I have my own homeopathy business but I keep it very low key. These days for cases I can tell will take a lot of time I refer them to other practitioners. For ones that are particularly interesting I take them on. I also have ongoing clients from my pre-homeschooling days. I often meet with people or talk over the phone Fridays when another homeschool mom watches my kids. I can do the rest of the work (analysis and remedy selection, paperwork, etc) at night after the kids are asleep. Acute urgent situations can throw a wrench into my day, though. It's my passion and I love it so I can end up spending too much time if I'm not careful. I'm apt to keep reading even after I've found what I'm looking for!

One time in the fall of 2008 (election info everywhere) we were at the library. DS was 4 years old and had recently begun going to the men's room on his own. I waited outside and when he came out I asked him if everything went okay. We were standing in the hallway close to the men's room exit. Just then an African American man came out of the men's room, while my son simultaneously exclaimed, "Guess what? Barack Obama is in there!" Except for color of his skin and hair, this man looked nothing like Barack Obama. He was at least 4 inches taller and 50 lbs heavier with longer hair and completely different facial features. DS's comment was based solely in skin color, I think. Luckily the man just smiled. I was pretty embarrassed. :blushing:

I checked out a book from the library called "Have a New Kid by Friday." It was more out of curiosity than anything else; my kids are generally well-behaved. (Although I realized that I have used some of the techniques in the book.) But a lot of my friends swear by it and that it works really fast. Maybe check it out from the library? A few other tips that have helped me: --Dad has to back you up no. matter. what. He can set the tone before he leaves for work. Is there a way he can come home one morning around 10:00 to see the mess? One time when my DH came home and saw the mess he really took the kids to task. Somehow having him turn up unexpectedly worked on them. --Try and get up before (or at the same time as) they do, even if you have to go to bed earlier. It's tiring to get up earlier, but it's also tiring to deal with the mess. --Have a lot less stuff. We got rid of 50% of our stuff and then 25% after that. I heard a great tip once: never have more toys than you'd be willing to pick up yourself if they were all out. (Not that you should be picking them up, but it's a guideline for quantity.) I completely agree with the poster who said kids who have too much stuff don't value what they own. --I've heard good things about Accountable Kids. I'm sure there are other people here who've used it. It's a bit expensive but considering what you're going through it might be worth it. I had a few other ideas but the kids distracted my and now I forget. :tongue_smilie:

Coincidentally my Indian/Pakistani mom just called to chat. :) Here's what she says: "I would skip it. The seeds are much more pungent and a teaspoon of seeds would definitely be missed, especially if they are popped open in oil. The powder as part of a mix would not be missed as much in such a small quantity. I wouldn't substitute fennel or anise seed for fenugreek, especially for tandoori. I would add more garlic to make up for the lost 'punch'."

Seeds or powder? Sorry I forgot to ask up front.:)

How much fenugreek does the recipe call for?

As a Muslim, I can say a lot of these reasons correspond with my hesitation to wear hijab or to put anything on my car or otherwise publicize my religion. Anyway, you're not alone. :grouphug:

As a Muslim I agree with the Muslim responses, Bill, and Mrs. Mungo. And no, it's not an offensive question. It's a really good one! :grouphug:

Their A+ worksheet maker is free, although you have to register. http://www.hwtears.com/aplus You type in what you want and it creates a page in the HWOT font and using the types of lined paper that goes with HWOT. HTH.

With the exception of the neighbors and the move to UAE I could have written your story. My parents are from Pakistan too! Also, my father became much more religious after he was diagnosed with a severe illness, but that happened when I was in college. Before that I was not raised religiously. When I was young we even had a Christmas tree! I don't have time to respond more right now but I will in the next couple of days when I get a chance. :grouphug:

I also don't answer the phone during schooltime unless it's my husband or parents. My parents I often call back later. Neither my husband nor I enjoy talking on the phone so it's rarely more than two minutes to talk to him. But people call a lot. I have been toying with the idea of saying something on the answering machine, something along the lines of "We don't answer the phone between nine and noon. Please leave a message and we will return your call after 2 pm (gotta add in time for lunch and getting DD down!) Sort of a hint so they'll be "trained" not to call during schooltime. Has anyone else done this? Does it seem rude?

Yes, the default rate is much higher now. The banks took on risk and this time they were wrong. (Same with the hypothetical Porsche dealer and furniture store.) They built the cost differentials into the loans and assumed a certain percentage of people would default. (Primary mortgage lending is pretty safe, in general.) The default rate was higher than they anticipated. That doesn't make it immoral for any particular homeowner to walk away. Going back to the Porsche analogy, are people saying owners shouldn't turn in the Porsche they cannot afford because normally the dealership experiences 2 returns/month and due to the economy they've had 6 returns this month? Are we really telling Porsche owners 3, 4, 5, and 6 if they don't wait for next month and the one following to turn in their cars they're doing something immoral? That turning in the car in this month is stealing but if you wait until the dealership has a slot for an anticipated return it's not? That it's now their responsibility to shield the Porsche dealership from any financial risk they've taken? I want to be in a business where, if I guess incorrectly about future defaults or returns, people are considered to be stealing from me if they don't go along with my estimate. A lending business with no risk sounds fantastic. :tongue_smilie:

But the cost differential is built into the original pricing and financing terms. If you have a contract with the store that allows you to return used furniture they understand that some furniture will come back and they build that into their pricing and business model. If they didn't want to build in the cost of returns they could offer a "no returns" policy or no financing. Financing someone's purchase is not risk-free; there's always the possibility the people won't be able to pay or will change their minds about paying and the risk is reflected in the pricing/interest rate. The ability to return furniture is a marketing item for them, a hook to get people to buy there instead of another place where it might be cheaper but they can't return it. In return for the privilege of the option to return used furniture, the buyer has paid a higher price or perhaps a higher interest rate on credit. It would have been cheaper to buy at a "no returns" place or on Craigslist, but they paid for the privilege and their contract allows them to return it. As an example, Nordstrom's "we take anything back at any time for any reason, even without a receipt" policy worked for them for years as a marketing hook and the prices reflected that.

"Suck it up." :glare:

I think they had a moral obligation to tell the lender. I think lenders should prioritize foreclosing on houses that no longer have inhabitants. That said, I think it's myth that it hurts the lenders to "give" grace, that they are somehow making sacrifices. It's in their best financial interests to not take on these houses. They don't want to own them (huge pain), nor do they want to modify loans (lose money). So they are doing what's best for them, which is to drag out the process as long as possible while still (kind of) meeting their legal obligations. This is confirmed by my brother, a bank VP who used to work for a large national bank whose initials are WF. Keep those houses off the books as long as possible, but don't modify the loans, either. That's the mantra.

A restaurant is not a good analogy because what you've purchased has been consumed and cannot be returned, nor have you been paying each time you take a bite, with interest.

Both of your examples are about people who cannot afford their homes. How do you feel about people who can afford their mortgages but it's no longer a good financial investment for them to sink money into the house? To carry your analogy further, if you realize you made a mistake (or just change your mind or need the money for something else etc) and there's a clause in the contract that allows you to return the Porsche, would you? As built into the contract, the car dealership gets to keep the car and all of the money you paid on the principal thus far plus interest as compensation for your unreasonable purchase. You can then go and get a Toyota. Or do you just wait until the car is repossessed or try to find a second job to pay for the Porsche even though there's a legal way to return it? And what happens if the dealership prefers you to keep the car so they drag their feet as much as with closing the return? You've done your part: signed the papers, stopped payments, returned the key, etc and executed the clause for breaking the contract to the best of your ability. But because they don't want the overhead of having the car back on the lot they draw everything out as long as possible and then take a year to pick up the car. In the meantime it becomes an eyesore on the street. Does the bank have a moral obligation to pick up the car quickly even though it would be better for them to not have to spend money to store the car, storing it for free on the street instead? In a foreclosure, does the bank have a moral obligation to complete the process and take possession of the home (and maintain it) in a timely manner? On a micro scale, the analogy to the argument that you must keep paying no matter what is that any consumer good purchased should never be returned because if too many people return goods they purchased it affects the economy. In other words, if you get home and find you overpaid for your new sweater, keep it anyway because you made a dumb mistake and if everyone exercises their right to return their sweaters it would be bad for the economy. We have a moral obligation to adhere to the consequences of our mistakes for the good of our neighbors, even if it's bad for our own families. It doesn't make sense to me.

I've never heard this but I have to agree with you. Yuck.

That's too bad. There are certainly better conditions in which to leave a house. The bank owns it so it seems to me they are the ones who are not doing a good job of managing the home. Before the collapse of the housing bubble houses didn't sit for that long when they were foreclosed upon, maybe a month or two at the most before the banks handled it. Now there are so many and the banks want to stretch out the foreclosures as long as possible. They are also unwilling to hire more people to handle all the paperwork. (Did you see the articles about the foreclosure processors who were handling thousands of applications/day?) This, in a time of rampant unemployment. The banks could certainly afford to hire more people to process foreclosures but it's not in their interest to do so. (My brother is a bank VP so I know of what I speak.) Where is the bank's moral imperative to handle their obligations in a timely manner? It sounds like the bank is a bad owner and has left you to clean up their mess. (I agree with you that the owners should not have left food in the fridge, etc.)

I don't feel it's immoral. Contracts have terms and the consequences of breaking the contract are defined in the contract and by law. If one chooses to execute those contractual terms it's fine by me. The bank does what's in the bank's interest and people should do what's in their financial interest as well. Nobody forces the bank to loan money. They do so knowing that the buyer may default and they build what they consider to be adequate compensation, in the form of interest and eventually ownership, into the contract. IOW, they're not stupid. (See: bonuses, Wall Street) As far as the neighbors, I think it's a bit much to place the "good of society" burden on underwater homeowners. Many people who have tried to change their loan terms have been told they need to stop paying in order to get a loan modification (this has changed for the slightly better more recently). Once people stop making payments they are more likely to foreclose. Knowing this, the banks could choose to modify more loans before people default. But they only modify loans when it's in their best interest to do so. Yet somehow homeowners have an obligation to prop up their neighbors, the ones who should have known in the first place that buying a house is not a risk-free investment. If the value of the neighbors' houses fall as well, they also have contracts with the bank they can choose to execute. Or not. I think there's a lot of propaganda going around from the banks and the Feds about how important it is to do the right thing as a way of making people act against their own self-interests. They only want us to be capitalists when it's time to consume, I guess. And I say this as a pretty far left progressive. So if they've lost me, they've really gone too far. :glare:

The one that drives me around the bend is "realtor" pronounced as "realator". Also "nucular".

There are also inspiring threads on College Confidential. Search for the "homeschool acceptances" threads. I've found 2008, 2010, and 2011 there.

Thanks. We've been having phone/DSL troubles here due to heavy rains in Southern California where my parents live. I'm going to give them a call today.

I guess I'm going to try and find a new Dish remote. I only see them online but we can make do with the one we have right now until it comes in the mail. Or... Are there good nationwide (or Southern Cal, where I'm visiting) chains for this type of thing? I only know of Best Buy and I don't like it but I could do it. I remember Good Guys but it looks like they are out of business. I don't really buy consumer electronics except Apple stuff and I go to the Apple store for that or through my friend who works there. We don't own a TV so I'm really out of the loop here. Thanks for the advice so far...

If people are losing weight due to the economy I think it would be due to more exercise than less food. I agree with the sentiments expressed above about cheap calories. I suppose it is possible people might be walking more to save gas $ or might spend the afternoon playing frisbee at the park instead of taking the family to a movie. Maybe someone's car died and they take the bus and have a 15-minute walk from the bus stop to their destination. Camping vacations (with associated hiking and calorie burning) are generally cheaper than hotel/restaurant trips.