Just come up with a kickass analogy

2»

Replies

  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,086 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    So is having a mortgage like having food poisoning?

    No, having a mortgage is more like being a slightly out of shape professional linebacker (American football). You're technically obese on the BMI charts, but your BF% isn't all that high, although it is higher than the "fit athlete" range. You have all that extra weight (debt) for a good reason, but you're still a little over-fat (burdened by a recurring financial obligation that you could likely only quickly rid yourself of if necessary by selling a non-liquid asset -- your home).



    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    So are children like tapeworms then?

    Hmmm. ... I see the analogy. But when tapeworms eat your food, they don't increase your energy surplus (your debt). I think tapeworms are more like some weird revolving credit instrument that your bank imposes on you without adequate notice or even transparency, and pays off your checks from it when you have plenty of money in your account to pay the check, and then turns around and grabs the money from your account to pay off the credit instrument, and you're never quite sure what the heck is going on.

    Children are more like a bulking phase, or at least they can be. You spend money on them (eat extra calories), thus incurring debt (gaining weight), but you hope that it will all be worth it in the end. Of course, the desired results (happy, healthy, independent children/better lean-to-fat ratio) may not be reflected directly in your balance sheet (scale weight).
  • akf2000
    akf2000 Posts: 278 Member
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    So is having a mortgage like having food poisoning?

    No, having a mortgage is more like being a slightly out of shape professional linebacker (American football). You're technically obese on the BMI charts, but your BF% isn't all that high, although it is higher than the "fit athlete" range. You have all that extra weight (debt) for a good reason, but you're still a little over-fat (burdened by a recurring financial obligation that you could likely only quickly rid yourself of if necessary by selling a non-liquid asset -- your home).



    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    So are children like tapeworms then?

    Hmmm. ... I see the analogy. But when tapeworms eat your food, they don't increase your energy surplus (your debt). I think tapeworms are more like some weird revolving credit instrument that your bank imposes on you without adequate notice or even transparency, and pays off your checks from it when you have plenty of money in your account to pay the check, and then turns around and grabs the money from your account to pay off the credit instrument, and you're never quite sure what the heck is going on.

    Children are more like a bulking phase, or at least they can be. You spend money on them (eat extra calories), thus incurring debt (gaining weight), but you hope that it will all be worth it in the end. Of course, the desired results (happy, healthy, independent children/better lean-to-fat ratio) may not be reflected directly in your balance sheet (scale weight).

    hahahaha "some weird revolving credit instrument" - some people have put WAY more thought into this than me.
  • MommyMeggo
    MommyMeggo Posts: 1,222 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    So are children like tapeworms then?

    Only when they become toddlers and steal off your plate.
    During pregnancy most of us eat plenty of, debt.
  • ogtmama
    ogtmama Posts: 1,403 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    Oh yes, I love this analogy. I've been thinking in these terms for a while now, especially when there is a buffet involved. When I go shopping I don't just grab everything in sight. I pick and choose the things I like the most and leave the rest on the shelves. That's how a buffet goes for me too, I pick the 2-4 things I like the most (the number depends on the calorie price) and leave the rest alone.

    Right? Do you shop carefully and just get what you can afford? Or do you whip out that shiny new card and pay for it for the next month? ;)
  • ugofatcat
    ugofatcat Posts: 385 Member
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    elphie754 wrote: »
    Not to burst your bubble but you are not the first to come up with this idea. It has been said many times before.

    yep. the idea of "fitting in your calorie budget" and more is very common and well-known.

    I don't like to think of it this way, but if it helps others who may think it is "intrusive" or "unhealthy" then why not. It's funny to me how some think that calorie counting is "bad" because of the negative connotation that it's been associated with, but have no problem with being completely ignorant about their intake. It's usually either-or with these people.

    I totally agree with you. What is wrong with wanting to know if I am eating the recommended serving on the package? If the package says 85 grams is a serving, I have no idea what that looks like, which is where my food scale comes in.

    Unfortunately we live an environment (I'm American) where we are bombarded with messages to eat cheap, fast, and unhealthy food in portions that could easily feed 2 or 3 people all day long. Counting calories and weighing my portions is how I fight back.

Categories