Re: Bank Levy/ Garnishment/ BK

[Mike]

"JJ" > wrote in message >...
> So you are telling her the child would be better off dead than being born to
> parents in bankruptcy???

What Holly is saying is that it would be a poor financial decision to
get pregnant and have a baby when you can't even get your act
together, financially.

I can't determine, from the original poster, whether they are indeed
currently pregnant, or just in the process of trying to get pregnant.
If it is the latter, then they need to stop and get a wake up call.
If the former, then they need to consider other options, and perhaps
bankruptcy is one of them. Perhaps they could move in with a parent
and sell their house (assuming they own). Sell a car, etc.

But yes, if you are NOT pregnant, and you can barely keep yourself
afloat financially, it is just plain wrong to have a baby. It is
irresponsible. This was touched on in a separate thread.

Is it ethical to bring a child into the world knowing you can't fully
care for it? Sounds like a question for alt.philosophy.

Mike

[Mike]

"JJ" > wrote in message >...
> So you are telling her the child would be better off dead than being born to
> parents in bankruptcy???

What Holly is saying is that it would be a poor financial decision to
get pregnant and have a baby when you can't even get your act
together, financially.

I can't determine, from the original poster, whether they are indeed
currently pregnant, or just in the process of trying to get pregnant.
If it is the latter, then they need to stop and get a wake up call.
If the former, then they need to consider other options, and perhaps
bankruptcy is one of them. Perhaps they could move in with a parent
and sell their house (assuming they own). Sell a car, etc.

But yes, if you are NOT pregnant, and you can barely keep yourself
afloat financially, it is just plain wrong to have a baby. It is
irresponsible. This was touched on in a separate thread.

Is it ethical to bring a child into the world knowing you can't fully
care for it? Sounds like a question for alt.philosophy.

Mike

[Mike]

"JJ" > wrote in message >...
> So you are telling her the child would be better off dead than being born to
> parents in bankruptcy???

What Holly is saying is that it would be a poor financial decision to
get pregnant and have a baby when you can't even get your act
together, financially.

I can't determine, from the original poster, whether they are indeed
currently pregnant, or just in the process of trying to get pregnant.
If it is the latter, then they need to stop and get a wake up call.
If the former, then they need to consider other options, and perhaps
bankruptcy is one of them. Perhaps they could move in with a parent
and sell their house (assuming they own). Sell a car, etc.

But yes, if you are NOT pregnant, and you can barely keep yourself
afloat financially, it is just plain wrong to have a baby. It is
irresponsible. This was touched on in a separate thread.

Is it ethical to bring a child into the world knowing you can't fully
care for it? Sounds like a question for alt.philosophy.

Mike

[John Cowart]

DIANA wrote:
>
> I will be a stay at home mom... We have considered giving up my car and keeping only his since he
> works 2 minutes from our house! If I needed the car I could just drop him
> off at work.

I suggest that you give up whichever car is the most expensive to own
and drive, regardless of whoever currently drives it the most.

> We get a tax refund every year due to my business expenses and my office
> being in our house.

That means that you can afford to decrease your withholding slightly.
For example, if you normally get a $600 refund, you can safely decrease
your withholding by $10 per week, etc. The goal is to either get a
minimal refund, or to make a minimal extra payment at tax time.

> After we have the child....April 2004

When you file your 2004 taxes, don't forget to apply for the Earned
Income Credit. It will likely cause a major reduction in the amount of
tax that you will owe. And once again, you can decrease your withholding
accordingly.

John Cowart

[John Cowart]

DIANA wrote:
>
> I will be a stay at home mom... We have considered giving up my car and keeping only his since he
> works 2 minutes from our house! If I needed the car I could just drop him
> off at work.

I suggest that you give up whichever car is the most expensive to own
and drive, regardless of whoever currently drives it the most.

> We get a tax refund every year due to my business expenses and my office
> being in our house.

That means that you can afford to decrease your withholding slightly.
For example, if you normally get a $600 refund, you can safely decrease
your withholding by $10 per week, etc. The goal is to either get a
minimal refund, or to make a minimal extra payment at tax time.

> After we have the child....April 2004

When you file your 2004 taxes, don't forget to apply for the Earned
Income Credit. It will likely cause a major reduction in the amount of
tax that you will owe. And once again, you can decrease your withholding
accordingly.

John Cowart

[John Cowart]

DIANA wrote:
>
> I will be a stay at home mom... We have considered giving up my car and keeping only his since he
> works 2 minutes from our house! If I needed the car I could just drop him
> off at work.

I suggest that you give up whichever car is the most expensive to own
and drive, regardless of whoever currently drives it the most.

> We get a tax refund every year due to my business expenses and my office
> being in our house.

That means that you can afford to decrease your withholding slightly.
For example, if you normally get a $600 refund, you can safely decrease
your withholding by $10 per week, etc. The goal is to either get a
minimal refund, or to make a minimal extra payment at tax time.

> After we have the child....April 2004

When you file your 2004 taxes, don't forget to apply for the Earned
Income Credit. It will likely cause a major reduction in the amount of
tax that you will owe. And once again, you can decrease your withholding
accordingly.

John Cowart

[Mike]

"DIANA" > wrote in message >...
><snip>
>If you don't have children or have never been pregnant your opinions
about
>my "unplanned" ethics is null.

That is an illogical argument. That's like saying that someone who
has never owned a car can't make a decision as to whether to buy one
or not. Note - I am not comparing a car to a baby, rather, I am
comparing the have to have not situation.

I would gather that all or most of the people (myself included) that
said it was irresponsible to have a child while in this financial
mess, made the statement with the assumption that you were *NOT*
currently pregnant. You later dispelled this assumption.

That being said, what Holly said about a child not being a necessity
still stands. But that is moot point now, since you are currently
pregnant. Congrats.

>Whats done is done and we can only try to provide a good life for our
child.

I don't think anyone here disagrees with this statement.

What Holly et al are telling you, however, is that you need to
seriously reevaluate how you are spending your money. You must spend
less than you bring in inorder to save money and pay off your debt.

Good luck.

--
Mike

[Mike]

"DIANA" > wrote in message >...
><snip>
>If you don't have children or have never been pregnant your opinions
about
>my "unplanned" ethics is null.

That is an illogical argument. That's like saying that someone who
has never owned a car can't make a decision as to whether to buy one
or not. Note - I am not comparing a car to a baby, rather, I am
comparing the have to have not situation.

I would gather that all or most of the people (myself included) that
said it was irresponsible to have a child while in this financial
mess, made the statement with the assumption that you were *NOT*
currently pregnant. You later dispelled this assumption.

That being said, what Holly said about a child not being a necessity
still stands. But that is moot point now, since you are currently
pregnant. Congrats.

>Whats done is done and we can only try to provide a good life for our
child.

I don't think anyone here disagrees with this statement.

What Holly et al are telling you, however, is that you need to
seriously reevaluate how you are spending your money. You must spend
less than you bring in inorder to save money and pay off your debt.

Good luck.

--
Mike

[Mike]

"DIANA" > wrote in message >...
><snip>
>If you don't have children or have never been pregnant your opinions
about
>my "unplanned" ethics is null.

That is an illogical argument. That's like saying that someone who
has never owned a car can't make a decision as to whether to buy one
or not. Note - I am not comparing a car to a baby, rather, I am
comparing the have to have not situation.

I would gather that all or most of the people (myself included) that
said it was irresponsible to have a child while in this financial
mess, made the statement with the assumption that you were *NOT*
currently pregnant. You later dispelled this assumption.

That being said, what Holly said about a child not being a necessity
still stands. But that is moot point now, since you are currently
pregnant. Congrats.

>Whats done is done and we can only try to provide a good life for our
child.

I don't think anyone here disagrees with this statement.

What Holly et al are telling you, however, is that you need to
seriously reevaluate how you are spending your money. You must spend
less than you bring in inorder to save money and pay off your debt.

Good luck.

--
Mike