Thursday, June 18, 2009

Conservatives say the silliest things

The finance minister of Alberta feels that in order to raise children properly, good parents means sacrificing some income so that one parent stays at home - like she did for her kids. I won't mention what else she said. You can read the rest in the linked article.

I'm going to guess that the while the minister stayed at home with her children, her partner wasn't earning $35,000 per year. So before you start lecturing about financial sacrifices.......

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

And then they have the gall to expect us to pay those ridiculous school fees!! However, I do think that if you are willing to stay at home for the first few years, it is beneficial to both the parent & the child. It is important to separate the wants from the needs...can you do without the second vehicle perhaps?... Is that satelite dish a must have?... Xmas presents for every single family member & friend you can think of?...Manicures & pedicures?...New flatscreen TV?...Dinner out every week?...Hardwood floors?...Green Drop Lawn service?...Annual winter vacation?...Maybe we want too much of everything these days and we should focus more on spending time with the people we love.

Goddess of Madness said...

BITE ME. To be able to afford a home... not a nice home but a home both my partner and I have to work, and my daughter has to be in daycare. To maintain one car we have to both work. I am not extravagant in my spending. I take one vacation a year usually within Canada. So get off the high horse you and that Torie Twit are on and GET A CLUE!

Anonymous said...

Trust me...I would never waste my money on a high horse. I did stay home with my two kids until they started kindergarten and he is making $35,000 working in a factory. We had/have a mortgage. Maybe you shouldn't have given into your urge to buy a "Trophy Queen" diaper bag for over $200...

Karl Plesz said...

Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you're living comfortably on $35,000 a year, you are a magician in my world. I'm guessing you either have very little left on your mortgage, or you don't live in Calgary. Here, if you took a 20 year mortgage on an average priced home right now at 4% interest with no down payment (who could afford to save one earning $35,000 per year?), you'd be paying $2645 per month. That's $31,740 per year. That leaves you a little over $3000 to live on for the whole year. Even if you bought a condo, you're still in it for $20,000 per year and that doesn't include condo fees, which would only leave you with $12,000 to live on all year.

The bottom line is this - I see plenty of examples of families that are barely scraping by on two incomes in my city. They don't even know what a vacation is. And they sure as hell don't buy their clothes at the Gap. They're shopping at Goodwill - and they can barely afford that.

This doesn't mean anyone is right or wrong. It's just how I see it.

Goddess of Madness said...

I love how you hide behind anonymous. And guess what sunshine I paid for that with money given to me for my birthday... money meant for me to do something nice for myself. So you can afford to have a mortgage on your partner's salary, great. Where we are at with student loans and such we can't not where we live. I have friends who are as you describe and I agree with you to a point. But just because both parents work outside the home it does not mean they are not good parents. I know people who are stay at home parents whose children are maladjusted nightmares. The situation can cut both ways. I am lucking out and this time around I can work from home rather than returning to the office after my mat leave. But all that aside no matter what the choice parents make to work or not, THIS DOES NOT MAKE EITHER A BAD PARENT!

Anonymous said...

My name is
Sue...now I'm no longer hiding behind anonymous.

Your comment..."But just because both parents work outside the home it does not mean they are not good parents."...I agree 100%! I never did say that parents who returned to working outside the home are bad. All I'm saying is that if you can sacrifice the WANTS and stick to the NEEDS that you wouldn't have to miss out on those few short years at home with your baby and toddler. Being able to spend that time with your child doesn't mean you are a better parent or that your child will always be better off. It will give you more time to bond and create memories though and once they grow up there's no going back. My opinion is that with planning, creative financing and wise spending habits many families, in Calgary and elseswhere, COULD be one income if they wanted to. Having stability and a roof over your head BEFORE deciding to get pregnant is the ideal. I realize that everyone has their own unique set of circumstances and that some are not able to survive on one income. I realize that some decide that they would have too much to lose (career-wise) if they stayed home for 5 years. Different strokes for different folks...no right or wrong...just different.