brilliant!!

No, it wasn't that I didn't agree with what I was saying or didn't think the ideas expressed were lovely . . . It's more that I don't like the idea of HAVING an oath like that. I think oaths should be reserved for more meaningful relationships. I think forcing allegiance to an oath is creepy, so any time I recite one (to America, to a religious creed, to the Scouts, etc), I have always been repulsed, even when I agreed with every lovely idea expressed. I always hated reciting the Nicene Creed, even when I was a committed and happy Episcopal. I always hated the Pledge all when I was growing up. I still do. I love our nation, but I do not love the demand for a pledge. Yuck. I love singing America the Beautiful -- it's a love song to our country. I don't love reciting the Pledge because it feels more like a shackle used to control and limit us rather than a love song. I wouldn't ask my kids to pledge allegiance to our family, but I still expect and observe loyalty, etc to our family. I made vows on my wedding day. I can't actually think of any OTHER formal/required vows that have ever been meaningful to me. Yuck. I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic, but I'm going to step out of this conversation. I had entered into it in good faith, to share ideas. I'm not interested in continuing a debate that has devolved into this. Take it easy.

Oh, believe me, I work towards replacing WV's idiots. I've got poor odds, though, given the general idiocy in our state. I routinely donate to various causes . . . donated to multiple city council politicians (we successfully replaced the entire city council in a recent election, TYVM), sent $50 as a Mother's Day tribute to my deceased mom to the progressive who is primarying one of our idiot senators, show up at local political meetings, protests, etc . . . Oh, I'm doing my part, FWIW, but I have little hope of progress in my particular state. We're just neck deep in idiocy on all sides of the political spectrum. The poverty and ignorance in WV runs very deep, and we're pretty much an extraction industry colony, to tell you the truth. Both political parties are owned, full on, by the extraction industries and the drug industries. Corruption runs deep and strong. I have no realistic hope of my state improving. I have resigned myself to moving out of WV in a few years, once our kids are all in college . . . whichever kid settles somewhere nicer and saner . . . we'll likely follow in short order . . . unless one of our kids is determined to settle here in WV and figures out how to make a living here (not easy) . . . then maybe we'll stay . . . while holding our noses and pretty much focusing on our own little patch of dirt and not paying much attention to this depressing state. If the current health care plans move forward as proposed or similar, our entire state will truly likely implode in the near future . . . as the opioid crisis is so deep and our social resources so poor . . . and w/o the Medicaid expansion resources we've had in recent years, the opioid crisis would be so much worse, which is hard to imagine. WV might really just drop off the map. Anyway, beyond WV stuff . . . I never liked that stuff about scouts, either. Creeps me out. LOL. I always sort of crossed my fingers in my head when we recited that sort of thing. Have a beautiful evening. I'm clearly not going to convince anyone of my perspective, and that's just fine. Y'all go right on following all the laws you want. :) I'll go right on ignoring the ones I think are wrongheaded, and we'll all be just fine.

As I said above . . . I have no rational explanations for my preference. I utterly admit it makes zero sense, lol. That said, I do see a *LOT* of *VERY* casual sort of relationships 3rd hand through my college girl's friends (and 2nd hand through her own experiences testing out the whole dating thing first year of college . . . which she very soon rejected as not-a-fun-hobby between the breaking boys hearts when she didn't want a 2nd or 3rd date . . . and the not-infrequent requests for s*x from 1st or 2nd dates and even from the friendly neighbor who just wanted to be fun-buddies . . . She is now very much single and contemplating a life of being a cat lady, lol) . . . There seem to be a zillion (otherwise lovely) college boys who want to just "hang out" and have very casual sex, regularly or irregularly, with a girl. Sometimes, these casual things evolve into bf/gf relationships. Most of the time, they do not. Sometimes, it's clear from the start that they are going to be "friends with benefits" but, I think, most of the time, it's not so clear to one or both of them . . . I find it all very depressing and sad. I think the formality of dating makes it more clear that this is a bf/gf thing . . . Not just two buddies sharing a pizza, sharing a movie, and then going to f*ck. So, that's probably where much of my aversion to going dutch, etc, at the outset of a relationship comes from. IME, it's most often the girl who is looking for a bf while the boy is looking for a f*ck. If the boy asks the girl out, takes her to dinner . .. rinse, repeat, over some time . . . then, to me, that looks more like a clear bf/gf situation. I guess it just makes it easier to define "intentions" . . . And, again, I totally admit it's arbitrary and I won't try to argue anyone out of their more rational and equitable beliefs. For me, I decided a long time ago that I'm happy to subsidize my son for a few years of dating . . . to help him practice being sweet and lovely and making a girl feel fabulous. Not $$$ dating (no $75 dinners except for very special occasions, lol) . . . and no, I don't want to routinely hand him cash as he's heading out the door . . . but, I'm just fine to add an extra $100/mo to his college budget spreadsheet to cover dating . . . assuming he dates . . . which I really hope he does, as I really prefer that to the hook up culture that is so rampant.

Well, I allow my teens to date, but none have, as yet, had extensive dating relationships that involved going out and paying for dates routinely . . . FWIW, I've encouraged my son to pay 100% when he's gone out on a formal "date" with a girl. Even when he was doing her a favor by stepping in as a last minute prom or homecoming date . . . I just think it's good manners for the boy to pay. And it's sweet. And tender. And sweet. I'd be pretty miffed if my dd was dating a boy and he wasn't paying for most/all of their outings for at least the initial months. I'd definitely get a bad impression of the boy . . . It'd be totally fine if the dates they went on were free or very cheap . . . I'd much rather have a boy take a girl on half as many dates than expect her to pay. I think after 4-6 months or so of dating, settling into a little more equitable pattern is fine, but, for the beginning, I think it's nicer for the fellow to pay. That said, there is NO reason to go out to a $75 dinner for a casual bite to eat. In fact, there's no reason to spend $$ at all to date. Free dates are just fine. Kids have to learn to manage their money, and it makes no sense to spend that sort of money on a casual dinner for teenagers -- not if they're paying for half, and even less so if they're paying for the whole thing, lol. Hike + ice cream cone = awesome day for $10 . . . Bike + popsicles = awesome day for $6 . . . See the theme? Sugar + outside = fun + cheap! And, FWIW, I have no rational reason for any of these opinions. All I know is that my dh treats me like a princess and we're very happily married, and I want that for my girls and for my son, too. And, really, we were very liberated and informal when we were dating! So, where'd I get this hang up on who pays for what? No idea, lol. The fellow paying just *feels* respectful and sweet to me, and SO MANY young men are just looking for a quick you-know-what with barely officially dating at all . . . somehow the fellow paying 100% sort of sends an "official date" message that is reassuring to me. I won't try to argue that anyone is wrong . . . but I'm just saying that's how I feel. :)

How about a middle ground . .. convince dh to ditch carpet in most rooms, but let him keep it in one or two favorite rooms . . . That'll make it less painful when you replace the carpet in 2 years. My 2c would be cheap carpet, as I know I'd be replacing it soon, no matter how pricey it is. (I finally got rid of EVERY inch of carpet in our house a couple years ago. Best. Thing. Ever.)

So, I see you equate following rules and laws with honesty and integrity. I can see why, in that context, following rules and laws would be so important to you. I value those traits, too. I don't make that correlation, at all. I never promised anybody I'd follow all the laws. I don't intend to promise that to anybody, lol. Some of the greatest, most honest people with lots of integrity are rule-breakers. I, too, value honesty and integrity. I just don't see that following laws has anything to do with those character traits. Laws are arbitrary, just like religious rules are arbitrary. If you "buy in" to a set of laws or a set of rules, then, sure I can see how following them would be important to you. I just don't see why you buy in to the laws just for no particular reason. I live in WV and followed our state legislative session fairly closely this year. Let me tell you, the folks who make laws here are full of shit and mostly idiots to the nth degree. I'm not just saying that due to political differences of opinions, I'm telling you that anyone with an IQ over 100 who watched these morons would understand that they are idiots, without sense, and making no good laws whatsoever, while making plenty of idiotic ones. After watching this, and of course watching our idiots in DC, I really can't understand how anyone could have a blind obedience to "the law". FWIW, it's 100% legal for vets to sell you vaccines that don't work and to guilt trip you into spending $1000s you don't have on a pet that is 99% going to die within weeks to months. Most of our local competitors do just those things. Over and over. My dh won't do those things. Ever. We decided a very long time ago that we're totally fine with going broke, so long as we keep our integrity. It's also entirely legal for us to not offer health insurance, paid time off, push the new mom into coming back FT right away though threat of job loss, etc. Oh, so many things are so legal. All our competitors do those things. We're not legally compelled to do the right things. But, we do them anyway. Because. We're good people. Etc. Etc. We all make decisions every day about doing what is right vs doing what is easy. The law is very rarely helpful. Your conscience is most often very helpful. Relying on the "law" instead of your *heart* can numb you to what is right and good. Case in point: Politicians (on all sides, this is not a political rant). Think about it, and you can find many good examples . . . I won't offer examples, as that'd be political, lol. Laws do not equal right. Counting on law-following as a guide to being a good person will take you not very far towards being a great person, IMHO. I'd rather focus on doing the right things because they are the right things, not because of an external rule/law.

Wow, I don't actually know anyone who tracks personal purchases on the internet to pay the appropriate sales/use tax. I track those untaxed purchases at our business and do pay all appropriate taxes at work, as I don't like to cut any corners at a business.... records are easy to track, and thus the risks are higher as are the chances of an audit . . . Besides, I pay our office manager to keep all those records straight, so I don't have to do it. So, we do it. But, wow, you track the $20 doodads you buy off eBay or other sites that don't collect sales tax. I'm impressed. Way to go! What a PITA that must be! Do you track them all on a spreadsheet or what? Or maybe you aren't a big online shopper? Me, nope, no way. Bring on the auditors to find my $25 doodads, etc. Not worth my bother, IMHO. If it's worth somebody's time to figure out which doodads did and didn't collect sales tax upon sale, and how much I owe, then I'll pay . . . until then, forget it.

Cucumber, carrot, sesame, soy . .. mmmmm Pretty much calorie free, lol. And, delicious. Soooo yummy. http://www.food.com/recipe/korean-carrot-and-cucumber-salad-226519

In the US, the word "noodles" may be used interchangeably for the generic word "pasta" -- so we've got lasagna-shaped noodles, macaroni-shaped noodles, spaghetti-shaped noodles, etc. You can call any shape of pasta "noodles". :) It's rather casual/inaccurate, but if you're looking at a big pot or plate of any shape of pasta, you can call it "pasta" or "noodles" or "spaghetti". Spaghetti would be most specific, pasta would be the more proper/formal general term, noodles would be a very casual general term. Some people even use "macaroni" as a generic word for "pasta", too, but that's less common! Your English is so excellent that it's easy for us to forget you don't live in the US. :)

Indeed, for the first dozen July 4ths we lived in WV, we were early adopters of cool-fire-works-on-our-own-land. Some were bought in other states . . . Some were legal here, some weren't. This year, though, apparently our (generally deranged and idiotic) state legislature (which doesn't have the time or organization to address any of the very serious pressing problems in our state) somehow found time and energy to pass a law recently permitting *all the fun and dangerous* fireworks. So, now we have very legal fireworks in hand . . . Which are no less dangerous than the prior 12 years we set them off . . . when they were illegal. Same fireworks. Same land. Different year. As always, we'll be prudent, responsible, wear shoes, have a hose handy for unexpected emergencies and a big bucket or water ready for the "dead" fireworks to safely cool down . . . I am confident we're no more safe this year than we were prior years. Laws changed. We didn't. I don't feel like a better person this year now that we're following the local fireworks laws.

LOL, see, when I see people arguing that one should "follow all the laws", I read . . . somebody has some serious problems with self-control and/or self-direction. I read that as somebody who has been really messed up by a rules-based religion, rules-based household, over-controlling family member, or something else. I personally think that it's really messed up to live life according to edicts, laws, rules. To me, it means that the individual has ceded their autonomy and given up their humanity. Isn't it strange how one can read the exact same stuff in such opposite ways? If we own our own actions, own the consequences of our actions, and are responsible not to harm others, then, to me, we're in pretty good shape. Whether we follow all the rules/laws/whatevers is only very loosely correlated with those more important principles, IME. I'd *much* rather live in a society where people had good critical thinking skills and took responsibility for their actions . . . than one where folks just followed all the rules.

Would you want your kids to follow every law in every state in our nation? There are some incredibly bad, and even evil, laws on the books. And, yes, I have plenty of confidence in my kids' judgment. Helping them develop their critical thinking skills is pretty much the core goal of my homeschool / family. Supervising them / guiding them as long as they are too immature to make good decisions is part of my parenting job. There are numerous critically important areas of life where no laws or even rules apply. They have to make judgements to make good choices on who to have sex with, who to be alone with, where to go at night, what to tell a friend who is about to make a dangerous decision, etc, etc. So, in essence, I don't rely on rules or laws to keep my kids safe or to ensure they make good decisions. I rely on their judgment and my supervision. Rules and laws are just pieces of information in my book. It's important to use information to make decisions.

I would NOT use restrooms in rest areas unless there is a family bathroom you can all go into together. I'd stop at fast food places, and do whatever you already do when you use public bathrooms. (When my son was 9, I'd stand outside the bathroom door while my son was in the bathroom -- and, yep, yelling in every minute or so . . . and drag the 4 year old in with me to the ladies room . . . and drag them both in with me when I had to use it . . . except maybe the 9 year old if I felt very comfortable with the location . . . But, on a road trip, they'd generally be with me in a family restroom or a ladies room.

We tell them that some laws are silly. We're not particularly devoted to following all laws just because they are on the books. There are numerous laws I would not obey because I morally or otherwise object to them. There are others that are just silly that I may not obey. I need to either agree with the rule . . . or be afraid of the consequences of breaking it . . . to be committed to following it. The government sets penalties according to the severity of the infraction. I consider consequences when I choose to disregard a law. Do you speed? Do you pay sales/use tax on all the stuff you buy off the internet? Do you pay (or accept payment) under the table ever? Ever give your spouse an extra vicodin that you had leftover from surgery when he has a killer headache? Do any DIY home improvements that technically required a permit? There are numerous laws on the books that we don't always follow. Personally, I am more of a risk/benefit person. I am OK with speeding up to 5-8 mph over (if I judge it safe) because I'm not too worried about a single low-grade speeding ticket given my decade+ clean driving record. However, I wouldn't speed 20+ mph over (even if I thought it was safe, which would be unlikely) due to the elevated legal risk of a potential reckless driving ticket. I'm OK with paying someone under the table for 500-1000/yr, but when I had an employee for several thousand a year, I jumped through all the hoops to make it legal and pay all taxes . . . again . . . I don't expect anyone to throw me in jail or excessively fine me for a <$1000/yr employee, but I fear the elevated risks of a more significant employee not being "legal". Same goes with fireworks. At the end of the day, I'm just not much of a "rules" person. I follow rules if they make sense to me and/or I've bought into an agreement/relationship/whatever that requires me to follow them. Or because I'm afraid of consequences. I don't follow laws or rules just because somebody in charge makes them.

Random idea . . . Assuming you don't do so already, can you start paying generously for chores? If the kids who ARE doing the chores are getting $$$ towards their pocket/fun/video game/whatever funds . . . they might not be as resentful as if they are doing it "for free" while their sibling does nothing . . . Even if you don't have "more" money to give . . . You can cut back on parental payments for some routine things (gas money, out-with-buddies money, make up, whatever) . . . and pay the kids for more chores . . . so your total outlay might not be much different. I've personally found that my kids are much less resentful/resistant to chores in general when they are paid for them. My kids are only paid for certain chores . . . others are just family duties . . . but for some reason, once we started paying $$$ (aiming for $10/hr+), they've become more cooperative on ALL chores, even the freebies/family duties. For us, the key was, I think, cutting back on all the stuff we routinely just pay for . . . to increase their incentive/appreciation for the cash. (I.e., stopped just giving gas money to teens . . . stopped just paying 100% of all "fun" kid activities . . . made them contribute some earned/own money to those sorts of things . . . )

http://www.food.com/recipe/mexican-potato-casserole-527640 Very tasty and flexible. Feel free to reduce the beef and increase the beans for economy. :)

Oh my gosh! That's so scary!! So glad you stayed safe!!!!! Yoikes!!!! FWIW, if you want industrial strength permethrin at a later date . . . This is what I bought: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003IMO3I2/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

LOLOL, your description of the horror your family responded with cracks me up. In exactly the same boat here, even after they witnessed my own disastrous and devastatingly painful bout with Lyme!! I have raised my kids to be chemical averse . . . and yet, am now, loudly espousing the wonders of some of the nastier chemicals commercially available. Tomorrow, I'm hosting a "tick tube making festival" during which I, and several equally crunchy, organic, grass-fed-meats mommas . . . will cheerfully don gloves (+/- hazmat suits, lol) to treat gear, clothes, etc in permethrin and assemble hundreds of "tick tubes" which are tubes filled with permethrin-treated cotton which happy little mice will then take for their nests, killing ticks on their favored host, which are actually mice, not deer. (Google for instructions!) I bought enough concentrated permethrin to make oh, 15 gallons or so of diluted permethrin with which to treat clothing, etc. It sounds very insane . . . until you face Lyme up close and personal . . . and suddenly, pesticides are my new best friend.

Fine Arts -- 1 credit, call it a day. :) My kids each did *tons* of music study, so in high school, I gave them credits for Music 9, Music 10, Music 11, and Music 12. 1 credit each year (probably averaged 500-1000+++ hr/yr of music study per kid). Since your dd has smaller time commitments to multiple areas of fine arts, I'd just call it Fine Arts and be done with it. :) That is, if you *need* the credits. If you don't need the credits, then I'd just leave it off the transcripts. If the time commitment is more like 10+ hr/wk, then I'd lean towards putting an "extra" on the transcript. I've done that for music, and I did that for FIRST Robotics as my son put in many hundreds of hours each year on that.

Pill box. Keep it with his toothbrush, assuming he brushes his teeth regularly. He needs to associate taking the pills with something he does EVERY morning and night. Since I *always* brush my teeth before bed and upon waking, keeping my meds near by toothbrush works for me. Eventually, it becomes ingrained. Perhaps get a large ziplock bag and have him store his pill box and tooth brush stuff together in that bag?

FYI, you can only put in EARNED income into IRAs. So, you can't put money into IRAs for your kids unless they have earned income. What you CAN do is, if they, say, earn $2000 from a summer job, you can gift them $2000 to put into an IRA (presumably a Roth, which is actually fairly liquid). FWIW, I do NOT advise taking student loans while having investments sitting around, unless there would be some huge tax penalty. Please consult a financial planner and/or do more research before you do that. (And, do NOT rely on advice from someone making money off of your investments!) Student loans are NOT CHEAP any more. Nope, not at all. Most grads are looking at 7% or so interest rates. Good luck finding any investments with 7% (after tax!) guaranteed returns. We can hope for those level of returns long term, but it's not guaranteed, for sure (especially considering taxes!).

Our college savings were done in the 90s/early 00s when we were still eligible (they had income limits for the contributor) to contribute to what were then called Educational IRAs (renamed Coverdell accounts). They can be re-assigned to other kids, even grandkids, etc if not used by the named beneficiaries. We (parents/owners) control the accounts. Withdrawals (for eligible educational expenses) are tax free. (The money was taxed before contributing.) Our kids' nest eggs are in trust accounts --- they came from my mom's estate. I wouldn't put my kids' nest egg money in a ROTH or 529, because the purpose of their "nest egg" accounts is post-undergrad . . . whatever they want/need. (DH and I are funding undergrad . . .) They might need help with grad school or they might need a car or they might want a year off traveling the world. Or they might want a down payment or seed money for a business or they might let it sit and grow and be their life-long emergency fund. Whatever they want, the money is theirs once they hit 25. Retirement accounts are in SIMPLE IRAs, which are similar to 401ks but are used by tiny businesses (as ours is). If I were eligible for a ROTH IRA personally, I'd use it once I'd maxed out the pre-tax vehicles I had access to (401k, SIMPLE, whatever your employer has . . . or a Traditional IRA if eligible for pre-tax contributions. If I were low enough income to not pay much income tax to start with, then, for sure, go with ROTH IRA. If your income tax bracket is high, then the pre-tax vehicles are generally better, so I'd use those first, and then do a ROTH if I had more to invest and was eligible.

I'm not who you directed your query to . . . . . . but, our "Kid Nest Eggs" are in Vanguard's LifeStrategy Growth Fund. It's a broad index fund approach of balanced stocks/bonds/domestic/international funds. It's goal is long term growth, so it's ideal for those with longer investment horizons (say 10+ years), but, I like it even for a shorter time horizon, so long as you won't freak out if it loses 10% one year, or whatever. I'm a invest-and-forget-and-never-sell investor, so I'm fine with the ups and downs. I'm just concerned about long term gains. Alternately, I also like Vanguard's Total Stock Market Index Fund if you want 100% domestic stocks. I'd probably use that for college savings if I were investing college money now. (I actually used Vanguard's 500 Index Fund for ours, but those accounts were established before TSM came out. Now I use TSM when I just want domestic stocks/stocks/stocks in some portfolio.) IMHO, either of those funds would be ideal for a long-term nest egg. I love Vanguard, and I love Index Funds, and I love Target Date Retirement Funds and Vanguard's LifeStrategy funds for non-retirement purposes. I'm no expert, though, so take my advice with plenty of salt.

Exactly. My friends who are "high income" (say, top 5%, not top 1%) . . . many have a spouse (all women IME) who stays home, maybe homeschool or otherwise has lots of time to devote to their kids during and after school, takes long walks with friends during the day, cooks up nice meals with no thought to grocery costs, has plenty of time to vacation plan, college plan, financially plan . . . When someone is ill, money is no object in obtaining medical care. When basic needs come up like car repairs, or even a new car, or a new roof . . . solving the need is as simple as calling a couple contractors for bids, then writing a check. Big needs such as college or retirement require planning, of course, but we have the resources to meet those needs, get the help needed, and the personal time to devote to appropriate planning. These folks have reserves, they have emergency funds and tons of (cheap) credit available if needed unexpectedly. A few weeks (or months) off work between jobs is rare and if it occurs, is usually is covered by some sort of separation pay, and if not means maybe dipping a bit into investment/savings accounts, or worst case, dipping into retirement savings or maybe taking cash out of a house via a HELOC. They can easily catch up once they are re-employed. My truly-poor (lowest quartile) friends and acquaintances . . . work many, many hours, often 60+ per week, struggle mightily to overcome the most basic obstacle such as a car repair, let alone manage more dire problems such a grandchild in need of rescue or an adult child in need of medical or legal care . . . VERY few of these truly poor people I know had health insurance before the expansion of Medicaid in our state, and even now, many still go without if they don't know how to work the system and/or just don't "get" the numbers/subsidies available. They do not utilize health care in the way that higher income people do, and they suffer mightily due to that lack. Many work in industries that do not offer health benefits or any other benefits. Vacations do not exist for them on any significant basis. A rare visit to distant (but very closely related, such as an elderly mother) family would be the only vacations that they've taken, ever, that I know of. These folks have zero savings, zero reserves, and almost no ability to manage a significant financial crisis. A few weeks off work between jobs means risking losing everything they have and generally puts them back YEARS in their financial progress as it can take years to catch up from getting behind on bills. If health care wasn't so insecure in our country, then there would be a lot more comfort to be found "in the middle", but (the vast majority of) poor folks suffer, period, IMHO. Once we finally join civilized nations in ensuring all our people have health care and education, then perhaps being in the 2nd quintile or third will be a reasonable comfortable option. But, IMHO, the insecurity of access to health care makes living in the bottom 1/2 to 2/3 of our economy incredibly frightening and stressful. I can't even fathom the stress I'd feel if were in that position, with a sick family member.