Last year, we got a little money from the sale of a property.
Now, we're "struggling" with a lack of cash. I use the quotation marks because we have several accounts intended as various retirement accounts to which I've been contributing. Some experts say "pay yourself ten percent first" and we're doing more than that as far as putting money into those accounts.
I bring in more than the average income for where we live.
But we are struggling to pay off our credit cards every month so we don't get charged interest or fees (which we've successfully avoided, as usual).
So where did the money go? Well, we've had higher than "usual" expenses for the last 18 months or so. My wife and I listed some of them to each other. The one thing she didn't bring up that I'm not going to bring up is... HER MEDICAL EXPENSES. Which... is... one... reason.. why... it... is... such... a... problem... that... she... wasn't... honest... with... me... before... we... married... and... kept... lying... at... least... until... earlier... this... year... long... after... we... brought... children... into... this... mess.
Now, my wife has access to all of our accounts. She can see this stuff for herself.
Our vehicles are not new, and so they require a lot of upkeep (but at least there are no payments). Her dog is quite expensive with the vet visits, many of which could be prevented if my wife took care of her own dog. There's therapists. Yes, multiple. There was a problem with the house (the house she loved so much when it was time to buy but now admits was a mistake) and that problem had to be corrected and THAT took the biggest chunk of the money. The insurance company didn't help, but after they dropped by for a visit they did demand some tree trimming - $$$. The electric bill for the house is ridiculous because of inefficiencies. We spent more on gasoline, since some of her family moved further away and it was important for her to visit her family and mine with the kids so that she would have help with them.
Paying other people to look after our kids in ways that my wife was supposed to is also very expensive. Some of the money went to cable and other expensive entertainment we no longer buy. There was a trip out of state (complete with our kids) for a funeral, a trip in the state, and more recently, airline tickets we can't use right now that will cost us to change or cancel and the leftover money we don't get back but can theoretically use in the future. Right. There have been HUNDREDS of dollars spent on our kids' birthday parties, and let's not forget Christmas! There are new activities and sports for the kids, we each "need" iPads. We've also "needed" replacement iPads after unfortunate effects of gravity.
I also started up monthly payments into an additional insurance/retirement thing that benefits my wife and kids, not me in the slightest. Maybe I shouldn't have done that!
And maybe if my wife prepared meals more than once every week or three, we'd spend less money on fast food.
So yeah... where did the money go?
A look at the world from a sometimes sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek, decidedly American male perspective. Lately, this blog has been mostly about gender issues, dating, marriage, divorce, sex, and parenting via analyzing talk radio, advice columns, news stories, religion, and pop culture in general. I often challenge common platitudes, arguments. and subcultural elements perpetuated by fellow Evangelicals, social conservatives. Read at your own risk.
Monday, October 20, 2014
Thursday, October 16, 2014
It's Deja Vu All Over Again
I dislike when talk radio broadcasts and/or their subsequent podcasts do not make it clear (or even hide the fact) that they are rebroadcasts.
I get that some might not do it because it hurts ratings. After all, if someone has already heard that segment, hour, or entire show, they might not listen to it again. I've caught myself listening until there's a call I remember and then I stop, so that tactic has worked on me. However, when they'll clearly note it is a "best of" sometimes, but not other times, I wonder why they can do it those sometimes and then they don't do it that other time.
I subscribe to Dennis Prager's podcasts and Dr. Laura's podcasts. I can listen to Prager live for free, but I don't have satellite radio so listening to Dr. Laura is another matter. I listen to every NEW hour of Dr. Laura. So when a "best of" is noted in the podcast listings, I don't brother to listen. I can see why Dr. Laura might want me to listen to the same hours again, since she does do "in-show" commercials. The breaks are cut out of the podcasts and I'd fast forward through them anyway. They get my subscription money either way. Sometimes the "best of" shows are labeled as such (both in text and in the introductory audio itself), and sometimes, annoyingly, they aren't. Dennis Prager's "best of" and guest hosting hours are always labeled as such. The topics of the hours are also listed, so I can decide if I want to bother to download them or not in the first place. Since they get my money anyway and Prager does NOT do "in-show" commercials and the podcasts cut out the breaks, it doesn't make a difference to them.
I try to listen to Michael Medved if my schedule permits and the topic of the hour interests me. Often his "best of" shows are NOT labeled, and again, that's annoying but at least I'm not paying to hear him. I also listen to Tom Leykis for free, again, if the topic interests me. I NEVER listen the last Wednesday of the year when he has that ridiculous "Ask a Mexican" guy on. That guy is NOT Mexican, as far as I know. If you're born in the USA, you're an American. That guy calls himself a Mexican anyway, then breaks out the fake accent for certain words, and last I heard, kept talking about Orange County as being some horribly racist place (so racist most of the "minority" populations keep growing there). So there's three hours I never hear.
Stand to Reason has free podcasts (STR is listener-supported) of its weekly show. Usually, if the broadcast show is a repeat or a lecture the host made elsewhere rather than the talk show, they won't bother to put it out as a podcast, and that's great by me. STR also lists the topics of the podcast and where in the podcast they start. VERY convenient.
I've fallen way behind on Bible Answer Man podcasts, which are free (listener-supported) and are made of the broadcast talk show. Again, they list the topics and so there have been episodes I haven't bothered to download. However, if I recall correctly, the text describing the podcasts doesn't usually note when it is a duplicate (because the broadcast was a rebroadcast).
The bottom line is that I wish all broadcasts of podcasts of radio/audio talk shows would make it clear before I bother to listen or download if they're a best of. If I missed the original, I just might listen.
I get that some might not do it because it hurts ratings. After all, if someone has already heard that segment, hour, or entire show, they might not listen to it again. I've caught myself listening until there's a call I remember and then I stop, so that tactic has worked on me. However, when they'll clearly note it is a "best of" sometimes, but not other times, I wonder why they can do it those sometimes and then they don't do it that other time.
I subscribe to Dennis Prager's podcasts and Dr. Laura's podcasts. I can listen to Prager live for free, but I don't have satellite radio so listening to Dr. Laura is another matter. I listen to every NEW hour of Dr. Laura. So when a "best of" is noted in the podcast listings, I don't brother to listen. I can see why Dr. Laura might want me to listen to the same hours again, since she does do "in-show" commercials. The breaks are cut out of the podcasts and I'd fast forward through them anyway. They get my subscription money either way. Sometimes the "best of" shows are labeled as such (both in text and in the introductory audio itself), and sometimes, annoyingly, they aren't. Dennis Prager's "best of" and guest hosting hours are always labeled as such. The topics of the hours are also listed, so I can decide if I want to bother to download them or not in the first place. Since they get my money anyway and Prager does NOT do "in-show" commercials and the podcasts cut out the breaks, it doesn't make a difference to them.
I try to listen to Michael Medved if my schedule permits and the topic of the hour interests me. Often his "best of" shows are NOT labeled, and again, that's annoying but at least I'm not paying to hear him. I also listen to Tom Leykis for free, again, if the topic interests me. I NEVER listen the last Wednesday of the year when he has that ridiculous "Ask a Mexican" guy on. That guy is NOT Mexican, as far as I know. If you're born in the USA, you're an American. That guy calls himself a Mexican anyway, then breaks out the fake accent for certain words, and last I heard, kept talking about Orange County as being some horribly racist place (so racist most of the "minority" populations keep growing there). So there's three hours I never hear.
Stand to Reason has free podcasts (STR is listener-supported) of its weekly show. Usually, if the broadcast show is a repeat or a lecture the host made elsewhere rather than the talk show, they won't bother to put it out as a podcast, and that's great by me. STR also lists the topics of the podcast and where in the podcast they start. VERY convenient.
I've fallen way behind on Bible Answer Man podcasts, which are free (listener-supported) and are made of the broadcast talk show. Again, they list the topics and so there have been episodes I haven't bothered to download. However, if I recall correctly, the text describing the podcasts doesn't usually note when it is a duplicate (because the broadcast was a rebroadcast).
The bottom line is that I wish all broadcasts of podcasts of radio/audio talk shows would make it clear before I bother to listen or download if they're a best of. If I missed the original, I just might listen.
Monday, October 06, 2014
Tying the Hands of Parents Behind Their Backs
If you're looking to have as little government involvement in your life, then you have another reason to NOT have children.
Having children means the government will have a foot in the door of your home. Even if you avoid government schools and send your kids to private school or you homeschool them, all it takes is for someone to report being concerned about your children to get the government involved in your home, even if there is not even a hint of abuse or neglect of your children. It can be someone in your extended family. It could be some stranger in the parking lot of a supermarket. It could be a neighbor.
Even if the police or social workers, after getting into your private life, determine everything is fine for your kids, there will now be a file and a record of them having gotten involved, and you're on your way to losing the benefit of the doubt.
The recent high-profile case of a National Football League player apparently repeatedly striking his young son with a switch is an extreme case. I'm not talking about something as extreme as that. How about a light swat in the tush with an open hand? Some people consider that abuse.
So there's the...
Having children means the government will have a foot in the door of your home. Even if you avoid government schools and send your kids to private school or you homeschool them, all it takes is for someone to report being concerned about your children to get the government involved in your home, even if there is not even a hint of abuse or neglect of your children. It can be someone in your extended family. It could be some stranger in the parking lot of a supermarket. It could be a neighbor.
Even if the police or social workers, after getting into your private life, determine everything is fine for your kids, there will now be a file and a record of them having gotten involved, and you're on your way to losing the benefit of the doubt.
The recent high-profile case of a National Football League player apparently repeatedly striking his young son with a switch is an extreme case. I'm not talking about something as extreme as that. How about a light swat in the tush with an open hand? Some people consider that abuse.
So there's the...
Thursday, October 02, 2014
When the Chickens Come Home to Choke
Warning: this entry deals explicitly with adult matters such as masturbation and marital sexuality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)