8 ms·

The answer is in the first few paragraphs: they live beyond their means in a high income tax state, have 3 kids and farm animals, are addicted to consumerism -

by oil25 7y ago

The answer is in the first few paragraphs: they live beyond their means in a high income tax state, have 3 kids and farm animals, are addicted to consumerism - and want to participate without spending the little money they have.

pmorici 7y ago
Not really the vibe I got reading this. More like She wants to work but doesn't like the inflexible hours of her chosen profession so instead of doing nothing she does this which lets her be home when she needs to for the kids while still also making a bit of extra money to help with the family's finances. Nothing in this article indicates that the family has a problem with lavish spending or any other out of touch with reality problems.
- goldcd 7y ago
  I'm with you on this. I really don't like the 'gig-economy' being a replacement full-time job, but I can definitely see the advantages of it when you're at a loose-end and just want a bit of extra cash. ~ to when you decide you really should get off your ass and ebay off that stuff that's been sitting in the corner for a year.
- PhantomGremlin 7y ago
  Nothing in this article indicates that the family has a problem with lavish spending or any other out of touch with reality problems. I agree with the GP. The following screams "out of touch with reality" to me: There are also four dogs, a bunny, a tortoise, chickens, ducks, goats and a not-so-miniature miniature pig named Squiggy. Forget the rest of the menagerie, does a suburban family really need four dogs? Maybe they're raising the pig for an end-of-summer luau, but we don't usually eat dogs in the USA. So do they really need that many pets?
  - paul_f 7y ago
    The great thing about living in a free society is choices. Some people might like to have 4 dogs in the same way someone else might want to have a swimming pool. To each their own and we should avoid passing value judgement on individual preferences when it has nothing to do with ourselves.
lotsofpulp 7y ago
It's also funny that she thinks she's not out spending money, when she is consuming fuel, wear and tear on the vehicle, and increasing risk of morbidity/mortality by driving around, also leading to more sitting.
- tyingq 7y ago
  I wouldn't begrudge her that hard for finding something that adds a little joy.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    I don’t mean to begrudge, just pointing out that people don’t consider driving for 1 min costs them $0.60+ (prob $0.70 in CA) with a regular ICE vehicle. Plus the risk of being involved in a collision (greatest risk to one’s health that Americans face), plus of course pollution. These externalities are never accounted for, and which lead our society to behave in suboptimal ways. Not to mention allowing all these on demand delivery and ride hailing tech companies to buy drivers at very low cost.
    - krsrhe 7y ago
      $.6 is average not marginal. The first mile (initial purchase) is half the cost.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
      My family went on a car trip that went from the Midwest to California and back. Compared to Oklahoma, California's fuel is about twice as expensive. I'm going to guess that Cali's 1-minute cost is more around $1.
      - purplezooey 7y ago
        OK has such serious problems, though, not really a comparison.
endorphone 7y ago
Your comment is extraordinarily cynical and judgmental, and seems completely detached from an observational article.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- PhantomGremlin 7y ago
  If you allow yourself to be profiled by a national publication, you're inviting people to be "judgemental".
  - endorphone 7y ago
    And if you dispense such judgement on a public forum, you're inviting people to find it unfavorable. Detachment from the subject doesn't grant us the right to be assholes. Well I suppose we all have that right, but it doesn't blanket us from disagreement.
return1 7y ago
Thats needlessly accusatory. It seems they are the equivalent of (male) uber drivers and according to the article they get some extra income but not a lot.
knolax 7y ago
>they live beyond their means in a high income tax state Yeah how dare the poors live near me!/s
- umvi 7y ago
  Living beyond your means doesn't mean you are poor, just that your current style of living cannot be supported by your current income. If I moved into a 500k house and bought 2 new cars, I'd be beyond my means. I have lots of coworkers who do just this. I would wager they are making less than me, yet have a bigger house and better car.
  - atwebb 7y ago
    >I have lots of coworkers who do just this. I would wager they are making less than me, yet have a bigger house and better car. Is this real? I can't for the life of me figure out if it's a trope or if it's actually the case. We try to keep housing under 20% of budget if possible. I just assume most other folks do as well, I am definitely speaking to the 500k and not the sub 150k housing scenarios since I understand at some point you have to live somewhere. Though I guess that depends too, you can buy a 3-3.5k sq ft brand new house in the top school zones for 500k around here.
    - pkaye 7y ago
      I'm sure those tropes are engrained is some truth. Like the "House Hunters" memes we hear.
gist 7y ago
No doubt the HN crowd will not like a comment like that that is grounded in personal responsibility and planning. When did taking into account potential bad life occurrences and/or living beyond your means turn into sympathy for people who spend money on '2 masters degrees' but can't get employed with those because of life choices. And some other things 'prom dress' that honestly are not life essential (little things do add up; read further below) And this: > But now there's also soccer, swim team, lacrosse, broken cleats, a junior prom dress, trips to look at colleges, AP exams, SAT tests and summer camp. How about not thinking that you have to do or supply all of that to your children to start. Here's an idea. Maybe it would be <i>more beneficial to your kids</i> if you say you can't pay for some of those things. That's right. Let them have a taste of what can happen if you don't think far enough in advance or make life choices with only a small safety net. That will certain be a motivating factor, right? Parents are brainwashed and lemmings to think they have to do things 'to show colleges you are well rounded' or 'because that's what parents do for their kids'. Maybe need to get back to think ahead and plan or you will end up delivering groceries to others as your job earning meager pay.

by oil25 7y ago

pmorici 7y ago

Not really the vibe I got reading this. More like She wants to work but doesn't like the inflexible hours of her chosen profession so instead of doing nothing she does this which lets her be home when she needs to for the kids while still also making a bit of extra money to help with the family's finances. Nothing in this article indicates that the family has a problem with lavish spending or any other out of touch with reality problems.

goldcd 7y ago
I'm with you on this. I really don't like the 'gig-economy' being a replacement full-time job, but I can definitely see the advantages of it when you're at a loose-end and just want a bit of extra cash. ~ to when you decide you really should get off your ass and ebay off that stuff that's been sitting in the corner for a year.
PhantomGremlin 7y ago
Nothing in this article indicates that the family has a problem with lavish spending or any other out of touch with reality problems. I agree with the GP. The following screams "out of touch with reality" to me: There are also four dogs, a bunny, a tortoise, chickens, ducks, goats and a not-so-miniature miniature pig named Squiggy. Forget the rest of the menagerie, does a suburban family really need four dogs? Maybe they're raising the pig for an end-of-summer luau, but we don't usually eat dogs in the USA. So do they really need that many pets?
- paul_f 7y ago
  The great thing about living in a free society is choices. Some people might like to have 4 dogs in the same way someone else might want to have a swimming pool. To each their own and we should avoid passing value judgement on individual preferences when it has nothing to do with ourselves.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

It's also funny that she thinks she's not out spending money, when she is consuming fuel, wear and tear on the vehicle, and increasing risk of morbidity/mortality by driving around, also leading to more sitting.

tyingq 7y ago
I wouldn't begrudge her that hard for finding something that adds a little joy.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  I don’t mean to begrudge, just pointing out that people don’t consider driving for 1 min costs them $0.60+ (prob $0.70 in CA) with a regular ICE vehicle. Plus the risk of being involved in a collision (greatest risk to one’s health that Americans face), plus of course pollution. These externalities are never accounted for, and which lead our society to behave in suboptimal ways. Not to mention allowing all these on demand delivery and ride hailing tech companies to buy drivers at very low cost.
  - krsrhe 7y ago
    $.6 is average not marginal. The first mile (initial purchase) is half the cost.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
    My family went on a car trip that went from the Midwest to California and back. Compared to Oklahoma, California's fuel is about twice as expensive. I'm going to guess that Cali's 1-minute cost is more around $1.
    - purplezooey 7y ago
      OK has such serious problems, though, not really a comparison.

endorphone 7y ago

Your comment is extraordinarily cynical and judgmental, and seems completely detached from an observational article.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
PhantomGremlin 7y ago
If you allow yourself to be profiled by a national publication, you're inviting people to be "judgemental".
- endorphone 7y ago
  And if you dispense such judgement on a public forum, you're inviting people to find it unfavorable. Detachment from the subject doesn't grant us the right to be assholes. Well I suppose we all have that right, but it doesn't blanket us from disagreement.

return1 7y ago

Thats needlessly accusatory. It seems they are the equivalent of (male) uber drivers and according to the article they get some extra income but not a lot.

knolax 7y ago

>they live beyond their means in a high income tax state Yeah how dare the poors live near me!/s

umvi 7y ago
Living beyond your means doesn't mean you are poor, just that your current style of living cannot be supported by your current income. If I moved into a 500k house and bought 2 new cars, I'd be beyond my means. I have lots of coworkers who do just this. I would wager they are making less than me, yet have a bigger house and better car.
- atwebb 7y ago
  >I have lots of coworkers who do just this. I would wager they are making less than me, yet have a bigger house and better car. Is this real? I can't for the life of me figure out if it's a trope or if it's actually the case. We try to keep housing under 20% of budget if possible. I just assume most other folks do as well, I am definitely speaking to the 500k and not the sub 150k housing scenarios since I understand at some point you have to live somewhere. Though I guess that depends too, you can buy a 3-3.5k sq ft brand new house in the top school zones for 500k around here.
  - pkaye 7y ago
    I'm sure those tropes are engrained is some truth. Like the "House Hunters" memes we hear.

gist 7y ago

No doubt the HN crowd will not like a comment like that that is grounded in personal responsibility and planning. When did taking into account potential bad life occurrences and/or living beyond your means turn into sympathy for people who spend money on '2 masters degrees' but can't get employed with those because of life choices. And some other things 'prom dress' that honestly are not life essential (little things do add up; read further below) And this: > But now there's also soccer, swim team, lacrosse, broken cleats, a junior prom dress, trips to look at colleges, AP exams, SAT tests and summer camp. How about not thinking that you have to do or supply all of that to your children to start. Here's an idea. Maybe it would be <i>more beneficial to your kids</i> if you say you can't pay for some of those things. That's right. Let them have a taste of what can happen if you don't think far enough in advance or make life choices with only a small safety net. That will certain be a motivating factor, right? Parents are brainwashed and lemmings to think they have to do things 'to show colleges you are well rounded' or 'because that's what parents do for their kids'. Maybe need to get back to think ahead and plan or you will end up delivering groceries to others as your job earning meager pay.