The NY Times has lost all credibility

<p>sue, I really admire you for working so hard. Kids don’t need new clothes, they need parents who are excellent role models and you provided that in spades.</p>

<p>

A few flips of the coin like buying organic milk, renting beach houses, and moving away from relateability?

Economics reporter who can’t budget? That’s saying Anna Wintour wearing the Gap or faux-fur and continue to preach Oscar de la Renta.

Since eating health food and still couldn’t fit into size 10. It’s easy blaming the extra roll on being poor and have to eat McDonald. This real housewife of Maryland is not eating McDonald’s. No excuses.</p>

<p>I have gone back and reread the article. They guy says he can barely afford a 1 bedroom apt with $2,777 income and then KNOWINGLY buys a house that costs $2500 (not including those extras like electricity and water and gas) a month. HELLO, what kind of a moron does that???</p>

<p>In the article he explains he was hoping the wife, who had been a stay at home mom for two decades, would make enough to make this all work. That’s what’s hard to understand coming from a supposed economics expert.</p>

<p>Love is blind in many ways, apparently.</p>

<p>hmom5 - its about 2 people who are totally irresponsible. The wife uproots her kids and moves away from her X – thereby hurting that relationship AND resulting in her having to pay for their trips to visit their dad. Spending out of control. Did she even think about money before moving her kids. They are both in lalala land. Which the shame is how it will effect the children involved</p>

<p>Pug and Sue – I commend your working your way through difficult times.</p>

<p>kayf - nearly EVERYbody has had some difficult thing to work thru in their lives. Whether it be physical, emotional, financial or some combination of them. </p>

<p>What doesn’t kill us, makes us stronger :-)</p>

<p>You may be right, but it is HOW we work through it that says who we are. Which is why I say that Mr. and Mrs. Andrews are irresponsible and commend you.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>At my fittest and thinnest–and if you saw me then I don’t think you would talk about “rolls”–I couldn’t wear a size 10 in many garments. There is such a thing as basic structure and body type. I find your remarks about her supposed weight mean-minded in the extreme. A picture of the woman accompanies the article, and she does not look heavy to me.</p>

<p>You clearly have some need for women to be tiny. Someone who has a requirement that all women starve themselves to be small enough to fit into a particular dress size has a problem, IMHO. No excuses.</p>

<p>consolation, Right on! </p>

<p>My sister is slender and a size 14. People express amazement that she wears a size “that big”…even though they also know she is six feet tall! </p>

<p>I gave up on numbers a long time ago, including pounds and dress sizes. I don’t miss them at all.</p>

<p>I will chime in again, even at the risk of being called “smug” or worse. I have seen people who have refinanced their homes in order to be able to afford things that their salaries could otherwise never afford - Coach and Louis Vuitton for example. I understand wanting things - I grew up poor and coveted LEVI’s jeans. However, I can not understand using your house like a piggy bank. This is never ever good advice. If you have an EMERGENCY yes, tap into what you must. A vacation, expensive goods and services,etc. are not emergencies. From a saavy person it is really incredible. I do feel sorry for anyone who screws up, but I really want to emphasize that financial planning should not include counting your chickens before they hatch! Never spend the principal and BTW, don’t spend too much of the interest either. This is meant to be cautionary, not scolding or smug.;)</p>

<p>Wow, Middsmith!
I don’t know what dress size has to do with making financial decisions. And you know what? Given this couple high spending ways, I doubt they would darken the doors of McDonald’s. Eating healthy seems to have done something to your judgment.</p>

<p>Am I missing something? Where does it say she wears a size 12?</p>

<p>I have a suspicion there is a story behind their two divorces and that may be why he is paying $48,000 for alimony and child support. His ex wife also lives in the same high cost area and she has custody of their three sons. The alimony is taxable to her…how much is left after that?</p>

<p>I don’t think being an economics reporter automatically makes one wise in personal financial decisions. If one is writing about billions the “minor” credit card balances probably seem like trivial amounts.</p>

<p>I think this guy is/was delusional in many ways, but I don’t get the impression that it was from love. And he was certainly quick to start with the blame game. That’s what makes it so hard to sympathize with him, it’s not just the overspending, but the nastiness of his descriptions of his wife.</p>

<p>Also, anyone notice that in the photo of the two of them in front of their house, their daughter is laying on the ground with the dog like some kind of collateral damage? Weird.</p>

<p>I lovela – I didnt see the size 12 in the online version either. Maybe in print. In any event, her picture she looked on the tall side - a size 12 wouldnt be a heffer. Not that it matters. </p>

<p>Silver – yes, my guess is good old Mr and new Mrs. Andrews starting seeing each other before divorced from spouse number 1 – which regardless of what one thinks about the morality it generally puts the spouse trying to leave in a worse negotiating position. </p>

<p>Mouse, my guess is both of them have major character flaws.</p>

<p>Again, my sincerest admiration for the people like sue and pug who have worked out of tough situations. </p>

<p>The kids will bear the brunt of this.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So instead of working on the problem, these women keep on eating and tell themselves fashion magazines poisoned the mind of the mass?
America has the fattest people per capita on Earth thanks to this kind of attitude. It’s ok to be fat, and whoever tells you so is delusional and have a problem with it. </p>

<p>

That’s exactly my point. The last time I put an article about some overweight woman, posters quickly jumped to the conclusion that she was poor, thus ate McDonald’s and got into the fat vicious cycle. This couple aren’t eating at McDonald’s. What’s your excuse for Patty now? Under the given situation, Fatty can take a few pokes, she has the cushion for it.</p>

<p>middsmith, You are rude and unkind.</p>

<p>i haven’t read the article yet, but how old is this couple? I’m in my 50’s, raised by Depression era parents and the difference in my thinking about money is so different from the couples around here just 10 years younger, its amazing! Their parents are baby boomers and they spend money like water. Does anyone else notice this?</p>