Opt out or left out?

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-07-2003
Opt out or left out?
430
Mon, 05-13-2013 - 3:31pm

This article says that most SAH moms do so, because they can't afford to work (i.e. couldn't make enough to cover their childcare costs).  Or that their husband's income is in the top 5% of earners in the US.  So SAHMs are at the two extreme ends of income.  This seems to me to be pretty much what we've found through discussions on this board.  Do you think that there should be programs in place to make it easier for SAHMs in the lower income brackets to go back to work?  How could this be accomplished?

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/opt-out-or-left-out-economics-stay-home-moms-1C9881635

Pages

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:47pm

chestnuthooligan wrote:
<p>The only really good reason to refinance a mortgage is to get a interest lower rate. Any other reason, e.g., consolidating debt, cashing out for home improvements or other unplanned expenses is debious in a housing market that can contract, and squeeze value from the home.</p>

Interesting logic considering you defend folks who borrow more mortgage than they can afford to begin with.  You know, those mortgage broker scams and all. 

 


 


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2013
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:47pm

Yes, part time, that is what those words state.  The article doesn't address wanting to return to full time work and your comment don't address the question.  Why can't you just answer the question as written?  

Nope, she doesn't, so why not if they are struggling so bad?

Programs that help people go back to work, why is that a problem with you?

I answered this already. 

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-24-2010
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:47pm

springfever2013 wrote:
<div><ul><li><ul><li><p><strong><span style="font-size:small"><span style="font-family:ArialMT">•</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">  </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">UPK stands for </span><span style="font-family:Calibri; font-style:italic">Universal Pre-Kindergarten. </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">It is a grant that is given to a district for the purpose of providing Pre-K only. It cannot be allocated to any other program.</span></span></strong></p></li><li><p><strong><span style="font-size:small"><span style="font-family:ArialMT">•</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">  </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">The grant is limited and can only be used on a </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">pre-determined </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">amount of students. State guidelines do not allow for the grant to be used in any other manner.</span></span></strong></p></li><li><p><strong><span style="font-size:small"><span style="font-family:ArialMT">•</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">  </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">ParAcipants are chosen through a logery system, to be held in April. Any family who applies will have a number assigned that will be placed in the logery. ALL NUMBERS will be selected. When the spots for the UPK have been drawn, the remaining numbers will be placed on a waiAng list. These families will have the opportunity to enroll in the * </span><span style="font-family:Calibri; font-style:italic">tui7on based program </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">if they so choose. (*The availability of the program is conAngent on space in the district.)</span></span></strong></p></li><li><p><strong><span style="font-size:small"><span style="font-family:ArialMT">•</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">  </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">The waiAng list remains acAve throughout the year. As students move throughout the program, you may sAll be called to take part in the UPK.</span></span></strong></p></li><li><p><strong><span style="font-size:small"><span style="font-family:ArialMT">•</span><span style="font-family:Helvetica">  </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">FOR ELIGIBILITY, STUDENTS MUST BE TURNING 4 BY DEC. 1</span><span style="font-family:Calibri">ST</span><span style="font-family:Calibri">, AND </span><span style="font-family:Calibri">NOT ELIGIBLE FOR KINDERGARTEN.</span></span></strong></p></li></ul></li></ul></div>

Yes I'm not stupid, I understand the part about a lottery system preschool.  I don't understand why they call it universal since they do not offer it universally to the entire 4 year old population of their own district.  The answer seems to be "for no good reason."  

“Clearly," said Arthur,"you're an idiot- but you're our kind of idiot. Come on.” 
― Markus ZusakThe Book Thief

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2013
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:50pm

She makes $11 an hour. Whether it's 20hrs or 40hrs, she can not afford child care for an infant and a toddler. It's the math.

Willix, who lives in rural Bonnerdale, Ark., had just earned a college degree in English and gotten a job making $9.50 an hour working in a chiropractor’s clinic when she found out she was pregnant.

She had planned to go back to work part-time after the baby was born, but scrapped those plans after realizing she’d have to make at least $11 an hour just to break even on child care costs.

Nope, she WAS making $9.50/hour in a PART TIME job. She would HAVE to make at least $11/hour to break even.  NO WHERE does it say if she worked FULL TIME in either situation would it help. 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2013
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:52pm

All kinds.

That's nice. I am sure there are many families out there they get "all kinds" of support from their families. Many don't ask or get themselves in a bad situation though to GET that support. 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2013
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:54pm

Yes I'm not stupid, I understand the part about a lottery system preschool.  I don't understand why they call it universal since they do not offer it universally to the entire 4 year old population of their own district.  The answer seems to be "for no good reason."  

I wouldn't know as I didn't make up the program. Maybe because it is OFFERED universally. NO ONE is denied to apply. 

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:54pm

springfever2013 wrote:
<p><span style="font-size:13px; text-align:left">My outlook is probably skewed because I grew up in a family of six kids and we were just squeaking by. I've worked since I was eleven, and I guess people might say I "suffered" because my parents had so many kids they could barely afford. However, when I think of my five sisters, who are still my best friends in the world, I can't agree I would have been better off with more "things" and fewer siblings. There's not one of them I would trade for the memory of childhood cruises, trips to Disney, or more toys or clothes.</span></p><p><span style="font-size:small"><strong><span style="text-align:left">No one, at least as I have read so far, is comparing material things for being a family. I am speaking of everyday things. Food, shelter, clothes, transportation. You don't continue to have children if you can't provide the basics for them. Children should not suffer because of your (in general) mistakes and lack of planning and common sense.</span></strong></span></p>

I don't see how the children in the article were suffering.  I wouldn't even see a family helping out another family member through a rough patch as children suffering.  What you can't seem to comprehend outside of your very narrow view is that people plan, sometimes things don't go according to plan and harping about said plan doesn't change the fact that the plan needs to change.  Broaden that narrow view a bit.

PumpkinAngel

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:57pm
Ahhh, Preschool memories... Lol.

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:58pm

springfever2013 wrote:
<p><span style="font-size:13px; text-align:left">Well that's a switch, you just said it didn't work for full time wohps, now it works for everyone?  Perhaps if all of those people living in illegal apartments paid their fair share of taxes, those who are living legally would have lower taxes?  It's quite a shame when those who living by their plan and legally have to pay for those who break the law.  </span></p><p style="text-align:left"><strong><span style="font-size:x-small"><span>The <span style="font-size:large">HOURS</span> do not work for full time people (not all but many)</span></span></strong></p>

Yea, I got it the first time, it doesn't work for everyone but you suddenly claim that it does when I mention something different.  

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 05-14-2013 - 1:58pm

springfever2013 wrote:
<p><span style="font-size:13px; text-align:left">Well that's a switch, you just said it didn't work for full time wohps, now it works for everyone?  Perhaps if all of those people living in illegal apartments paid their fair share of taxes, those who are living legally would have lower taxes?  It's quite a shame when those who living by their plan and legally have to pay for those who break the law.  </span></p><p style="text-align:left"><strong><span style="font-size:x-small"><span>The <span style="font-size:large">HOURS</span> do not work for full time people (not all but many)</span></span></strong></p>

Yea, I got it the first time, it doesn't work for everyone but you suddenly claim that it does when I mention something different.  

PumpkinAngel

Pages