in wondering what this generation of enforced renters are going to do

[mustbetimeforacreamtea]

When they reach retirement and can't afford commercial rents on a pension? What happens then?

[Missunreasonable]

None of us jam tomorrow people would say life is easy for those with disabled children (although we all do know women like Nicola Horlick who had to cope with full time work other children and a sick and then dying child - if you earn a lot as a woman you can defnitely afford more care for the disabled child so I really would emphasise the importance of women picking higher paid careers if they can or at the least passing that advice on to their daughters).

But no amount of Jam could make me sacrifice what little time I would have with a sick and dying child. My child in that situation would be the priority.

I didn't go to uni when I left school, I went Into full time work and then took on a 2nd part time job and bought a house at 19. I have since been to uni as a mature student. I have a good level of education. I have worked hard. I own a house (well we still have a mortgage on the house but we own more than 60% of it). No matter what, I wouldn't want to be like Nicola Horlick and put a career and earning money before spending time with a Child who has a life limiting illness. My child's disability is not life limiting. I could perhaps earn enough to cover his specialists care but I won't attempt to to do that because my care is better than any care that paid carers could provide. He is happy with me and that is my priority.

[JaneParker]

I don't think working whilst you have a sick or not sick child is putting a child second. If you think it is presumably you think the children's father who might do exactly that should be exiled to the furthest reaches of hell for not putting his child first by being with it all the time. May be it's beause you chose not to go to university your income is less? Is that not the reason - that your choices had consequences? Anyway you have bought so are not what the thread is about. It's about people not making sacrifices today like sleeping on floors or the couple above who will live with parents (and by the way nothing to stop anyone ever having a baby hilst living with parents - ridiculous to think otherwise - the baby goes in a carry cot on the bed room floor of where the young couple live - you don't need perfection to give birth - get on with it now whilst saving for the place and don't give up full time work when the baby comes and don't take very long off on maternity leave - all jam tomorrow thingswhich will ensure the jam will come as you sacrificed the idea of having the perfect house before the baby comes along.

[Suzannewithaplan]

hmm, I think jam can be anything which gives gratification, jam now people want instant gratification, the jam laters are prepared to do without and save for a rainy day, etc, that probably doesnt answer your question.

I've always liked peanut butter over jam anyway

[JaneParker]

Jam is the wrong metaphor for me as I odn't eat sugar which is one rason I'm happy successful and never ill. It's not my phrase.It is a very old and sensible one. It is just about suffering a bit now to ensure life is better later. The good thing is that the "suffering" (hard work or saving up or whatever) makes you happier anyway whereas sitting around saving up no money tends not to make you happy as you don't achieve flow.

[Suzannewithaplan]

Jane, you are the very epitome of virtue and self denial and no mistake.

[Missunreasonable]

I don't think working whilst you have a sick or not sick child is putting a child second. If you think it is presumably you think the children's father who might do exactly that should be exiled to the furthest reaches of hell for not putting his child first by being with it all the time.

The point is that one of US would be with the sick child. We are both parents and either of us could assume the full time caring role. Leaving a sick/ disabled child with paid non parent carers is not the same. I could easily earn the same as my husband. I have been to uni (an RG uni as a mature student) and have a good degree. My earning potential is probably higher than my husbands but we decided that I was better at assuming the caring role (for various practical reasons) whilst he brings home the bacon. If I was not around for any reason then I know that my husband would give up work in an instant to ensure that our son is properly cared for. Money could never come before our children. In you case we have enough equity to move a couple of miles away and be mortgage free if required.
The example you gave was of a woman who works and has a child with a life limiting illness (my child does not have a life limiting illness). My point was that no amount of money could make me choose between spending time with a dying child or going to work and having a career. Some things are far more important than money and property.

[Nomama]

cooperG, but that's what people have always done.

Either live with ILs immediately after marriage and save like crazy, buy a house then start the family.

Or have family and live with ILS and save like crazy.

Mine did the latter.

Times haven't changed that much.