Salons and Spas: An Indulgence During Tough Economic Times or a Bare Necessity?

It’s become something of a cliché that people focus on their physical health and well-being starting January 1st, suddenly moving it from the last thing on the list to the top of their agendas. The gym parking lot is once again full. Weight Watchers meetings are hopping. I’m dodging more and more runners in reflective gear as I drive in the cold, dark of night. Maybe we’re all just so exhausted from the holidays, from the overeating and the overindulgences and the general overconsumption, that we’re eager to draw a line in the sand on January 1st, and put it all behind us?

For whatever reason, the Internet is suddenly bustling this week with people interested in salons and spas and Caribbean vacations. Is it a sign that the economic recession really is nearly behind us, or just a reflection of a completely exhausted population looking for a break? It begs the question: Do people suddenly have the disposable income for luxury items like a vacation or a visit to a salon? Or, are we just so desperate for a little rest and relaxation this time of year that we’re willing to go to any expense? And what about you moms out there, specifically? Is a trip to the spa/salon a luxurious indulgence for you, or do you see it as a bare necessity, and therefore, a required expense for your own mental and physical health, especially this time of year? Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

Would you choose a facial for yourself over a month of ballet lessons for your daughter?

Lately it seems the headlines are blaring “Recession Over!” and I keep waiting to hear a scratchy old phonograph blaring, “We’re In the Money,” while people skipping in the street yell, “23 Skidoo!” although neither has happened yet.

We’ve been in recession mode for over three years, and while we were in the thick of it, it never seemed as if we’d go back to where we were before, as if the rubber band being stretched, stretched and stretched some more would never regain it’s original elasticity. Even as news that the country was in recovery mode emerged, not much felt different. If the ATM was supposed to start dispensing a bonus $20 bill with every withdrawal, credit card offers in the mail were supposed to start tucking a little something extra in the envelope or restaurants were supposed to start paying us to come inside and eat, apparently no one told them.

Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

Should there be a foreclosure freeze?

CNBC reports that several state Attorney Generals are “demanding a federal investigation into shoddy foreclosure procedures or ordering a freeze on foreclosures for the foreseeable future, even though [they] might not exactly have the jurisdiction to do so.”

Diana Olick, CNBC real estate reporter, writes, “I’m not going to feign surprise at any of this. It’s to be expected, especially given this particular upcoming election,” adding, “This scandal is largely about bad paperwork, not unwarranted foreclosures.  Right now close to 10 percent of borrowers in this country are delinquent on their loans.”

Olick quotes Nancy Pelosi as saying, “Avoidable foreclosures end up being unnecessarily costly for homeowners, lenders and servicers, and our housing market, whose health is essential to our economic recovery.”  Pelosi’s argument is that these unwarranted foreclosures should cease.  And why not?  If the government was able to bail out Wall Street and the auto industry because their industry-wide failure would be bad for the bottom line, why shouldn’t homeowners be privy to the same advantage? Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

At a time when half of all the working adults in the U.S. say they have experienced some “work-related hardship” and more than 70% of those over the age of 40 say they’ve been somehow affected by the economic crisis, it is fair to say that the recession has left very few families untouched.

And with fewer dollars to spend on the things that pull us apart – video games, cable television, etc. – there is lots of talk about how we are once again embracing the simple joys of family life.  Talking to one another, visiting the library together or just having a family game night.  When you look at it like that, you might even say that the recession has been good for families. Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

I love that word, splurge.  It’s the name of the comedy show I produce and something my mother used to say all the time when I was a kid.  It’s onomatopoeic, really.  Splurge.  It’s the sound of overflow, excess.  But in a recession, can anyone really afford to splurge?  Especially on a baby?

“For many parents, there’s a temptation to rationalize spending on children,” writes Ruth Mantell for the WSJ column The Juggle.  She quotes Eric Tyson, author of Personal Finance for Dummies (Hello! Someone buy this for me, please! I’d buy it myself but I can’t afford to, cuz I’ve been so dumb about my personal finances…), who says, ”We love our kids and we want what’s best for them, and we equate what’s best for them with buying them things.”  Right?

I was pregnant in 2005, back at the height of the Bugaboo stroller craze.  I’m so proud of myself that I didn’t sell my spleen in order to buy one (they start at 600 bucks – more than a spleen is probably worth).  I’ll admit – I did pay $150 for a Fleurville diaper bag – which is totally ridiculous – but my ex still uses it five years later and it’s in great shape.  That was pretty much my only splurge re: baby gear.  We were given a Zooper Peas & Carrots high chair as a gift, which, although on the pricey side of the scale, actually broke right as we were done using it. 

According to Alan Fields, the co-author of Baby Bargains, I was right about the stroller.  There’s no need to splurge on an expensive one, he told MoneyWatch.  Same thing for the high chair.  But he says I should have shilled out the big bucks for a high-end breast pump (looking back, I agree) and that of course parents should buy the highest-quality car seat they can afford.  Other than that, the rest are non-essentials.  Save your dough.

You hear that pregnant women and mothers with infants?  Of course you don’t.  Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

Tyler Ross

Should a grown man making at least $400,000 a year still be living with his parents?  Such is the case for two Major League Baseball players: 23-year-old Tyson Ross of the Oakland A’s and Pittsburgh Pirates second baseman Neil Walker, age 24.

Stu Woo has written a profile of the players for The Wall Street Journal that outs Ross and Walker as the only guys in the league still bunking at home.  Sports historian Rick Obrand thinks “it’s great” that there are still some hometown players, but is allowing an adult child – especially one with talent and means – to stay in the nest a giant parenting fail, as Madeline suggested in a post last week?

The subject of Madeline’s post, 24-year-old Scott Nicholson, is unemployed and living at home without paying rent.  Ross and Walker have what some would argue is the greatest job in the world, but it’s certainly not the steadiest.  “Unproven youngsters like Mr. Ross, who had a poor earned run average of 5.79 as of Monday, are routinely sent down to the minor leagues for seasoning, so it might not make sense for them invest in real estate,” writes Woo.

Investing in real estate is one thing, renting your own apartment is another.  Walker says his mom does his laundry and Ross’s mother cleans his bathroom for him.  Ross says living at home, “cuts out all the hard stuff, like setting up cable and getting furniture.”  It’s charming that these boys love their mothers, but should their mothers be treating them like children?  I guess it gives more potency to the sign in the locker room that says, “Your mother doesn’t work here: clean up after yourself!”  Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

Remember flextime?

Flextime was the much-ballyhooed benefit that was supposed to make life easier for working moms (not to mention anyone else who wanted a life outside the office) by allowing them to arrange their own workday schedules. Work-life consultants argued companies offering flextime to moms were going to benefit by not losing the labor of women who might otherwise decide to leave the workforce for the home front when they had children.

It sure sounded great. There was only one problem: many companies, it seemed, didn’t care for flextime so much. Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It