Knowledge is power. They don't teach much about money management in school. Many didn't learn much about it at home - as children grow, it seems to me wise to have them gain in-depth knowledge, incrementally, of how the family's financial system works. When I was a kid, we got a weekly allowance, that grew as we grew, and we were epected to buy our clothes for school and cover school expenses (which were smaller than currently). World War II began in 1939 when I was 10, the farmhands went off to war and what Dad and this 10 year old, plus a couple smaller, got done - got done: the rest ... didn't. We had lots of work in summer and Dad paid us for that, which helped us buy the things that we needed to return to school and there was an increase in our allowance, to compensate for the increased chores, year-round. We were encouraged to save some - I had a bank account when I was too young to see over the counter ... and we were expected to pay at Sunday School, church-based youth group, etc. from our allowance. In case of dire emergency, we could borrow against future allowance from Dad, which entailed some questions as to whether we might have foreseen the problem, and, even if not been able to have seen it coming, to cover the cost from savings, had we chosen to have some/(any?). And we learned early the discipline of getting along for a while on less after we'd borrowed, for Dad expected us to repay those loans earlier rather than later. Good training as to management of debt ... which would be helpful much later, when "credit" cards appeared on the scene: we knew that they didn't offer "free money". When we use someone else's money - usually they require some compensation (and, sometimes ... way too much: have you investigated the economics of the recently-arrived "payday loan" game?)! After one has stepped into a bear trap - it's a bit late to wish that one had chosen where to put one's feet more carefully! Looks as though Microsoft has cut some of our opportunity for learning about one portion of personal financial management a bit short, also. ole joyful P.S. When one guy, regardless of how central a position he holds in our economy, can become the richest man in the world in half of a generation ... ... do you figure that possibly sometimes people get overcompensated for some innovative discovery that they have made (usually, along with a number of others)? That just possibly our free-market-based economy could stand some tweaking? And the Bolsheviks and the Commuist systems aren't any better - look at all of the newly-minted millionaires ... nay, billionaires ... that have been appearing in Russia and China as their system matures (goes to seed?). And during their heyday, they arranged things so that not too many became part of the core system - didn't want to spread the largesse around too much - or it'd get too thin for each! o j

I have income, but want to reserve it for other usage. I asked two financial planners, they gave different answers. You completely lost me here. If you have income, then you have income. There really is no such thing as "reserving it for other usage," when applying for a mortgage. Money is fungible anyway, so in reality reserving a cash inflow for a specific outflow is largely arbitrary. For the purposes of a mortgage, you list all your income and list all your debt payments. Your Debt to Income will be calculated on that, and you either qualify on that or not, if not then start finding other methods. Where the actual cash to pay your mortgage comes from is completely detached from that calculation. ----------- Banks will do portfolio loans on just about anything and you can get a portfolio loan based on your investments, however, I found it not a very pleasant experience. I recently attempted this when some investment property financing was showing up in my DTI, it wasn't worth the trouble and my assets were substantially more than 5 times the house. --- ETA: Littlebug beat me to the punch.

So far Ida has the most likes on a single post which qualifies as the winner. The winner picks the theme, any theme they want. The winner creates the post with choice of theme along with posted guidelines. There are a few that are close. On an almost parting orange note I want to add this house I love that I posted on Robo’s thread. It’s an MCM blend of farmhouse. Pretty cool for a small lot front face garage home. The more I look at it the more I like it. This house but in Florida and with an elevator to the second floor would work for me. Oh, and no basement. I would have to greatly adjust interior finishes to get closer to my budget. It could be done. https://www.openlistings.com/p/5336-lyman-ave-downers-grove-il-60515?lightbox=6

Carolyn, thanks for reminding me. On gothic covers, it is all about the house! Then there is the one lighted window -- it has to be a high window, at least on a top floor but preferably in a turret if there is one. The funniest cover I've ever seen shows the typical 'young thing' (this time clad in a costume that looked straight from Star Trek) fleeing from a house . . . no, wait! Is it a house or a rocket ship? There's an obligatory light high up in the nose cone if the rocket ship was standing upright. I'll never give a spoiler, however. Actually, I don't remember what the cover was meaning to convey. Speaking of cliched covers: In the 1950s and '60s, my father enjoyed hard-boiled detective books (e.g. Mickey Spillane and Erle Stanley Gardner) and thrillers, such as those by Ian Fleming. He kept them up on a high shelf in his closet. However, I had big eyes and readily observed the main tropes: usually a man with a gun -- always fully clothed -- and a scantily attired or naked woman with strategically placed bits to suggest her most alluring features. I asked my father why the men had clothes on but the women did not. My mother overheard this uncomfortable exchange and said that she had to smother her laughter over daddy's disconcerted explanation. To think, though, the same men who thought the covers of books aimed primarily at men existed with good reason, but bodice-ripper covers because they were aimed at women were abominations. Oh well! The double standard still exists, but it seems to be watered down nowadays.