Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Which would you take?

23 replies

Ellabella989 · 29/03/2019 13:28

Saw an interesting picture today of a red pill and a blue pill.
The red pill would jump your life to 20 years in the future but with £50 million in the bank.
The blue pill would take you back to 10 years old and let you relive your life with all the knowledge you have now.
Which would you take?

OP posts:
Original poster
Ellabella989 · 29/03/2019 13:31

As tempting as the £50 million would be i’d personally go for the blue pill.

OP posts:
CabbageHippy · 29/03/2019 13:31

neither i'm happy where i'm at but if I had to then definitely the blue pill & make a few million with the knowledge

random79 · 29/03/2019 13:31

Surely going back 10 years in the past would mean that you would have all that money anyway?

It's like Biff in Back to the Future and the sports almanac

Ellisandra · 29/03/2019 13:32

If forced with a gun to my head, the red pill as I could never undo my daughter.

Original poster
Ellabella989 · 29/03/2019 13:32

@random it would take you back to 10 years old, not 10 years in the past

OP posts:
iklboo · 29/03/2019 13:32

Blue pill has the potential for horrendous butterfly effect though.

If I hadn't have done what I did growing up I'd have never met DH, had DS etc. The paths would never have aligned.

CabbageHippy · 29/03/2019 13:33

second thoughts i'd take the red pill first, get the money then take the blue pill and be 10 years old with money & knowledge

Ellisandra · 29/03/2019 13:33

Hang on - 2 players say back 10 years, OP says back to 10 years old! Big difference and a huge influence on my choice!
I could go back 10 years and still have my daughter Wink

BlueMerchant · 29/03/2019 13:35

Definitely Blue pill. 100%

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 29/03/2019 13:35

I wouldnt want to jump 20 years and not live all the young years of my daughter's life. Id prob go back 10 years just to try and make money by buying property in areas I now know were up and coming.

Whatififall · 29/03/2019 13:35

I don’t think I’d be able to take either.
I’d be too worried that if I went back in time I’d lose my 8 year old and never have her.
I’d be too worried to go forward as I’d lose 20 years of her life, all those memories we’ve yet to make I wouldn’t get to experience.

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 29/03/2019 13:36

oohh 10 years old.....dont want to live my teen years again.....forward then...lord this is hard

BlueMerchant · 29/03/2019 13:37

Whether it took me back 10 years or to 10 years of age I'd take the Blue. I've had health probs the last few years and would not have had these if I'd known what I know now 10 years ago.

recrudescence · 29/03/2019 13:38

In my case the red pill would be a suicide pill. £50m not much use to a dead person.

random79 · 29/03/2019 13:39

You'd just have to wait until 18, but you'd still be able to be absolutely minted.

For kids though - I can totally get those who wouldn't want to run the risk that something important would change and they wouldn't have them, but would you happily skip 20 years of their lives? What happens if you woke up and they'd died 1 year ago.

Ellisandra · 29/03/2019 13:41

Imagine the grief of waking up aged 10, of knowing that almost all the people you currently love, and previously knew or loved, were effectively dead.

Imagine your first kiss at (say) 14 - complete with the 52 year old’s knowledge that this boy’s probably just a loser, and anyway - fucking hell, who wants a kiss when you know what good sex is?! I’d hate to lose out on that innocence and excitement!

mrsk28 · 29/03/2019 13:46

Red pill for sure, it would only take me into my 40's and I'd have 50 million. Also couldn't go back to being a child/teen again, much prefer being an adult.

SleepWarrior · 29/03/2019 13:50

Neither, they both sound awful! Obviously having a shed load of money is great in many ways but not worth missing out on my children's childhoods for.

The back in time one sounds horrendous. What an awful extra burden to the second half of your childhood, to know what outcome of some decisions might be - so much pressure to do it the same/differently. Although having said that, when you say "knowledge", do you mean you'd have knowledge of how your life turned out or just things you learned? The latter is better but still takes away the lightness of being young and carefree.

On balance I guess I'd go forward. At least I could set up my children's futures financially and do lots of good with the money.

7salmonswimming · 29/03/2019 13:51

Who would want to be 10yo with the knowledge and experience of a 44yo??

Equally, I wouldn't want to miss out on the next 20 years of my life, just to leave my kids a fortune which would probably ruin them anyway.

Nah. I'll stay as I am thanks.

NuffSaidSam · 29/03/2019 13:52

I'd definitely take the red pill.

Being 10 with the knowledge of an adult and knowledge of the future would not make a happy life. Would I know about major events in the world? Would I, aged 10, have to try and stop 9/11? It's too much!

Rich and middle aged for me! My DC are bordering on teen years so I've had the cute baby times. Happy to skip the teen years and have them be adults!

Crappygilmore · 29/03/2019 13:55

Blue pill. So many things i would change . Many causing me heartache daily. My life at 41 is shite 31 was great. No brainer for me.

InsertFunnyUsername · 29/03/2019 14:07

Going back ten years would take me back to an early teen, full of spots and hormones!

Il take the 20 years and millions please!

InsertFunnyUsername · 29/03/2019 14:08

Oh sorry just see 10 years old! Doh.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread