Posted by Dave on November 22, 2011
This is a guest post by Dave, who is also looking to retire no later than 45, but unlike Tim has no kids and doesn’t want any. Dave is from Ontario and is working towards his CGA certification.
In my “debut” post 2 years ago, I discussed my wife’s and my aversion to having children. This past weekend we talked about this again and are still fairly steadfast in maintaining our childless household. This is kind of an amusing viewpoint to have, as I am writing this post while going to see my new niece, just born an hour ago (apparently my brother doesn’t really agree with me and my views on children as this is his second girl born in 17 months). My wife and I spent the weekend with our nephews, aged 8 and 4 and after we were done playing with them (which was fun) we were both very happy for the quiet ride home.
In the past two years, my views haven’t really changed around having kids although I think my reasons have a little bit. In my first article, I wrote about how expensive kids would be and how it would limit my chances of retiring early. Since then, I have come to believe that kids are as expensive as you make them. If you go out and outfit an entire room with fancy furniture, buy disposable diapers, and attempt to buy your kid a good childhood, then I could see how having children could easily approach the average cost of $250,000 I quoted in my original post. Otherwise, I think costs could be kept down fairly low.
Where my views have changed, beyond my own personal preference to be free to do what I want to do when I want to do it (maintaining what could be called a selfish lifestyle) I really don’t know why I would add to the population. The UN recently had a huge celebration that we as a species have achieved a population of 7 billion people. For me to make a decision to add to this, is essentially being selfish. I can’t really see how me and my wife adding to the population is really going to help anything. The only reason I would be having a kid is because I would want one, as the choice is available. Everyone out there adding to the 7 billion people on the planet is basically saying “What’s one more person?”
I’m not getting all Malthusian here or anything, I’m sure that we’ll somehow figure out a way to get more food for the next 7 billion people on the planet – I’m simply saying that, from the standpoint of the species as a whole maybe we should calm down a little bit in our population growth. I don’t think the addition of another few billion people is going to have a positive effect on the planet, but nobody really talks about that (I’m going to say that population control is not a very popular campaign to run on).
So, no real change here, from my wife or myself. We love kids, we just love to be done with them after a visit. We are enjoying our freedom, and the maintenance of our DINK status.
I understand that this is kind of a charged subject, but my question of the day is can you see how down the road the planet will be a better place if we maintain our current level of growth? Thinking of this, would you think twice before adding to this growth?
Posted by Tim Stobbs on May 18, 2011
If you are like me your front yard is likely a large expanse of grass. You didn’t pick it to be this way, but your stuck with grass just about everywhere. I personally hate grass since I only actually use a small amount of area as a play space for the kids and the rest is basically just a endless amount of watering, mowing and chemical application to keep the damn stuff alive.
So I’ve decided to end my suffering and get rid of every damn blade of grass in my front yard. Yet to keep the costs low and my sanity in tact, this will be done over a number of years. Right now this year’s project is getting the design done and getting some trees planted. Since I don’t want to spend a small fortune to just get rid of my lawn, I’m going to do this the smart way and keep my costs as low as reasonable. Yet I also fully accept the fact that while lawn is cheap to put in and expensive to keep up, just about everything else is the opposite: expensive to put in and cheap to keep up.
First up is saving on the design. I’m rather lucky that my mother happens to have a talent for landscaping design. So I invited her over and had a discussion between her, my wife and me. From there she is going to outline a draft design, which we will fine tune and most importantly, get those trees in the ground this year. The reason I want a few trees is two fold: first to have something to shade my south facing living room which can get fairly hot in the summer and to also have something to shade the patio I want to put out front.
Then I will also do some research this year on plants I want to put in the costs associated with them and other landscaping materials. I also want to work in some eatable plants into the design, so at least I can get something useful out of my front yard rather than the endless watering and cutting of my lawn that I currently do.
So have you ever gone lawn free in part of your yard? If so, how much did it cost? If not, would you ever consider getting rid of your lawn?
Posted by Dave on February 22, 2011
This is a guest post by Dave, who is also looking to retire no later than 45, but unlike Tim has no kids and doesn’t want any. Dave is from Ontario and is working towards his CGA certification.
My wife and I were at a friend’s place over the long weekend for a tobogganing party. Temperatures in the last week made the tobogganing sub-par, but I was able to build a fairly good fort with the kids that were there (it was good igloo snow). My wife and I normally get together with this set of friends every 6 to 8 weeks to have some laughs, play some board games and just hang out. Some of these friends I have known for around 20 years, and we have stayed close the entire time.
My wife and I were talking about where we were going to live when we retired. I jokingly told a couple of my friends that I was going to put up a tiny house in their back yard. We talked about this for a little bit, with my wife still not really all that excited about this idea (or many of the others).
My friends kids are 7 and 3 right now, but we said that those ages worked out just about right to match our retirement date – we could move into one of their kid’s rooms. I wouldn’t say that this is a concrete plan by any means, and I wouldn’t say that these friends are particularly in favour of this living arrangement, but in general (to me anyways) this type of living arrangement makes a lot of sense for older adults. I can see the following as benefits:
Lower cost per person to live – Costs which are essentially fixed, like heating, property taxes, delivery charges for water, electricity and gas (which make up the majority of my household utility costs) would be significantly reduced.
More efficient use of space – Rather than having a total of 3,000 square feet of space for 4 adults in two houses, resulting in significant waste, both financially as well as space. I don’t need that much space and I think that generally speaking most people don’t – cutting housing down by half would limit this waste.
Easier social interactions – Much like University, it is much easier to hang out if you don’t have to travel a significant period of time (or at all) to do.
The problem that I can see in living with a bunch of adults is the same problem that came up during school with a bunch of people – there will be days that people will not get along. I didn’t really have any problems myself, but I saw what could happen between roommates, which did not always end very well.
Personally, I would prefer to have my own space in a Tiny house, but cohabitating is another option and would require significantly less cost and fewer resources.
Would you, or could you live together with friends? What could you see as potential problems?
