TRUFAX: You can raise a baby on $70 a month!

[FundiesInMyFamily]

But disability is expensive – fucking expensive. And it's even more expensive in a child.

AMEN to that Burris. I've been buying diapers for 16 years (my son is on a bowel & bladder program but still leaks at night). I can't imagine what it would be like to raise a disabled child on no insurance or the Jeubs happy healthcare club.

There may be exceptions, but having a baby only costs $70 when you are Emily & DNA, stacking your kids on shelving and feeding them hate for dinner.

[valsa]

feeding them hate for dinner.

I shouldn't have laughed at that, but I did.

[crawfishgirl]

This topic seems to have gone viral all over the fundie-net - here is another blog on it: http://pursuingtitus2DOTcom/2011/12/15/ ... ally-cost/. My kids are elementary-aged, but they seem to have been expensive since their birth.... though I wouldn't change a thing. We have no family nearby, so we had to rely on daycare when they were younger, and basically you get what you pay for regarding daycare, so I didn't mind spending more than average on that service. Even saving for their future college tuition is expensive, in addition to all of their current needs. These bloggers are not being realistic, unless they just don't give a damn about enrichment opportunities such as sports, ballet, future educational needs, etc.

[lessa]

I bet Suzie was including things like life insurance, health insurance, copays, food, diapers, perhaps these parents included savings for college in their original budget, clothes, increased utility costs, a bit for emergencies, etc.

We also have no idea if the bulk of their money goes to student loans and a mortgage. Two expenses they cannot change unless they could sell their house and move to a smaller/less expensive home and for all we know part of the expense was they live in a two bedroom house and would need to look at getting a bigger home.

While $700 is high I think it is a lot closer then $70.

Goodness, I averaged $35 a month on copays the first year of each kid.

[emmiedahl]

I bet Suze Orman is also counting on the parents saving for college, something that the fundie set does not generally do.

I know a Jewish family that spends that $700-1000 per month just on day school and educational expenses... for one kid. And I imagine it is worth every penny; I know my private school education has given me some advantages.

[Feberin]

This topic seems to have gone viral all over the fundie-net - here is another blog on it: http://pursuingtitus2DOTcom/2011/12/15/ ... ally-cost/. My kids are elementary-aged, but they seem to have been expensive since their birth.... though I wouldn't change a thing. We have no family nearby, so we had to rely on daycare when they were younger, and basically you get what you pay for regarding daycare, so I didn't mind spending more than average on that service. Even saving for their future college tuition is expensive, in addition to all of their current needs. These bloggers are not being realistic, unless they just don't give a damn about enrichment opportunities such as sports, ballet, future educational needs, etc.

That blog seems to spell everything out in fairly resonable terms. Yes it's a absolute cheapstake has a baby type spelling out of costs but it sounded pretty decent to me and does realize that there are medical expenses. Of course you should have a safety net to make sure you can cover unexpected costs such as special needs but EVERYONE should have a safety net of money saved for unexpected expenses because who knows when somebody will loose their job, crash the car or get sick. Parents should probably have more money saved up since kids are less predictable in terms of expenses. Also while I agree that older chidlren are more expensive and a parent should be prepared for a baby growing up nobody (including Suze in my opinion) are counting ballet lessons into the expenses for baby's first year.

[keen23]

$70 is insane. And for the record, my third child was quite expensive - a lot of the things we'd bought had been plain worn out by the first and second kids, and needed to be replaced.

Word.

Yup, by the time #3 rolled around, things needed to be repurchased or replaced. And it wasn't like #3 was far behind her sisters either, its just that two kids did a number on the baby stuff that we did have. Not only that, but #3 needed Alimentum formula, our insurance didn't cover it. So that was $30 a can, for a can that lasted about 2.5 days. Just feeding her cost more than $70 a week!

[Sydney Fox]

Word.

Yup, by the time #3 rolled around, things needed to be repurchased or replaced. And it wasn't like #3 was far behind her sisters either, its just that two kids did a number on the baby stuff that we did have. Not only that, but #3 needed Alimentum formula, our insurance didn't cover it. So that was $30 a can, for a can that lasted about 2.5 days. Just feeding her cost more than $70 a week!

Our #3 was a different sex than the first two, so I'm having to buy all new clothes for him. If he had been a girl, we would have had lots of clothes for him. He rides around in a hot pink stroller, but I haven't the heart to dress him all in pink. Clothes are expensive for us because we live in a remote location with limited shopping, and I have to order everything in by mail.

[AnnoDomini]

I bet Suze Orman is also counting on the parents saving for college, something that the fundie set does not generally do.

Yep, I can't speak for most fundies but it wouldn't surprise me if it's common for the parents to not make a college fund for each or any kid. My parents certainly didn't for any one of their ten children (though at least my grandparents had one started for the first few. Most of that disappeared when the economy crashed).

[fundiefan]

I've never had or raised a kid. But, if it can be done properly on $70 a month, all society is an epic fail. Give $70 a month and nothing more to a single mom, or a young family, and prove how they fail. Because rent doesn't matter or utilities or food for mom & dad. No car is needed to get to any job, no phone is needed, no INTERNET to tell the world how much they suck. No diapers - the initial output for cloth or using disposables. No laundry - and if you don't have your own appliances, you can easily spend $10 a week or more (I am single and spend $12 a week).

No, you don't have to spend a ton to have a kid. But, you do have to have income and spend money to survive, and that is part of the cost of supporting a living human being. If you can't feed and house yourself, you can't do the same for your kid. The baby is not an entity in and of itself. It needs care and provision. All of which are far more than $70 a month. Even far more than $70 a month 'over' what one may already pay for life.

$70 for just the baby, fine. Who is going to provide shelter and electricity and laundry and water for that baby, though?

Idiots.

[Feberin]

I've never had or raised a kid. But, if it can be done properly on $70 a month, all society is an epic fail. Give $70 a month and nothing more to a single mom, or a young family, and prove how they fail. Because rent doesn't matter or utilities or food for mom & dad. No car is needed to get to any job, no phone is needed, no INTERNET to tell the world how much they suck. No diapers - the initial output for cloth or using disposables. No laundry - and if you don't have your own appliances, you can easily spend $10 a week or more (I am single and spend $12 a week).

No, you don't have to spend a ton to have a kid. But, you do have to have income and spend money to survive, and that is part of the cost of supporting a living human being. If you can't feed and house yourself, you can't do the same for your kid. The baby is not an entity in and of itself. It needs care and provision. All of which are far more than $70 a month. Even far more than $70 a month 'over' what one may already pay for life.

$70 for just the baby, fine. Who is going to provide shelter and electricity and laundry and water for that baby, though?

Idiots.

I don't think anyone is saying the $70 figure (which I do think is low but nowhere near $700 if you're not needing daycare) is for the entire family. Just extra expenses that the baby causes. I also think most people are assuming that laundry is being done at home with your own washer and dryer. I think one of the reason these threads get so much discussion is there is so many "what ifs" in the equation that you can't figure it out across the board. A baby could have a complicated birth and the parents shitty insurance or an easy one with great insurance. You could have an apartment with in unit washer and dryer and utilities are included in your rent or you could have to go to a laundromat each week. The mother could breastfeed for the full year or have problems and have to switch to special extra expensive formula. There might be special needs or the baby might grow really fast and be in 2T at their first birthday. Every baby is unique and so are the parents so there is no simple equation that will tell you how much a baby will cost. But we can estimate costs and I feel like $700 is a lot assuming your talking about a baby without special needs, the parents have insurance and you choose some cheaper options. I do think some parents make babies way more expensive then they need to be when they purchase all the clothes brand new at the mall, have every single toy that promises brain development and fancy a fancy stroller. I know one person who although they cloth diaper and breastfeed have like 20 different carriers/wraps/slings since they're super into baby wearing.

[Bella99]

$70? Her Maj needs medicine for asthma and ADD, and since we are uninsured we spend well over that amount. The asthma means she gets more upper respiratory infections, at least 3 a year and every visit costs $100, plus parking and meds. We do all of the hygiene type stuff regarding laundry and housekeeping, but that only goes so far.

As an infant, she was very affordable, I cloth diapered, breastfed, thrift shopped, etc. As a 2nd grader, she needs medicine, fun with friends, and activities that stimulate her mind and body. More children would have been a joy, but by the time she was weaned it was obvious that everything was going up but wages. We can't give her everything, but having more children would have meant we couldn't afford the healthcare and experiences that will give her a better shot at being a successful adult.

[Boogalou]

Honestly, I don't think it matters if it cost $7, $70, $700, or $7000 a month to have a kid. The couple on the show were already overspending every month by almost $1000 and no amount of added expenses (or a decrease in income) is going to help matters any. It's simple math, but I'm not surprised the fundies can't do it. What I am surprised is that they even watch Suze Ormon in the first place. I am also confused as to why one of the commenters put her name in quotes. So strange.

[clever_name]

I'm moderately crunchy so my kids don't have those things either, but they DO have expenses outside of food, clothes, shelter and well visits to the doctor. They need glasses for example. My insurance pays for frames every 2 years which is fine for an adult, but my kid needs them more often than that. $300 out the window.

Zennioptical.com

You're welcome. :)

[gilora]

Honestly, I don't think it matters if it cost $7, $70, $700, or $7000 a month to have a kid. The couple on the show were already overspending every month by almost $1000 and no amount of added expenses (or a decrease in income) is going to help matters any. It's simple math, but I'm not surprised the fundies can't do it.

This. A couple of commentors tried to point this out but were shouted down by cries of "that LESBIAN hates teh baybeez!!!"

The math seems to go something like this:

income - expenses = deficit; however

(deficit - wife's income) + extra baby + manna from that magical dude in the sky = exactly enough

[FemaleScientist]

Where do they live? 6500 is a lot to pay a month, even if they don't have a lavish lifestyle. But I know daycare can add up costs quite a bit. And if they opt to have another kid, they'll have to pay more daycare costs (though it may be discounted for a second kid) unless they have a family member babysit during the day or Jill stays home (which doesn't seem economically possible). I don't think 700 is a bit high of an estimate... I mean, think about day care, extra food, any accidents that may occur, basic baby supplies. And expenses add up when kids get older, want to get involved in more things, and then go to college.

I know people that pay almost 600-1000 a month just for day care in Wisconsin.

Honestly, I don't think it matters if it cost $7, $70, $700, or $7000 a month to have a kid. The couple on the show were already overspending every month by almost $1000 and no amount of added expenses (or a decrease in income) is going to help matters any. It's simple math, but I'm not surprised the fundies can't do it. What I am surprised is that they even watch Suze Ormon in the first place. I am also confused as to why one of the commenters put her name in quotes. So strange.

This, also.

[Feberin]

This. A couple of commentors tried to point this out but were shouted down by cries of "that LESBIAN hates teh baybeez!!!"

The math seems to go something like this:

income - expenses = deficit; however

(deficit - wife's income) + extra baby + manna from that magical dude in the sky = exactly enough

I agree that the couple on the show were in no position to expand their family. Also since Suze Orman said they

couldn't cut back I think it's safe to assume they weren't spending all their money on lattes and the latest fashions like fundies like to believe working mothers do and if they only stopped those luxuries then they could afford to stay home and have a litter of kids. Instead of the honest truth where th mother's salary covers the mortgage, student loans and health insurance. However it is still interesting to hear how much people think a baby costs. Also the couple in question did not use daycare but worked opposite shifts.

[snarkbillie]

Zennioptical.com

You're welcome. :)

Oh, I get her frames there. The $300 is for the visit to get her prescription adjusted. She has to go to a specialist.

[Crackedeggs]

Wow.. there's enough judgment going on in here for the book of Revelations.

1. Suze Orman does have an over inflated idea of what people " need" to live.

2. Suze Orman being gay has not one damn thing to do with that.

3. There is not a god damned thing wrong with buying used furniture.I do it even when I DO have money, I prefer antique or used, because I don't care for how shoddy most modern furniture is, and I prefer older styles. I do buy mattresses and box springs new, cause that's just gross.

4. Yeah, you could do a baby on $70 a month. However as that kid gets older, yes, they WILL cost more. However...

5. Food purists give me a pain in the ass... once your wumply umpling gets a taste of sugar and white flour and candy and hot dogs and pizza at school, they will at some point turn their noses up at your all natural range free or vegan healthy cuisine, and you are lying if you say they don't... and then, at that point, your choice is do you want them to eat or not! And secondly, a lot of us can't afford to pay $8 a pound for free range meat or $4 a dozen for organic eggs, etc, etc. Just because we don't have the level of economic prowess that you think we should have, doesn't mean we shouldn't be allowed to have kids.

6. While I am all for enrichment, and spend a small fortune providing for my daughter's extracurriculars.... funny, I can remember growing up without dance lessons, soccer, t-ball, whatever. My parents did NOT spend a small fortune on running me from one planned activity to the next. Neither did most of the kids I grew up with's parents. We PLAYED. We lived outdoors weather permitting, we did stuff like build forts out of old boards, jump paint cans on ramps made of bricks and boards on our bikes, swam in creeks, rollersvkated, played hide and seek... We got sweaty, dirty, and we were pretty self directed about it all, we didn't need a coach

7. Oh yeah, you could do it on nearly nothing if you eschewed medical care. Or, if you were on welfare insurance.

[LadyBBR]

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/calculatorintro.htm

The USDA has a calculator to figure out how much it will cost each year to raise a child. It takes multiple variables into account (region, age of kids, how many parents in the household). It also includes things like housing, which you'd obviously pay for even without any kids.

For my 3 kids it says they cost me 52,000/year.

[valsa]

6. While I am all for enrichment, and spend a small fortune providing for my daughter's extracurriculars.... funny, I can remember growing up without dance lessons, soccer, t-ball, whatever. My parents did NOT spend a small fortune on running me from one planned activity to the next. Neither did most of the kids I grew up with's parents. We PLAYED. We lived outdoors weather permitting, we did stuff like build forts out of old boards, jump paint cans on ramps made of bricks and boards on our bikes, swam in creeks, rollersvkated, played hide and seek... We got sweaty, dirty, and we were pretty self directed about it all, we didn't need a coach.

Depending on what they're doing, you could run up quite a bit monthly if your kids do just one or two activities a year. I hate the idea that if you spend a lot on extracurriculars, you must be overloading your kids with a dozen different acitivites each week. Where I live it's a couple hundred dollars a month for once-a-week lessons if you're doing dance, gymnastics, marital arts, music, etc. It usually costs a bit less if you want to just do something sports-y for a season but, in either case, you still have to add the cost of uniforms, equipment, and transportation into that.

Also, things have changed from when we were kids. You can't really to save money by just expecting your kids to play like you used. If you do, they'll usually be playing alone (because everyone else's kids are out doing extracurricular)

[little zoo]

The calculator says that my 4 kids cost $39,400/yr. That is probably correct, but the part not taken into consideration is that I gave up a career to stay home. My husband and I would be making a lot more money if I didn't stay home with them. (I'm glad I stay home, but it's expensive!)

[Crackedeggs]

Depending on what they're doing, you could run up quite a bit monthly if your kids do just one or two activities a year. I hate the idea that if you spend a lot on extracurriculars, you must be overloading your kids with a dozen different acitivites each week. Where I live it's a couple hundred dollars a month for once-a-week lessons if you're doing dance, gymnastics, marital arts, music, etc. It usually costs a bit less if you want to just do something sports-y for a season but, in either case, you still have to add the cost of uniforms, equipment, and transportation into that.

Also, things have changed from when we were kids. You can't really to save money by just expecting your kids to play like you used. If you do, they'll usually be playing alone (because everyone else's kids are out doing extracurricular)

Yeah, I learned this as she got to be school age. We did 2 years of karate, 2 years of dance, 10 years and counting of music,2 years and counting of track... 3 years of summer swim camp, 2 years of regular summer camp, 2 years of soccer...... and I'm one of the lightweights when it comes to this stuff. I can see where a woman's entire salary could pay for the extracuriculars!

[keen23]

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/calculatorintro.htm

The USDA has a calculator to figure out how much it will cost each year to raise a child. It takes multiple variables into account (region, age of kids, how many parents in the household). It also includes things like housing, which you'd obviously pay for even without any kids.

For my 3 kids it says they cost me 52,000/year.

The USDA calculator grossly underestimates both my housing cost and my daycare costs. It puts my housing at under $20K a year, while in fact, the mortgage payment alone is over $20K.

[Jade]

The USDA calculator grossly underestimates both my housing cost and my daycare costs. It puts my housing at under $20K a year, while in fact, the mortgage payment alone is over $20K.

It estimated my child care costs at $3463. I wish! We pay $700/ month ($8400 a year) for one child. I would say they were pretty close on the food and health care though.