How is everyone dealing with their finances in this economy?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by you&me

Wait, there are people that like Nose Hill Park?

Archaeologists

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...foot-1.7215155

There is a dig ongoing

[you&me]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Archaeologists

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...foot-1.7215155

There is a dig ongoing

That makes sense - it reminds me of the barren-plains-Drumheller aesthetic

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I will make a promise: I'll eat crow if that ends up being the case. I vow to not pigheadedly stick to what I've historically said if it turns out I was wrong. I don't have an ego or any reason to try to view or portray reality as anything other than what it is on this. If it turns out it's a hard job working 3/4 of a year for $100k during a shortened career with unbeatable benefits I'll be completely at peace with admitting it.

You and Locke should start a club, and then inevitably join a 'Fathers of resentful daughters who are also Teachers' support group.

It's funny, it's always Dad's who are this flippant about the demands of being teachers, but never the spouses. Probably because the spouses actually see what goes on, and not just get the bullet points at Sunday dinners.

[Old Yeller]

It's funny/enjoyable reading about all of you guys around my age who have teenagers or older and the experiences you've gone through, it's like looking into a crystal ball and it (mostly) makes me excited for the future.

I also totally get you all saying "I can't imagine having a toddler at this age", you've done your tour of duty on that front, but when your my age (mid 40s) and have a toddler it's just what it is... sleep deprivation probably sucks at any age. Yeah, I'm probably more tired than I would have been in my 30s if I had a kid then, but I'm also more financially stable than I was in my early 30s and have a lot more flexible work-life balance because of it.

I know this thread has gotten a little off topic but it's just a very interesting read from my perspective and I appreciate everyone sharing.

[fotze2]

I swear the marks fellow students got in engineering class with me are reversely proportional to monetary success 30 years later. (Obviously assuming $$ is the performance measure which is definitely debatable). My top 5 high wealth friends all squeeked through business or engg. Like $10MM to - $100MM net worths. Number one quality is self confidence and charisma. If you aren’t sure, be sure. The number one skill (or lack of self -doubt) I wish I had just a shred of myself is that one. If you can throw in a wicked smaht in that combo, obviously better, but it’s a distant second.

I have an old buddy that wonders why I have my kids in activities all the time. He puts his kids in kumon even though they get 98% in school. Please don’t send me his resume when he graduates.

[fotze2]

Except if it’s medical school, I want those guys being my doctor! Haha.

[nfotiu]

It strikes me how different Canada and US high schools are. Is it still the way in Canada that only 12th grade average matters for University entrance? US is all about GPA and in some instances SAT. GPA covers all 4 years of high school and there is a big incentive to take harder level classes as they all give a GPA boost.

My older kid who is more into school always took the toughest classes (AP, Dual enrollment classes for almost all of his last couple years), and did well enough in them without having to do too much work after school. I wouldn't have ever wished taken easier classes as he'd have got bored and felt like he was wasting his time at school. I guess there's a difference between tough classes and classes that are a lot of work. Tough classes where you have to learn during the time you are in school generally seem like a positive. Busy work classes that require hours of after school time not so much.

[WinnipegFan]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I will make a promise: I'll eat crow if that ends up being the case. I vow to not pigheadedly stick to what I've historically said if it turns out I was wrong. I don't have an ego or any reason to try to view or portray reality as anything other than what it is on this. If it turns out it's a hard job working 3/4 of a year for $100k during a shortened career with unbeatable benefits I'll be completely at peace with admitting it.

Things have changed drastically. I am assuming your daughter wants to teach elementary or a humanity. Otherwise Marh 30-2 is closing a lot of doors. As far as an easy job, if is truly that way why do we have one of the highest attrition rates within the first five years? The benefits ain’t what they once were, they are a joke compared to most private packages now, the salary has been stagnant for a decade and the work is becoming increasingly complex.

You know from our previous conversations I. The topic I will stand by you with distaste for the union as their only goal is self preservation and profit off the backs of teachers, especially dead ones. However, the career is daunting, and complex and with today’s salaries she may only teach for 3:4 of the year but she will be working for that summer to make any financial headway in life. As a lifelong educator I will steer my kids away from the career at all costs, at least in Canada and especially in Alberta.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by fotze2

Except if it’s medical school, I want those guys being my doctor! Haha.

Question:
What do you call the person who graduated with the lowest marks in medical school.

Answer:
Doctor

[Twitchy15]

lots of good information in the posts!

I'm 32 and my son is almost 14 months old it is so much fun but so much work.. Can't imagine having another right now for multiple reasons. The financial cost and the time feels so busy even though it feels like we are not doing much taking care of him takes a lot of our time. Feels like we are just doing the bare minimum for other things. We moved into a new place last year and there is so much I want to do but don't have the time to do most of it.

[Twitchy15]

Originally Posted by WinnipegFan

Things have changed drastically. I am assuming your daughter wants to teach elementary or a humanity. Otherwise Marh 30-2 is closing a lot of doors. As far as an easy job, if is truly that way why do we have one of the highest attrition rates within the first five years? The benefits ain’t what they once were, they are a joke compared to most private packages now, the salary has been stagnant for a decade and the work is becoming increasingly complex.

You know from our previous conversations I. The topic I will stand by you with distaste for the union as their only goal is self preservation and profit off the backs of teachers, especially dead ones. However, the career is daunting, and complex and with today’s salaries she may only teach for 3:4 of the year but she will be working for that summer to make any financial headway in life. As a lifelong educator I will steer my kids away from the career at all costs, at least in Canada and especially in Alberta.

I think from an outside perspective it sounds like a good job summers off extra holidays with school 100k a year and benefits and government pensions.

BUT when I have talked to teachers about all the prep work and extra time they need to put into things, dealing with ever demanding parents and even just dealing with kids having a huge range of how they act and different backgrounds.

a co-worker recently told me her partner works at a school where certain parents from another country do not really punish / teach there kids much at home and it is total chaos at school..

but like any job I am sure if you get a good grade to teach and a good school could be decent

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by fotze2

Except if it’s medical school, I want those guys being my doctor! Haha.

I kind of feel like I want my engineers knowing what they're doing as well. Especially the ones helping build bridges and buildings.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by WinnipegFan

Things have changed drastically. I am assuming your daughter wants to teach elementary or a humanity. Otherwise Marh 30-2 is closing a lot of doors. As far as an easy job, if is truly that way why do we have one of the highest attrition rates within the first five years? The benefits ain’t what they once were, they are a joke compared to most private packages now, the salary has been stagnant for a decade and the work is becoming increasingly complex.

You know from our previous conversations I. The topic I will stand by you with distaste for the union as their only goal is self preservation and profit off the backs of teachers, especially dead ones. However, the career is daunting, and complex and with today’s salaries she may only teach for 3:4 of the year but she will be working for that summer to make any financial headway in life. As a lifelong educator I will steer my kids away from the career at all costs, at least in Canada and especially in Alberta.

Math 30-2 will close no doors, but keep banging that drum. Once you're in university you can do anything you want within that university following a quick meeting with a dean, a prof or anyone else who can make an exception with the stroke of a pen. lol at thinking Math 30-2 will close doors. That's ridiculous.

As far as an easy job, if is truly that way why do we have one of the highest attrition rates within the first five years?

I need two things to accept this as anything other than union propaganda designed to make teachers think they have it so hard and require the union to protect them from the big bad world.
1. A citation.
2. A comparison against all other university graduates.

I bet $25 dollars (if you want to accept) that teachers stay at their jobs at higher rates than those who graduate from other university programs. That is, if you're saying they have a higher attrition rate within the first five years, I need to know what jobs it is higher than.

I don't believe the statistic on an intuitive level, but I think since you're the one who brought it up you can be the one to defend it.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I kind of feel like I want my engineers knowing what they're doing as well. Especially the ones helping build bridges and buildings.

Don't worry, the ones with the super good grades are doing the work. That's my point. They're the worker bees.

Their bosses didn't get the high grades, but have the personalities to make more money, have better benefits, get more perks and not have to bury their nose in a computer dividing by zero and making toothpick bridges (or whatever it is an engineer does all day).

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Don't worry, the ones with the super good grades are doing the work. That's my point. They're the worker bees.

Their bosses didn't get the high grades, but have the personalities to make more money, have better benefits, get more perks and not have to bury their nose in a computer dividing by zero and making toothpick bridges (or whatever it is an engineer does all day).

If I think back to the popular kids in high school who didn't care much about grades, they were about 50/50 to be successful or were Al Bundy types that peaked in high school and didn't amount to much.

I did read an interesting thing the other day that 95% of fortune 500 CEOs played college sports. I'm not really sure what to read into that, but I think that putting enough effort into getting good enough grades while spending enough time on a sport to play at a collegiate level is putting in some pretty solid effort during HS/College years.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

If I think back to the popular kids in high school who didn't care much about grades, they were about 50/50 to be successful or were Al Bundy types that peaked in high school and didn't amount to much.

To be in the popular/party crowd in my high school didn't mean you didn't care about grades. I think if you don't care at all about grades then you are definitely lowering your probability of success. If you don't care about grades you're not going to accidentally get into university. You have to care and plan to get accepted, there's little doubt about that.

My strategy is more to put in the effort to get adequate grades to get into your program, but do not push much beyond that. Like, the amount of time for many people to go from an 85% average to a 95% average would be insane and not a good use of youth/time/energy. If you're adding 15+ hours a week of studying to get that extra (and unnecessary) 10% versus socializing, then I think you're doing your future self and opportunities a disservice.

My point isn't to work less for the sake of working less. My point is to get good enough grades and also focus on your social life and making fun memories that build the foundation of a person people like and want to be around.

The people who were weirdly studious to the point of being anonymous NPC background characters in high school absolutely - and without exception - hit a glass ceiling in their careers from what I can see. And the saddest part is they seem absolutely befuddled by it as they were indoctrinated to think the higher your grades are the more successful you'll be. I don't think it plays out like that.

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I did read an interesting thing the other day that 95% of fortune 500 CEOs played college sports. I'm not really sure what to read into that, but I think that putting enough effort into getting good enough grades while spending enough time on a sport to play at a collegiate level is putting in some pretty solid effort during HS/College years.

It seems very rational to me. People that know how to interact and work with others, how to joke around, how to motivate, how to accept losses and dust off, etc. That is the recipe for a successful person. The guy studying and getting straight As just will not have those qualities.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Sliver

To be in the popular/party crowd in my high school didn't mean you didn't care about grades. I think if you don't care at all about grades then you are definitely lowering your probability of success. If you don't care about grades you're not going to accidentally get into university. You have to care and plan to get accepted, there's little doubt about that.

My strategy is more to put in the effort to get adequate grades to get into your program, but do not push much beyond that. Like, the amount of time for many people to go from an 85% average to a 95% average would be insane and not a good use of youth/time/energy. If you're adding 15+ hours a week of studying to get that extra (and unnecessary) 10% versus socializing, then I think you're doing your future self and opportunities a disservice.

My point isn't to work less for the sake of working less. My point is to get good enough grades and also focus on your social life and making fun memories that build the foundation of a person people like and want to be around.

The people who were weirdly studious to the point of being anonymous NPC background characters in high school absolutely - and without exception - hit a glass ceiling in their careers from what I can see. And the saddest part is they seem absolutely befuddled by it as they were indoctrinated to think the higher your grades are the more successful you'll be. I don't think it plays out like that.



It seems very rational to me. People that know how to interact and work with others, how to joke around, how to motivate, how to accept losses and dust off, etc. That is the recipe for a successful person. The guy studying and getting straight As just will not have those qualities.

It's about being well balanced academically, socially and other ways. Your concept has an element of truth about it that has been studied before. I can't remember the context but I remember someone saying that A students sometimes were passed over for B students and C students during hiring.

The reasoning being was the A students were the cream of the crop demanded the top, often had multiple offers and assumed they knew everything when they started the role. They were often (but not always) harder to teach.

B students knew a lot they knew didn't know everything and were more willing to learn, also less likely to accept a different offer even if your firm offered them a contract because they were less likely to have multiple offers.

C students were more likely to be available to be hired, often teachable, but you didn't know whether you would just get a worker bee on auto pilot vs someone who could accomplish more because they knew they had to catch up (but someone like that typically ends up shooting past most of the other A and B students longer term).

I think the concept also spoke about how well they would work in teams. A team of pure A students would likely have a bunch of them go rogue, some of the roles were always beneath them. B and C student groups were far more likely to collaborate and allocate roles appropriately per individual strength/weaknesses.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Sliver

To be in the popular/party crowd in my high school didn't mean you didn't care about grades. I think if you don't care at all about grades then you are definitely lowering your probability of success. If you don't care about grades you're not going to accidentally get into university. You have to care and plan to get accepted, there's little doubt about that.

My strategy is more to put in the effort to get adequate grades to get into your program, but do not push much beyond that. Like, the amount of time for many people to go from an 85% average to a 95% average would be insane and not a good use of youth/time/energy. If you're adding 15+ hours a week of studying to get that extra (and unnecessary) 10% versus socializing, then I think you're doing your future self and opportunities a disservice.

My point isn't to work less for the sake of working less. My point is to get good enough grades and also focus on your social life and making fun memories that build the foundation of a person people like and want to be around.

The people who were weirdly studious to the point of being anonymous NPC background characters in high school absolutely - and without exception - hit a glass ceiling in their careers from what I can see. And the saddest part is they seem absolutely befuddled by it as they were indoctrinated to think the higher your grades are the more successful you'll be. I don't think it plays out like that.



It seems very rational to me. People that know how to interact and work with others, how to joke around, how to motivate, how to accept losses and dust off, etc. That is the recipe for a successful person. The guy studying and getting straight As just will not have those qualities.

I don't think I entirely agree with you. I wasn't in the "in crowd" in high school and couldn't possibly care less. Congratulations to people who peaked at 16/17 and had a great time though!

I got good enough grades (and I do agree with you on that part). Undergrad and that phase of life was the absolute best though! In terms of success I guess it depends on how you want to measure that. I don't think it just comes down to money though, and it means some different things to different people.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't think I entirely agree with you. I wasn't in the "in crowd" in high school and couldn't possibly care less. Congratulations to people who peaked at 16/17 and had a great time though!

You misunderstand me. It has nothing to do with peaking. It has to do with developing a balance between achieving your academic goals, but not pushing hard beyond what's necessary to the detriment of equally important developmental opportunities that are only available at certain times of your life.

TBH, there wasn't really even a popular crowd in my school during my years there. We all got along pretty well, but it wasn't like a Hollywood division between jocks, nerds and a-hole popular people. But there was a contingent that was having the most fun as a group by partying and doing the fun stereotypical cool-kid things. There was also a group of perfectly nice, pleasant people that opted to grind out extra hours to get those top scores versus letting loose a little more. It's my view that those ones missed out on some neat experiences just to get a higher random number on a piece of paper that doesn't matter one iota. It's a poor trade of youth/time for a meaningless number (IMO).

Originally Posted by Slava

I got good enough grades (and I do agree with you on that part). Undergrad and that phase of life was the absolute best though! In terms of success I guess it depends on how you want to measure that. I don't think it just comes down to money though, and it means some different things to different people.

Yeah, there are a lot of ways to measure success. I guess I have in my mind a few specific examples of people unhappy in their late 40s because they aren't as successful professionally or financially as they expected - and still believe they're entitled to be - because they worked harder to get better grades in high school and university.

My kids are at such a pivotal age so this stuff is super on my mind right now. We're balancing best places to put their efforts and we're trying to be super strategic. It feels like it's paying off, but plan all you want and the world will have its way with you, anyway, so none of it probably matters in the end hah.

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I kind of feel like I want my engineers knowing what they're doing as well. Especially the ones helping build bridges and buildings.

As a civil engineer, those guys get paid criminally low