay $10,000 more in child care than they earned for the sake of potential future earnings, live life for now, kids only grow up once.

the issue isn't whether people will do the best for their children; the issue is your insistence that you know best what is best for other people's children without knowing their circumstances.

are you a politician?

RichardD1970

CLAPTON wrote: »

the issue isn't whether people will do the best for their children; the issue is your insistence that you know best what is best for other people's children without knowing their circumstances.

are you a politician?

And where have I said that? Are YOU a journalist?

I just asked why someone would pay £10,000 more than they earn for child care and not save themselves the money. (Money Saving Expert.com)

But then again I knew when I started this I would get attacked by the money driven element of this board.

ash28

RichardD1970 wrote: »

So it's a lifestyle choice, putting money before bringing up your kids yourself.

Not necessarily, sometimes it's necessity.....when we had children I gave up a fledgling career in engineering to stay at home and look after them.....OH carried on in his fledgling career in engineering....we were both in our mid 20s. If I'd wanted to go back to work when the children were very young I couldn't have afforded it.....childcare was very expensive back in the 1980s too and we couldn't have afforded 3 under 3s to be looked after.

I went back to full time work when our youngest started school - mainly because interest rates were so high it took most of OH's very decent salary to pay the mortgage (half of his salary at times) the bills, travel expenses etc. There was actually very little left to feed and clothe a family of 5. I'd been out of full time work for 8 years.....

Do I regret it...on one level I do because it would have been beneficial on some (but not every) level for the kids to have me at home but finances at the time were such that we probably would have ended up in pretty dire straits like many others at the time. And could possibly have lost the house.

On another level I didn't....I enjoyed my job and it was good to get back into it, although it was back to entry level in my 30s....I'd been out of it a long time. I never made those years up, either in terms of pension or seniority. It also gave me self confidence and self esteem to be in a place where I wasn't just someone's mother.....I was a person in my own right. It might be difficult for some to understand just how bad that could feel, it was a time when being a stay at home parent (especially a professional) was largely looked down on. Being back at work gave me the intellectual stimulation that I hadn't really realised I had lost...

Given that time again would I go back to work - the answer would be yes I would.

Loughton_Monkey

Am I missing something?

Surely, you'd either reduce your nanny's salary to below £9,440 or if she won't accept that, just sack her and replace by two part time ones. Each one paid £8K or something like that?

... large gin & tonics all round...

CLAPTON

RichardD1970 wrote: »

And where have I said that? Are YOU a journalist?

I just asked why someone would pay £10,000 more than they earn for child care and not save themselves the money. (Money Saving Expert.com)

But then again I knew when I started this I would get attacked by the money driven element of this board.

I'm explaining to you that it is their choice made with regard to their circumstances made in the best interests of their family.