poor people?

Peg · Post by **Peg** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 6:06 pm

I'm not quite sure what you are asking here. Are you talking about her working and still having time with the children? How old are they?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 12:58 am

I don't approve of political jokes. I've seen too many of them get elected.

I love that brilliant one liner.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 1:38 am

ryk22 wrote:

the world wasn't made for poor people...children need time alone with their mother...how can we afford to do this,, any ideas??

When God created the world, he did not think of people as rich or poor. For Him every body is same. It is we who have created these differences. And then who is rich and who is poor? If we differentiate them on the basis of how much money one is having then it is wrong. The concept of money has been developed by people not God. There were times when there was nothing like money. How people were differentiated as poor in those times? In my opinion, a poor person is whose espenses are higher than his income, irrespective of the amount of money he or she is having. A person earns an amoint 'A' and is fully satisfied. Another person is earning million times of 'A' but is not satisfied. Now who is poor? Another example - A person changes his car every year and another changes his aircraft every six months. Due to some financial problems later person is not able to change his aircraft for two years and is very unhappy about it. Should he be connsidered a rich person?

Children need more time with their mother whether alone or with others present. In India mother is considered the first and the best teacher. As far as affording to do this is a matter of priority. If a mother considers her children as her first priority then she will find time for the children, irrespective of how busy she is elsewhere. In India no mother treats this issue as a problem.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:58 am

ryk22 wrote: Do Indian mothers see their role as mothers as important ..I don't think my wife does. She seems to want her freedom as she calls it, no responsibilities to a husband and children and the benefits/pleasures that children bring.She is not very patient with them or me ,she only seems to have time for her friends!

Indian mothers see their role as mothers as most important part of their life. They are child's first and the best teacher. Ans this does not dilute their responsibilities to their husbands. In India married women keep fast and pray to God for health and prosperity of their husband and children. In Indian household, mother is the most patient person. Father may loose his cool, children may create all sort of problems, but mother is always cool and helping. All her time is for her husband and children. Her friends come afterwards if she has spare time. It is her home and she is free to run it the way she likes.

Peg · Post by **Peg** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 4:33 am

ryk22 wrote: mmm, do Indian mothers (can we generalise?) see their role as mothers as important ..I don't think my wife does. She seems to want her freedom as she calls it, no responsibilities to a husband and children and the benefits/pleasures that children bring.She is not very patient with them or me ,she only seems to have time for her friends!

If you feel this way, why not go for custody? It is easier now than it was even 10 years ago for men to get custody. Or why not shared custody? A father in their lives is just as important as a mother in their lives.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 4:48 am

Peg wrote: If you feel this way, why not go for custody? It is easier now than it was even 10 years ago for men to get custody. Or why not shared custody? A father in their lives is just as important as a mother in their lives.

He's in the UK. Things are very different here, and there is a presumption in

favour of the mother as it "is best for the children". This can of course be

very unfair. When the child is of an age where he can be reasonably

expected to make in informed decision, then his views will be taken into

account. If the child is much younger, the mother will in the vast majority

of cases get custody, unless she's a raving drunken prostitute with a

drug habit and a propensity for violence, for instance. It is important

to establish an agreement for "access" either way, one of the reasons that

an amicable divorce is the best if at all possible. Have you seen what Batman

and Robin have been up to recently, or heard about "our fascist leader"

having flour hurled at him in the Commons, or similar protests? They are

protesting about "access rights" being refused, etc, etc.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:28 am

ryk22 wrote: She wants the house, the kids , maintainance for her and the kids and me to have the kids every other weekend when I'm not working...I just can't afford it..I could barely afford a room in a shared house

I can only feel sorry for her, you and kids. A woman who is not a good wife can not be a good mother also. Making a family takes lot of this and that, but breaking a family only needs a negative mindset. How can a woman love her children if she can not love their father? Father is the cause of their existence. The cause can not be dismissed and the effect can not be experienced without the cause.

Paula · Post by **Paula** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 2:47 pm

you're only as poor as you choose to be, kids do grow up, we all had to start some-where...it don't come easy...do the best you can, SHE sounds too needy, a taker and not a giver - usually results in hard lessons, you can't have it all...she is a B!t@#, get rid of her to some-one else.... :-5 :-5 :-5

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Tue Sep 28, 2004 4:27 am

Paula wrote: you're only as poor as you choose to be

Does one really has a choice to be poor or rich? No body wants to be poor. Every body wants lot of money. And how it is decided that one is poor or rich? Being rich or poor should not be decided by how much money one has. The most important thing in life is to feel satisfied. If a person having highest amount of wealth in the world is not satisfied then should he be called a rich person? In India there were and are such people who own nothing but they are the most satisfied people. It is a matter of attitude not choice.

Paula · Post by **Paula** » Tue Sep 28, 2004 5:14 am

well i'll tell you what? my paternal grandparents came here in the 20"s through Ellis Island, they had nothing, hard working people, 2-3 jobs later and many years they had a home with land, my husbands paternal grandparents bought the place we have in their upper 30's working the mills in rhode island, in 1916, this place had a price tag of $5000.00 dollars, these people worked their butts off, just like i and my family does today, we work no-stop, its the only way...we feel we are rich with energy, to continue, we may have assests but money only comes if you sell out? if we were lazy we would be poor, the definition of poor is not having opportunity to work and grow...., i cannot change that for some.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Tue Sep 28, 2004 5:35 am

Paula wrote: well i'll tell you what? my paternal grandparents came here in the 20"s through Ellis Island, they had nothing, hard working people, 2-3 jobs later and many years they had a home with land, my husbands paternal grandparents bought the place we have in their upper 30's working the mills in rhode island, in 1916, this place had a price tag of $5000.00 dollars, these people worked their butts off, just like i and my family does today, we work no-stop, its the only way...we feel we are rich with energy, to continue, we may have assests but money only comes if you sell out? if we were lazy we would be poor, the definition of poor is not having opportunity to work and grow...., i cannot change that for some.

When I said that being rich or poor is a matter of attitude not choice, I meant what you have said in your message. If it was a matter of choice then some people will not do any work as they have made a choice to remaqin poor. Have you seen such a person in your life? You yourself and your family have worked non-stop to earn money. Have you, by choice, decided to be poor?

We, Hindus believe in the pronciple of Karma (non-ending work with no right to result) and consider it our duty to do Karma. The result of Karma is not in our hands. It is decided by the God. Every body should be grateful to God, for what He has given and what He has taken.

Paula · Post by **Paula** » Tue Sep 28, 2004 8:02 am

yes some people remain - underpriviledged, and certainly you can't miss something you never had, your country is different than here, we are a free country, we have choices, i'm sorry for you, it will get better...we have (NO) choice, we have to work hard everyday to (MAINTAIN) what we have. you need to re-pay money if borrowed, in order to grow? USA is the modern world, you can do what you want, all my descendants are not from the USA, what does that say?

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Tue Sep 28, 2004 8:43 am

Paula wrote: yes some people remain - underpriviledged, and certainly you can't miss something you never had, your country is different than here, we are a free country, we have choices, i'm sorry for you, it will get better...we have (NO) choice, we have to work hard everyday to (MAINTAIN) what we have. you need to re-pay money if borrowed, in order to grow? USA is the modern world, you can do what you want, all my descendants are not from the USA, what does that say?

I am sorry, but I am a little confused. You have perhaps misunderstood my messages. I am an Indian. I am proud to be an Indian. India is a free country. We have many many choices. We are not underpriviledged. Please don't feel sorry for us. We also work very hard. It is not missing something which you do not have. It is feeling satisfied with what you have. I don't agree that USA is the modern world. The western world had to learn many things from us.

Peg · Post by **Peg** » Tue Sep 28, 2004 9:12 am

It is not missing something which you do not have. It is feeling satisfied with what you have.

I like that attitude!

sohcahtoa · Post by **sohcahtoa** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:40 pm

Suresh Gupta wrote: Every body should be grateful to God, for what He has given and what He has taken.

This is beautiful, and in beauty there is truth, after all. People seem to forget to be grateful for the second part, the part I bolded, about what God has taken.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:54 pm

Marsue3417 wrote: Have you tried setting out a special day to be the kids. A family day where you are alone the phone is turned off so no one can bother you. You can go to the park, or go for a walk. Or just have a movie day. Start out with something little. Children are resilient to many things. They also understand that as parents we are trying to do our best to take care of them. Time will come. Just spend as much time as you can with your children and this time will payoff in the end. Even if it is just an hour a day. They will be fine with that. Because they know that you are dedicated to giving them the best life that you can possibly offer, giving the circumstances.

Sincerely,

Mary

Thank you Mary for a nice message. There are some members on this forum who will be benefitted by these views.