I don't place negative connotations on stay at home parents that have a husband, wife or significant other working. I don't place negative connotations on stay at home parents that suck off their parents or if they flat-back, or whatever...

Just don't come for my money if you had a kid or kids and you can't pay the freight. I didn't get to screw anybody in someone else's family to make that kid, so why should I get screwed financially?

Originally Posted by: dfosterf 

But to answer Zero's question, yeah, it would have been awesome to have Julie at home to raise the kids. Unfortunately, there aren't enough high paying jobs to allow this. There are some advantages to the day care thing though, such as social skills and a survival tenacity. When have to fight for those toys - you get tougher.

Essentially, your children's greatest influence is their parents. Whether that's good or bad depends on the parent.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

Why can't stay at home parent bring the children to a park or play area or other things where children are present to get that social interaction? After all it seemed to work just fine for prior generations with stay at home parents. Stay at home parent does not mean they must stay at home.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

What is the problem with our country today?

It is us, we are the problem. Why is that?

What is the difference between this generation and the generations in the past?

Studies have shown that from infant to age five is when we are most influenced and is when our personalities are essentially decided.

The primary difference between generations is that the mothers were raising our children back then whereas now mothers are working to pay someone else to raise our children in a "kid is a number" type of setting known as Child Care.

I'm very much for equality regardless of age, sex, skin, sexual preference, and whatever other issue. And this is not saying a woman's place is the kitchen or house-maker, but think about it, who would you rather raising your children during the most critically important years of their life? An individual who most surely cares for your child, but can they possibly care for as much as your child's mother?

When people hear someone is a stay at home parent, immediately there is a negative connotation attached to them that they are freeloading or using Government assistance. Most of the time the harshest critics are women bashing women for being stay at home parents. "Oh, you don't work? I'm sorry to hear that".

When you put a child in child care, you're facing upwards to $200 a WEEK and those child care workers are not paid well either. If you're fortunate, maybe $10 an hour. So you're paying $750 to over $1,000 a month for someone to raise YOUR child during the most important years of their life.

If a tax break for MARRIED couples who have a child were doled out for families who have a stay at home parent, I would be all for it. I would gladly pay a little more in taxes so the parent is raising their child during those first five years than a child care teacher who has around four children at once to monitor.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

The primary point of this discussion is that parents should be spending those first five years raising their children, not child care centers. The tax break thing was my concession that I am willing to make for those MARRIED couples who need a small break to get by. Notice the MARRIED couples and realize that implication.

The neighborhood you are talking about is what I am looking to move into next year at the earliest. Something I can set up shop for a decade or so until all my girls are moved out. Then I'm going to build myself a small shack with a full bathroom and garage on a tiny piece of land that has high speed internet and fall off the gird.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool