Make a big life decision for me, please!

[snafu]

I wonder if you are a bit out-of-touch with economic reality whether N America or Europe. A recent interview with the Earl and Duchess Carnavon at Highclere, the real Downton Abbey, revealed how hard they work for future generations. Early last century there was a staff of 60. The current Earl pays a staff of 20. They host 60,000 tourists a year paying about $ 50. each to tour the two functioning floors. The current butler works in the ticket office during high season. There are hunting events for pheasant, grouse and Buck [didn't say cost per person]. Grounds are rented for events @ $225,000. per day. The two chefs do catering for events in near by towns. The upper floors are no longer functioning as the fireplaces have crumbled and there is serious mold on the walls. The Earl was distressed to have to sell some acres to pay taxes and upkeep. Renting to a TV show [he is friends of writer Julian Fellows] allows window and door repairs.

I can't imagine smiling at 60,000 people traipse through my home I wish home buyers really looked at mortgage amortization schedules. For the 1st 5 years, nearly all the payment goes to interest,property tax, insurance etc. there is hardly anything paid on principal. Equity holders demand profits and business is only as good as last quarter figures which impacts jobs and hiring policies. I sure hope you wrote off moving expenses on income taxes. Jobs are created for robots these days [according to Apple]. I wonder if the school you favor has provided validity data.

[syracusa]

I wonder if you are a bit out-of-touch with economic reality whether N America or Europe. A recent interview with the Earl and Duchess Carnavon at Highclere, the real Downton Abbey, revealed how hard they work for future generations. Early last century there was a staff of 60. The current Earl pays a staff of 20. They host 60,000 tourists a year paying about $ 50. each to tour the two functioning floors. The current butler works in the ticket office during high season. There are hunting events for pheasant, grouse and Buck [didn't say cost per person]. Grounds are rented for events @ $225,000. per day. The two chefs do catering for events in near by towns. The upper floors are no longer functioning as the fireplaces have crumbled and there is serious mold on the walls. The Earl was distressed to have to sell some acres to pay taxes and upkeep. Renting to a TV show [he is friends of writer Julian Fellows] allows window and door repairs.

I can't imagine smiling at 60,000 people traipse through my home I wish home buyers really looked at mortgage amortization schedules. For the 1st 5 years, nearly all the payment goes to interest,property tax, insurance etc. there is hardly anything paid on principal. Equity holders demand profits and business is only as good as last quarter figures which impacts jobs and hiring policies. I sure hope you wrote off moving expenses on income taxes. Jobs are created for robots these days [according to Apple]. I wonder if the school you favor has provided validity data.

So what's your point? You completely misunderstood my post. I was talking about the lifestyle portrayed in Downtown Abbey, not about the Fallen Gentry who inherited that castle (a major burden without the dough) and a fancy title, and now are more or less starving.
The true aristocrat, who has both wealth and a certain psychology, does not ever have to work. Period. They volunteer for "charities", show their distinguished faces in various places wearing dashing attire, cut ribbons ...and all that...when the spirit moves them.
This is what "work" is to them.

I am not saying it is even remotely likely for the vast majority of humans to step into a life like this. Most who live such lives are BORN that way. Even the richest self-made man cannot live like this because of his psychology. A self-made rich guy is still a market man even when he gets extremely rich. He needs to constantly compete, produce, keep growing, be "productive". These people are bred to work, not to enjoy life.
Most people, when faced with the rare situation of not having to work ever again for the rest of their days, do two things:
- go back to some kind of organized work (those who got rich on their own want to get even richer);
- fall prey to substance abuse or other types of addiction, including busting all the money they made.

What I said is that I would want to NOT HAVE TO work for pay. Nothing with obligations, deadlines, pressures, specific expectations - regardless of how much I would love the actual object of my work. For me, even the most attractive occupation turns into toil when it is marked by obligation. I am currently into an occupation that I love most of all the occupations I could ever do. Unfortunately, it still sucks because the loads are large, the deadlines are always there, everything needs to be done within a constraining framework.
That is toil. Not work I love doing. The only kind of work I would truly love doing would have to be sporadic, spontaneous, without deadlines, and only done when the spirit moves me.
Like a hobby.

Blasphemy? Maybe. Honesty? Yes.
Just because I could never live such a life, doesn't mean I can't dream of it.
I have worked my entire life like a dog and have contributed to society way more than I will ever be able to get out of it. So no one could ever accuse me of being a leech.
Just dreaming of being one. It's not against the law. Is it?

There are plenty of leeches out there, some poor, some very rich.
All I can say is: lucky them. I wish I could be one.

[KTP]

We plan on becoming leeches soon (less than 3 years to go on our leech plan).

Don't knock the leeches till you try it.

[syracusa]

We plan on becoming leeches soon (less than 3 years to go on our leech plan).

Don't knock the leeches till you try it.

Oh, totally!

And who knocked the leeches? ...

But are you going to be the kind of leeches I'm talking about?

If you guys busted your behinds your entire lives to put together some capital that will finally allow you to retire and rest your achy bones...then no, you will not be "my kind" of leeches.
You will just be tired people in need of some well deserved rest.

[syracusa]

I wonder if you are a bit out-of-touch with economic reality whether N America or Europe. A recent interview with the Earl and Duchess Carnavon at Highclere, the real Downton Abbey, revealed how hard they work for future generations. Early last century there was a staff of 60. The current Earl pays a staff of 20. They host 60,000 tourists a year paying about $ 50. each to tour the two functioning floors. The current butler works in the ticket office during high season. There are hunting events for pheasant, grouse and Buck [didn't say cost per person]. Grounds are rented for events @ $225,000. per day. The two chefs do catering for events in near by towns. The upper floors are no longer functioning as the fireplaces have crumbled and there is serious mold on the walls. The Earl was distressed to have to sell some acres to pay taxes and upkeep. Renting to a TV show [he is friends of writer Julian Fellows] allows window and door repairs.

I can't imagine smiling at 60,000 people traipse through my home I wish home buyers really looked at mortgage amortization schedules. For the 1st 5 years, nearly all the payment goes to interest,property tax, insurance etc. there is hardly anything paid on principal. Equity holders demand profits and business is only as good as last quarter figures which impacts jobs and hiring policies. I sure hope you wrote off moving expenses on income taxes. Jobs are created for robots these days [according to Apple]. I wonder if the school you favor has provided validity data.

Also, regarding the real gents of Downton Abbey and how "hard they work for future generations".
While I can promise I will TRY to cry a river for the fact that they can "only" hire a staff of 20 instead of 60, and that they have a house large enough and interesting enough to be visited by so many people for money, or to be rented out to the show biz...I cannot guarantee there will be the flooding you're expecting.

Now who's out of touch with economic realities or the intricacies of the class structure?
How about the real definition of WORK, as in selling your labor and precious hours of your life in exchange of a paycheck - large or small?

That's what I was talking about.

[UnknownXV]

Thank you so much. In fact if I were to go part time, our total gross family income would become about 120,000, not 145,000. Husband's net is not 100,000. That's his gross. Oh, well - could be worse.

So 120,000 x 2.5 = 300,000.

Unfortunately, we could not do a 15 year mortgage (it would be nice) - but we do plan on paying extra every year so we can get rid of the debt faster.

With our current 170,000 income we could apparently qualify for a 800,000 or so dollar house. What an insanity. We do not plan on buying anything more expensive than 300,000.
I would go for much less if if I wasn't so fixated on top school district.

In the meantime, looks like I will have to continue my crazy full-time-job-kids-cooking-tutoring life so we can build that hefty down payment come October.

Talk about modern slavery. Yey.

Thank you so much again for everyone's help.

You are very responsible, and you have a kid that is a bit more to manage than normal. So, these stresses aren't surprising. Having a family was never designed to be easy was it? But, it's the choices you made. I think it will be worth it for you down the line, but it's why I don't think I'd want a kid. I'd probably end up being like you, wanting the best for him / her. It might drive me slightly insane.

Oh, totally!

And who knocked the leeches? ...

But are you going to be the kind of leeches I'm talking about?

If you guys busted your behinds your entire lives to put together some capital that will finally allow you to retire and rest your achy bones...then no, you will not be "my kind" of leeches.
You will just be tired people in need of some well deserved rest.

Someone with a lot of capital who does not work, is still contributing to society in a massive way. I wouldn't call someone like that a leach.

The exception is if all his wealth was just horded in a vault. If it's mostly in banks or other investments, that money is hard at work seeding the capital needed for other people to start their own businesses, expand them, or improve on something else in their life. Money at work generating interest is very important to society.

Oh...I was just talking to my husband and he says he's not quite sure why you see the difference in interest rate as such a disaster given interest rates are very low right now anyway.
Of course, it IS better NOT TO pay interest at all than pay interest...but my husband says the difference is small enough not to have such a terrible impact on long-term net worth.
And then it also depends on the amount borrowed and whether you can make some extra payments on the mortgage here and there.

Over a 30 year mortgage, at what was it, 4.5 or 5% interest, you end up paying the entire value of the home in interest. Twice the cost. 15 year amounts to a quarter, maybe 1/3rd. It's quite astonishing, actually.

Regardless of interest, we would try to pay off the house as fast as humanly possible so that I can get closer to my ideal world, which I will never reach anyway - but it's still nice to think about. Hey, that's why I am watching Downton Abbey.

That's the trap. The trap is to lure people in with lower interest rates so that payments initially aren't hard to bear. In fact, this is a large reason why the housing market collapsed in the states. Banks would loan people money based on teaser rates that would expire in a few years. They knew given the financial portfolios of these individuals that when the rate expired and went up, they would have to default. This was great for them, because either somehow they didn't default, or they did and they got the house anyways to just sell again.

They also bundled poor mortgages together and somehow offered them as financial investment packages to outside investors and marked them as a lower risk grade than they should have. It's shocking.

And then the taxpayers were forced to bail out these banks when their house of cards came collapsing down. Big corporation in bed with big government, lovely days..

In my ideal world, I would have no debts of any sort, not even mortgage, and I would not have to work for pay at all. I know I am uttering the biggest blasphemy you can utter in the developed world (hating work) but...oh, boy...in my previous life I must have been an aristocrat or something. I never have envied anyone for houses, cars, clothes or any sort of fancy stuff as they all qualify as trinkets to me. I do get green with envy when I see people who have total control over their time and who do not have to sell their hours on this Earth in exchange of a pay check.
Some of these people are the kind who live on welfare, or off of their parents, or somehow; yet others are simply very rich.
Time is the only commodity that cannot be made back no matter how hard you work. This is why I never ever understood the "industrious" mentality of those who bust their backs their entire lives and save like nuts for the goal of FINALLY becoming a millionaire in old age.
All this after you sold your entire life away.

I could not agree with you more. There is nothing in this world I want more than to retire. If I won the lottery now I would be jumping for joy and crying my eyes out not because I can afford a mega yatch or mansion, but because I could live my life completely on MY terms for as long as I have time left.

Nothing is more important or valuable than genuine freedom. The only thing that provides that in this world is money.

At the risk of offending the industrious and civilized society's core beliefs...the best money in the world is money you step into via inheritance, marriage (this applies especially to women) or lottery and which allow you to enjoy your ENTIRE life, not just a few miserable old-age years, after you had enough time to develop the back and the mentality of a slave.
Millionaire in old age - too late then.

OK, done with the philosophy and back on Earth.

Yes. There isn't much other way to do it though. Society only functions as long as most work. You have to be either very smart, very lucky, or very frugal.. or some combination of all; in order to retire young. Personally, I'm mostly the last one. I work a normal job, but keep my expenses very low so I still save a reasonable value. I'll also retire modestly. I don't care. As long as I can live comfortably for the rest of my life without having to do anything I don't want to.. that's the dream for me.

[graceful]

What would I do if I were you and these were the parameters I had to work with?

I would NOT quit my job.

Time is MONEY in this case.
1)CUT all non-mandatory school volunteer functions. The kids will survive. No point in competing with all the SAHMs that may or may not helicop parent. I'm not the only Mom that has to work.
2)Have to hire out some of my burdens. Seems like I am a perfectionist and no one person could do it the way that I do it or want it done. Might mean hiring different people to do different things (cleaning, cooking, car pooling, etc) to free me up for things I HAVE to do myself. I must learn to live with imperfection.
3)Time management and prioritization is going to be key. If I have to be doing ALL the cooking, can I prepare more than one meal at a time (on the weekends) and freeze it, to be heated quickly on a busy night?

I think that I could not live with the uncertainty of DH's job situation, so I would have to work and save as much as possible in order to alleviate that anxiety in case the worse would happen.

I understand the need to see your parents. I have MANY friends in that situation and overseas trips are just a given, even at the expense of everything else. Most can only afford to go once every 2 years though, not just because of the money but because of the vacation time. Are your parents healthy enough to visit you in the States? Perhaps that would be an option for a couple of years. I have friends where their parents come for a summer. Much easier for the non-working parents to do and provides for much longer visit instead of a 2-3 week trip abroad.

Much luck to you!

[bjlabelle]

What does your husband think you should do?
I would keep my job until we got the loan for the house,
i would hire someone to come in a few days a week to do the shopping and the cooking, even if they can cook a weeks worth and freeze it.
700 on groceries? really? i am a family of 7 and we dont spend that much on groceries. and we dont do coupons, but it might be something to look into.
and your son is adhd, my son too, CAFFEINE! works good, calms them down. and helps them to focus.
and i like the idea if you could pay most of the house off, and have a basement suite or guest house, then at least you have extra money coming in.
keep brainstorming though i think you have plenty of ideas, teach your husband a few things, if you keep your emotional self like this you will crack and before you know it your life will be over, the way you know it. (been there, dont recommend it)
Best of luck!

[bjlabelle]

One more thing, set goals for yourself, not limitations, they always get you cranky and not where you want to go.

[syracusa]

You are very responsible, and you have a kid that is a bit more to manage than normal. So, these stresses aren't surprising. Having a family was never designed to be easy was it?

Cliche.
Yes, it was. In any case, much easier than today.
There was a time when life was simple, kids were hardly an eventful part of life, they needed roof, food, some character formation, and mostly to be seen but not heard. In addition, there were grandparents, uncles, aunts, round-the-corner playmates, and an entire community to rely on. The helicoptering and efforts children need today exclusively from two extremely burdened and 100% alone parents is hard to imagine for previous generations or for people who don't have children.

But, it's the choices you made. I think it will be worth it for you down the line, but it's why I don't think I'd want a kid. I'd probably end up being like you, wanting the best for him / her. It might drive me slightly insane.

Good for you. Stay child-free, insanity-free, guilt-free and bring your much appreciated contribution to population control. It's not what humans were wired to do, but given where the world is heading, it is the right choice. Yes, you would want what's "best" for the child because, just in case you didn't notice, anything short of "best" means "being in trouble" nowadays. Middle class is going down the drain, we're going back to "Masters and Slaves" times. So you'd be crazy not to want your child to end up in the "Master" category; which is an excruciatingly hard thing to achieve when you go neck-in-beck with almost 7 billion agitated creatures whose main purpose in life is to get ahead of you. I literally shudder at the thought of what my children are going to face when they reach adulthood.

Someone with a lot of capital who does not work, is still contributing to society in a massive way. I wouldn't call someone like that a leach.

You are very kind - per Masters' indoctrination as to how wonderful the wealthy are. If I am really hard pressed, I may give you that true wealth creators contribute to society in significant ways. (We would probably have to spend long days trying to agree on the definition of a true wealth creator). Likewise, those who worked very hard throughout their lives and accumulated some capital via personal talent, effort, creativity, saving, then investing...sure, they contributed.
But to tell me that someone who simply steps into a pile of wealth (such as those who inherit big) or those who manipulate wealth via speculation, are still "contributors"... just because their money is "at work" ... is downright offensive to those who actually break their backs their entire lives.
Your money is not YOU. You are the person who may have MADE the money or not.
The Me = My Money equation is yet another one of those Godless irrationalities of the modern world. If you made your money yourself and then you put it "to work" (which translates into lending it to those who don't have it and then charging them interest)...then you are simply ripping the benefits of your previous hard work.

But if you inherit it and then do the same thing...seriously? That is a 100% LEECH. With capital letters. Which is not to say I would decline the honor of being called just that by the rest of society, all while minding my own sweet business of doing nothing my entire life. The guillotines were all melted long time ago.

Over a 30 year mortgage, at what was it, 4.5 or 5% interest, you end up paying the entire value of the home in interest. Twice the cost. 15 year amounts to a quarter, maybe 1/3rd. It's quite astonishing, actually.

Why would I get an interest rate of 5% when rates are around 3% right now...and why would this rate change to "trap" us if we get fixed rate? It is, of course, no secret that the sooner you pay that house off, the better off you are. We intend to make many extra payments on the mortgage and be done with it asap.

Nothing is more important or valuable than genuine freedom. The only thing that provides that in this world is money. ... There isn't much other way to do it though. Society only functions as long as most work.

Yeap, especially modern society.
People have always worked, this is how we were created - to work. But we were never created to never stop working, or to work for work's sake, instead of working for a living.

[syracusa]

What would I do if I were you and these were the parameters I had to work with?
I would NOT quit my job.

More people seem to lean towards this option; which is probably the right thing to do for now.
One must be creative though...and creative will I be.
Given something's gotta give, doing a less-than-stellar job at work while still cashing my checks must also be part of the plan. When people become so burdened, they end up doing a *****y job, poor products result...and this is how this society ends up producing A LOT and CRAPPY.

It will last while it lasts...and then it will be good riddance any way...

[syracusa]

What does your husband think you should do?

Secretly, I know he wants me to continue to work; after all few people will say no to a 170,000 dollars income and take 110,000 instead.
Otherwise, he tells me that I should quit if this is what I really want to do and if it's getting too hard for me (which he knows it is). He knows many women in my place would have simply refused to do the massive amount of work I am doing and would have just stayed at home, regardless of the consequences. Absolutely all married women we know personally, with kids our age, are either at home or work part-time at the most, with insignificant contributions to family income. It is inconceivable that all of these families have single-earners with secure or high-demand jobs, lots of savings, or huge incomes. And yet they ALL have the female at home, even when all kids are shipped off to school for most of the day and they end up having to do...not much, given most I know don't ever cook from scratch. Many of my neighbors' occupation during the day consists of walking the dog, jogging with friends, being in "tennis teams", or volunteering at school to glue butterflies on walls (aka "getting cozy with the teachers and shoving their kids ahead in school"). Others have mentioned going away for doing the Earth-shattering work of scrap-booking in special clubs. When a husband loses the job, the female expects him to find another, wherever, they pack up and move. A family like this in our neighborhood just recently packed up and moved after living in the house for only one year (they bought and sold within one year during this terrible housing market).
Because this kind of irresponsible and Devil-May-Care life is unacceptable to me, I end up working my back off like an imbecile, while women like these live it high and well...from California...to the New York Island, wherever the next job of their husbands takes them.
After all, this land is THEIR land.

700 on groceries? really? i am a family of 7 and we dont spend that much on groceries. and we dont do coupons, but it might be something to look into.

Yeap, that much. Sometimes a bit more. I admit we are used to certain foods I grew up with in Europe and we pay premium to get it here. But only certain items. In general, my family eats an insane amount of fruits, fresh salads and vegetables...and I can guarantee you you don't get away cheap when you are used to eating like this. We tried with less, as mostly rice, potatoes, pasta and the like... but it doesn't work for us.

and your son is adhd, my son too, CAFFEINE! works good, calms them down. and helps them to focus.

What do you mean Caffeine? In what form do you give the kid caffeine...'cause I can't start having coffee with him, right?
But hey, if it works, I'll sign up! Just let me know how!

[UnknownXV]

Cliche.
Yes, it was. In any case, much easier than today.
There was a time when life was simple, kids were hardly an eventful part of life, they needed roof, food, some character formation, and mostly to be seen but not heard. In addition, there were grandparents, uncles, aunts, round-the-corner playmates, and an entire community to rely on. The helicoptering and efforts children need today exclusively from two extremely burdened and 100% alone parents is hard to imagine for previous generations or for people who don't have children.

Not sure when it was easy. It used to be quite possible for one person to work while the other stayed home with the kids. It still is now but not quite as common. I do agree that communities and families are not nearly as close as they used to be. I'm not sure what happened there.

Good for you. Stay child-free, insanity-free, guilt-free and bring your much appreciated contribution to population control. It's not what humans were wired to do, but given where the world is heading, it is the right choice. Yes, you would want what's "best" for the child because, just in case you didn't notice, anything short of "best" means "being in trouble" nowadays. Middle class is going down the drain, we're going back to "Masters and Slaves" times. So you'd be crazy not to want your child to end up in the "Master" category; which is an excruciatingly hard thing to achieve when you go neck-in-beck with almost 7 billion agitated creatures whose main purpose in life is to get ahead of you. I literally shudder at the thought of what my children are going to face when they reach adulthood.

I know if I ever did have a kid, I'd adopt. Why would I create another life when there are so many that need help and are already born? Their cards are laid out.. no need to start a new deck.
I wouldn't want to bring a kid into this world either, unless I was already rich and had unlimited free time to care for him // her.

You are very kind - per Masters' indoctrination as to how wonderful the wealthy are. If I am really hard pressed, I may give you that true wealth creators contribute to society in significant ways. (We would probably have to spend long days trying to agree on the definition of a true wealth creator). Likewise, those who worked very hard throughout their lives and accumulated some capital via personal talent, effort, creativity, saving, then investing...sure, they contributed.
But to tell me that someone who simply steps into a pile of wealth (such as those who inherit big) or those who manipulate wealth via speculation, are still "contributors"... just because their money is "at work" ... is downright offensive to those who actually break their backs their entire lives.
Your money is not YOU. You are the person who may have MADE the money or not.
The Me = My Money equation is yet another one of those Godless irrationalities of the modern world. If you made your money yourself and then you put it "to work" (which translates into lending it to those who don't have it and then charging them interest)...then you are simply ripping the benefits of your previous hard work.

If I am given money, that money belongs to me; yes? So in that sense, if it's my money at work in a bank or other investment, yes I am contributing to society by allowing capital to flow to other people so they can start their projects. You seem to have a general dislike towards the rich. It's quite common to be envious of people who have so much and, more importantly, freedom.

But if you inherit it and then do the same thing...seriously? That is a 100% LEECH. With capital letters. Which is not to say I would decline the honor of being called just that by the rest of society, all while minding my own sweet business of doing nothing my entire life. The guillotines were all melted long time ago.

Your money is at work helping society, and as long as you hurt no one else.. you're definitely not a leech.

Why would I get an interest rate of 5% when rates are around 3% right now...and why would this rate change to "trap" us if we get fixed rate? It is, of course, no secret that the sooner you pay that house off, the better off you are. We intend to make many extra payments on the mortgage and be done with it asap.

Mortgages here that are fixed are much higher than 3%, but it's different in the states with the Federal reserve buying so many mortgages and securities with fake money. Don't expect it to last. How long do fixed rate mortgages last at your bank?

Yeap, especially modern society.
People have always worked, this is how we were created - to work. But we were never created to never stop working, or to work for work's sake, instead of working for a living.

The private sector is efficient. Good for society, good for the consumer, but usually hell for the employee. Efficiency isn't comfortable or easy.

[Redraidernurse]

Absolutely all married women we know personally, with kids our age, are either at home or work part-time at the most, with insignificant contributions to family income. It is inconceivable that all of these families have single-earners with secure or high-demand jobs, lots of savings, or huge incomes. And yet they ALL have the female at home, even when all kids are shipped off to school for most of the day and they end up having to do...not much, given most I know don't ever cook from scratch. Many of my neighbors' occupation during the day consists of walking the dog, jogging with friends, being in "tennis teams", or volunteering at school to glue butterflies on walls (aka "getting cozy with the teachers and shoving their kids ahead in school"). Others have mentioned going away for doing the Earth-shattering work of scrap-booking in special clubs.

Sorry if this is offensive, but to me, this paragraph you typed just reeks of jealousy of these moms. It sounds like these moms are probably very happy doing all of the above mentioned things. Who cares if the families don't have high-demand jobs, lots of savings, or huge incomes? There are far more important things in this life. If the wife is joyful with her position in the family home, then that joy spreads forth unto her husband and children. Whereas if the wife is working her butt off and taking care of the children's schooling, housecleaning, and cooking from scratch to the point she is unhappy, then those feelings also spread forth unto her husband and children. Let's be real now - wouldn't you love to be in their position and be able to spend more time with your family, doing activities you enjoy, joining clubs or teams you fancy, volunteering your free time, etc? Criticizing them for enjoying scrap-booking (oh the horror), volunteering at their child's school, or exercising makes you come across as envious and resentful of their free time.

[Mjenn]

I know you have been living in the US for a long time, but it sounds like there is still a bit of culture clash going on. I am on the other side of the pond, going on over a decade in Europe, and there are still things here that annoy the crap out of me, but I need to accept that things are done differently here -- and either live with it or make myself miserable.

That said, many of the reasons we chose to remain in Europe are what you have written about -- we want to have a comfortable life/work balance and enjoy the best of both worlds -- jobs we find challenging, while still having time to enjoy family life and not just rush home to get the kids fed and in bed. But lets be honest here, it isn't just about work it is about attitude, the attitude here is that home life should be relaxed and enjoyed. My husband's boss has walked out of huge conferences he organized because he has to go pick up his sick kids from school, setting a precedent that this kind of thing is totally OK. And it is. Where we would relocate to the US, I think we would really struggle to find the situation we have today.

Also, having grown up in an American suburb that sounds a lot like where you are living, you have to understand that a lot of it is about facade. You want people to think you are leading this lifestyle, whether or not you actually are or are enjoying it. There are always going to be those who go above and beyond. But, that doesn't mean you have to. Just like one of the previous posters said, your kids are either going to be the ones that thrive academically or they thrive at something else. And all the support in the world cannot change that. I am not a big fan of this new role of parenting to do absolutely everything for your kids to make them a success--- that means many kids are not learning any personal responsibility, a key factor for success, in my book.

Again, you seem to be really caught up in everything you need to do for everyone else and what everyone else is doing. If I were you, (and I am not) I would take a step back and try to figure out what it is exactly I want and what would make me happy --- because it seems in all your posts this is what you are searching for. Then cross off everything else on the list and focus on those things as much as I can. Is it money that makes you happy? Security? Time with family? Sure it would be nice if you could have it all, but most of us find that something needs to be sacrificed at some point. You need to find what you are willing to let go of.