Most everyone knows about The Rainbow Room in the Rockefeller Center in New York and its subsequent closing that has everyone saddened.
While I was reading about that Rainbow Room, it reminds me of another Rainbow Room from another time. I was thinking of The Rainbow Room in the Lee Gardens Hotel in Hong Kong.
I still remember quite vividly my first time there, in the 1980s, in a lunch with a business client and my team. While it's not as grand as the one in New York, it has its uniqueness from the colonial era, with tall window that let in all the sun and the high ceiling. I don't remember much about the food which, while decent, was not exceptionally, as far as I can recall.
Much like all the old structures and landmarks in Hong Kong, I found out that Lee Gardens Hotel has since been renovated, the Lee Theatre now long gone, and the whole area in the vicinity was ripped out with a face-lift.
While I've heard about the closing of Lee Threatre some time back, I had not known that Lee Gardens Hotel and that area around Hysan Road that I have come to know for a long time are now all but unrecognizable. I must say, I'm quite saddened by it.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Thursday, January 8, 2009
On Drexel Burnham Lambert and dirty deeds...
The names Drexel Burnham Lambert and Michael Milken evokes memories from the market excesses from the 1980s, with cheap money from junk bonds.
As I lived through those days when I first started out, DBL reminds me of something a little bit more personal.
I was with Lehman Brothers at the time, and my boss has a good friend from college who was with DBL. One late evening when the two of them dropped in, apparently on the pretense by my boss showing his friend around his office and stuffs. His friend threw his bag on one side. A short while later, my boss ran back in his office and back out to me, handing me a rather thick document and asked me to make a copy for him. I did so for him, but while I was copying, I realized that it's a confidential document on a company that must have been a client of DBL that his friend was handling, and that my boss stole it from his friend, no doubt with the intention of stealing the client from DBL (and his friend).
Although I did it for my boss, I looked him in the eye when I gave him back the original and the copy. I held his eyes long enough to make sure he knew I knew what he did, and my look didn't condone the action.
My boss is a good and kind man. But somehow career ambition gets the better of him, and he did what he did. While I understand why he did it, I can't say I was proud of him. Ever since then, every time I looked at my boss, he would have this embarrassed look on him that he found it difficult meeting my eyes.
Not too long after that, I left Lehman for further studies. Oftentimes, I have secret hopes that my boss would win, without having to resolve to dirty deeds. Given that I'm in business long enough now, I am not as naive to believe that such things will and should not happen. Still, I would hold out my hope.
It's like hoping the athletes competing in the Olympics would not take body enhancing drugs or gears like Nike performance-enhancing suits in swimming that helps shattering records, compared to decade-long records held by Spitz. But once that kind of "performance enhancement" becomes standards, there is almost no turning back. And that is very sad.
As I lived through those days when I first started out, DBL reminds me of something a little bit more personal.
I was with Lehman Brothers at the time, and my boss has a good friend from college who was with DBL. One late evening when the two of them dropped in, apparently on the pretense by my boss showing his friend around his office and stuffs. His friend threw his bag on one side. A short while later, my boss ran back in his office and back out to me, handing me a rather thick document and asked me to make a copy for him. I did so for him, but while I was copying, I realized that it's a confidential document on a company that must have been a client of DBL that his friend was handling, and that my boss stole it from his friend, no doubt with the intention of stealing the client from DBL (and his friend).
Although I did it for my boss, I looked him in the eye when I gave him back the original and the copy. I held his eyes long enough to make sure he knew I knew what he did, and my look didn't condone the action.
My boss is a good and kind man. But somehow career ambition gets the better of him, and he did what he did. While I understand why he did it, I can't say I was proud of him. Ever since then, every time I looked at my boss, he would have this embarrassed look on him that he found it difficult meeting my eyes.
Not too long after that, I left Lehman for further studies. Oftentimes, I have secret hopes that my boss would win, without having to resolve to dirty deeds. Given that I'm in business long enough now, I am not as naive to believe that such things will and should not happen. Still, I would hold out my hope.
It's like hoping the athletes competing in the Olympics would not take body enhancing drugs or gears like Nike performance-enhancing suits in swimming that helps shattering records, compared to decade-long records held by Spitz. But once that kind of "performance enhancement" becomes standards, there is almost no turning back. And that is very sad.
Monday, January 5, 2009
On non-prime mortgage borrowing, home ownership, and foreclosure...
I'm all for equal opportunities. It's probably one of the biggest selling point of America where everyone is supposed to have a fair go (or at least the hope and look of a fair go).
The push towards increased home ownership during the boom years, from Bush (remember the "Ownership Society"?) on down, to everyone in the mortgage and financial food chain, including of course, the great enforcer of Alan Greenspan who had made it all possible, with the prolonged period of super-low interest rate and easy money.
The argument goes, when someone else is having a house, everyone should have one too. So goes the push for lower-income, sub-prime, non-prime, and whatever name you call those groups who were on the outside looking in on the housing boom, in which everyone's SUPPOSED to own their homes.
What's wrong with that picture/argument, anyways?
There is this case study/report in Wall Street Journal of this phenomenon back in the housing boom when state officials were all the rage in pushing for easy credit to the Latino community, which is now facing particular hard times with foreclosures, amid falling housing prices and slumping economy.
I don't think anyone would argue against the discriminatory practice of redlining in which minorities are denied credits. Sometimes, when you're down low in the ladder, all you need is a break and you can move up. At least that's the hope. But as the article has noted, one of the things that happened during the housing bubble years was the reverse redlining in which minorities were targeted for easy credits. When people are pushing money into your money, I don't think anyone would push back. But of course there would come a time when you need to pay back; or in the case of the property market crash, the once-lofty home ownership becomes a dead-weight.
The keyword of all these is sustainability. I'm sure somewhere at the back of the minds of those (supposedly) Hispanics non-profit foundations and state officials, there had once been the hope to genuinely help lift the boat of Hispanics when the tide was high. It's not that they didn't deserve that break (of allowing the credit/mortgage). But if it's not sustainable, you're simply setting up the traps for these minorities.
The other keyword is the implied entitlement mentality. Does everyone deserve and entitle to own their homes? While it would be nice to think so, whether they're ready to own a home, thereby assuming a huge debt from a long-term mortgage, could do more harm than good, as the reality now show us.
In the blogosphere, there're more than enough postings of local Americans who would proclaim to be the ultimate, prudent American, who would not live beyond one's means. Whether they are indeed one or not, is not my concern. But the idea of that is very valid.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To give an analogy: Most everyone drives. So it goes that, since everyone's driving, we should let kids, however young they are, the chance to drive. Afterall, every adult is doing that, isn't it!? So, the argument would go that, you should let kids drive, no matter how young they are, since it's a matter of "fairness." Before long, you have wreckage and carcasses on the roadside everywhere, because you let them drive, even though the kids don't really know how or don't know what they're doing. When you arrest the kids, they claim innocence. Afterall, you *let* them drive, don't you? You give them the car, you push the key in their hands, and you fill up the tank to make sure the car moves. YOU are the one causing it, as the kids claim, and not them.
So...do you let the kids off the hook for causing the wreckage, or do you kick yourself in the backside for letting them do it in the first place?
Should we have waited until the kids are big enough, and show enough prudence to pass a driving test before they're allowed to drive? For those who have allowed the young ones to drive, should they go to jail instead? Who should pay for the damages?
The push towards increased home ownership during the boom years, from Bush (remember the "Ownership Society"?) on down, to everyone in the mortgage and financial food chain, including of course, the great enforcer of Alan Greenspan who had made it all possible, with the prolonged period of super-low interest rate and easy money.
The argument goes, when someone else is having a house, everyone should have one too. So goes the push for lower-income, sub-prime, non-prime, and whatever name you call those groups who were on the outside looking in on the housing boom, in which everyone's SUPPOSED to own their homes.
What's wrong with that picture/argument, anyways?
There is this case study/report in Wall Street Journal of this phenomenon back in the housing boom when state officials were all the rage in pushing for easy credit to the Latino community, which is now facing particular hard times with foreclosures, amid falling housing prices and slumping economy.
I don't think anyone would argue against the discriminatory practice of redlining in which minorities are denied credits. Sometimes, when you're down low in the ladder, all you need is a break and you can move up. At least that's the hope. But as the article has noted, one of the things that happened during the housing bubble years was the reverse redlining in which minorities were targeted for easy credits. When people are pushing money into your money, I don't think anyone would push back. But of course there would come a time when you need to pay back; or in the case of the property market crash, the once-lofty home ownership becomes a dead-weight.
The keyword of all these is sustainability. I'm sure somewhere at the back of the minds of those (supposedly) Hispanics non-profit foundations and state officials, there had once been the hope to genuinely help lift the boat of Hispanics when the tide was high. It's not that they didn't deserve that break (of allowing the credit/mortgage). But if it's not sustainable, you're simply setting up the traps for these minorities.
The other keyword is the implied entitlement mentality. Does everyone deserve and entitle to own their homes? While it would be nice to think so, whether they're ready to own a home, thereby assuming a huge debt from a long-term mortgage, could do more harm than good, as the reality now show us.
In the blogosphere, there're more than enough postings of local Americans who would proclaim to be the ultimate, prudent American, who would not live beyond one's means. Whether they are indeed one or not, is not my concern. But the idea of that is very valid.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To give an analogy: Most everyone drives. So it goes that, since everyone's driving, we should let kids, however young they are, the chance to drive. Afterall, every adult is doing that, isn't it!? So, the argument would go that, you should let kids drive, no matter how young they are, since it's a matter of "fairness." Before long, you have wreckage and carcasses on the roadside everywhere, because you let them drive, even though the kids don't really know how or don't know what they're doing. When you arrest the kids, they claim innocence. Afterall, you *let* them drive, don't you? You give them the car, you push the key in their hands, and you fill up the tank to make sure the car moves. YOU are the one causing it, as the kids claim, and not them.
So...do you let the kids off the hook for causing the wreckage, or do you kick yourself in the backside for letting them do it in the first place?
Should we have waited until the kids are big enough, and show enough prudence to pass a driving test before they're allowed to drive? For those who have allowed the young ones to drive, should they go to jail instead? Who should pay for the damages?
Sunday, January 4, 2009
On Bill Richardson's fall from grace...
How ironic it is, to see those once hopeful Dem presidential nominees, one by one, to fall from grace, ranging from the sex scandal of Kent-doll John Edwards, to now Bill Richardson's withdrawing from Commerce Secretary nomination vetting due to the awarding of several state contracts to a company that contributes to his campaign while he's governor in New Mexico.
Given the intense vetting of cabinet positions, I often wonder out loud how much vetting there is for any presidential hopefuls. Supposedly, if the media would do its part and pass each candidate under microscopic examination, dirty laundry would come to light. Well, apparently it didn't happen with Edwards and Richardson. Given that Obama had been the media darling and poster boy of the media, providing headline-wrapping stories during the long campaign season, it's doubtful too many in media would want to see him failed.
Imagine how it'd have been like, should Edwards or Richardson have become the Dem nominee or even presidential winner. Imagine what dirty laundry Obama would have in his closet, given the strong elbowing in the Chicago politics. Judging from the close-loop feel of the so-called "investigation" by the Obama team, for the Obama team, regarding the senate-seat-selling scandal by the Chicago governor Rod Blagojevich, it doesn't inspire confidence at all in the incoming Obama administration.
The Obama campaign of "Change That We Believe In" sounds more and more like a ridiculous tagline that mocks those who voted for him. It's just a matter of time before this so-called historic candidate would make real history to come out with a major scandal at some point in his administration. I'm waiting to see, and I would be the first to admit that I'll be very glad to see him going down.
Given the intense vetting of cabinet positions, I often wonder out loud how much vetting there is for any presidential hopefuls. Supposedly, if the media would do its part and pass each candidate under microscopic examination, dirty laundry would come to light. Well, apparently it didn't happen with Edwards and Richardson. Given that Obama had been the media darling and poster boy of the media, providing headline-wrapping stories during the long campaign season, it's doubtful too many in media would want to see him failed.
Imagine how it'd have been like, should Edwards or Richardson have become the Dem nominee or even presidential winner. Imagine what dirty laundry Obama would have in his closet, given the strong elbowing in the Chicago politics. Judging from the close-loop feel of the so-called "investigation" by the Obama team, for the Obama team, regarding the senate-seat-selling scandal by the Chicago governor Rod Blagojevich, it doesn't inspire confidence at all in the incoming Obama administration.
The Obama campaign of "Change That We Believe In" sounds more and more like a ridiculous tagline that mocks those who voted for him. It's just a matter of time before this so-called historic candidate would make real history to come out with a major scandal at some point in his administration. I'm waiting to see, and I would be the first to admit that I'll be very glad to see him going down.
Friday, January 2, 2009
On the age of a child losing its innocence...
When is the time when a child loses his/her innocence? I can't recall mine, but for my son, it's the Christmas time when he's 8 years old.
See, every parent does this, re-telling the tale of Santa Claus, carefully choreographing the Christmas story, the Santa's-good-boy/girl-list in order to see their gifts under the Christmas tree, and of course, the perfectly wrapped gifts, complete with personalized Christmas cards to the child, under the tree.
My kids, for obvious reasons, bought into the story. They even prayed to Santa. Christmas mornings always started early, when the kids woke up, sprang out from bed, and rushed to see what gifts they'd got from Santa. The sheer joy on their face is priceless. Such is the wonder of the Santa fantasy, with his elves, reindeers, sledge that comes when everyone's asleep, and even Mrs Claus.
Hence, I was taken aback when over meal time one day before Christmas this year (2008), my son, now 8, proclaimed calmly that, "I don't think Santa is real." I asked him why. He said, "Santa cannot be real." When I asked him, "So who gave you all those presents?" He said, "It's you." He went on to say that, they always told us what gifts they prayed to Santa that they hoped to get, thus we would know what gifts to get. But my daughter insisted that Santa is real.
That night, my husband and I discussed about this, and whether to confirm his belief. We've decided that it's time he loses his innocence (he suspected that much anyways). So, the next day, when I had lunch with him alone, I told him he was right, that Santa is not real, and it's been us (the parents) who've been giving them gifts. Instead of being sad or nostalgic, he gleefully grinned, "I knew it!" I guess he can't wait to grow up.
That evening, we told our daughter about that fact too. She refused to believe it still. My son very maturely explained to her, "You know, Christmas is about sharing; not just the gifts and Santa." Still, in her young, innocent mind, she would not accept that fact. My husband tried to sooth her, explaining to her that, the idea of giving and sharing is very real, and that's what Santa is all about. She looked down on her bowl, and rather quietly replied, "Oh..."
She has brought up the same question, "Is Santa real?" to us a few more times after that initial shock. My husband told her that, however many ways and times she asks that question, the answer would still be the same, that Santa himself is not real, but the idea of giving and sharing that Santa brings about is very real.
I'm rather sad to have shattered her innocence because he has come to his own. If we have not openly discussed it, sooner or later he's going to tell her in her face that she's wrong, which would be more cruel that to explain to her in a calm and civilized fashion. I have always thought that she's more mature than he is, but I guess I have been wrong.
In a way, I'm rather sad too, that my babies won't be taken in by baby stories anymore. Sometimes, I wonder if it's all those bedtime readings of Harry Potter with them that speeds up his thought process. I guess, like my daughter, I'm not quite ready to shed that childhood innocence quite yet either.
See, every parent does this, re-telling the tale of Santa Claus, carefully choreographing the Christmas story, the Santa's-good-boy/girl-list in order to see their gifts under the Christmas tree, and of course, the perfectly wrapped gifts, complete with personalized Christmas cards to the child, under the tree.
My kids, for obvious reasons, bought into the story. They even prayed to Santa. Christmas mornings always started early, when the kids woke up, sprang out from bed, and rushed to see what gifts they'd got from Santa. The sheer joy on their face is priceless. Such is the wonder of the Santa fantasy, with his elves, reindeers, sledge that comes when everyone's asleep, and even Mrs Claus.
Hence, I was taken aback when over meal time one day before Christmas this year (2008), my son, now 8, proclaimed calmly that, "I don't think Santa is real." I asked him why. He said, "Santa cannot be real." When I asked him, "So who gave you all those presents?" He said, "It's you." He went on to say that, they always told us what gifts they prayed to Santa that they hoped to get, thus we would know what gifts to get. But my daughter insisted that Santa is real.
That night, my husband and I discussed about this, and whether to confirm his belief. We've decided that it's time he loses his innocence (he suspected that much anyways). So, the next day, when I had lunch with him alone, I told him he was right, that Santa is not real, and it's been us (the parents) who've been giving them gifts. Instead of being sad or nostalgic, he gleefully grinned, "I knew it!" I guess he can't wait to grow up.
That evening, we told our daughter about that fact too. She refused to believe it still. My son very maturely explained to her, "You know, Christmas is about sharing; not just the gifts and Santa." Still, in her young, innocent mind, she would not accept that fact. My husband tried to sooth her, explaining to her that, the idea of giving and sharing is very real, and that's what Santa is all about. She looked down on her bowl, and rather quietly replied, "Oh..."
She has brought up the same question, "Is Santa real?" to us a few more times after that initial shock. My husband told her that, however many ways and times she asks that question, the answer would still be the same, that Santa himself is not real, but the idea of giving and sharing that Santa brings about is very real.
I'm rather sad to have shattered her innocence because he has come to his own. If we have not openly discussed it, sooner or later he's going to tell her in her face that she's wrong, which would be more cruel that to explain to her in a calm and civilized fashion. I have always thought that she's more mature than he is, but I guess I have been wrong.
In a way, I'm rather sad too, that my babies won't be taken in by baby stories anymore. Sometimes, I wonder if it's all those bedtime readings of Harry Potter with them that speeds up his thought process. I guess, like my daughter, I'm not quite ready to shed that childhood innocence quite yet either.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
On economic cycles and youth unemployment...
Economy has its cycles, with it goes recession and unemployment by each generation at least once.
I still remember clearly one of the worst economic times, at the time, in 1990 in England. There were long lines waiting in government agency looking for work. By default, it's hard for overseas students to find proper/formal employment (not the under-the-table deals like working tables in Chinese restaurants when everything comes in cash, but you run the risk of immigration raid and you'll get kicked out of the country, if found). It's even harder at the time, since unemployment was more than 10%. I was lucky enough to have found part time employment at my university, supplementing that with typing thesis for graduate students.
The hard times continued when I arrived Australia in 1992. By the time my class in the university was looking for internship (which is one mandatory requirement for the bachelor degree), 98% of the class didn't get one. I was one of the lucky few to have found internship with an investment bank, which I stayed on and which provided me with the highest salary among my classmates.
While I have counted my stars and luck in all these past years, and I never really suffered those anxiety of looking for jobs amidst high unemployment, I know how it feels like.
By Providence, when I relocated to Boston in 1997, tides were running high. There was this charge of energy, as a result of the stock market bubble. It really did feel good. Of course we know how it turned out. The stock market bubble of tech stock burst in 2000, followed by recession for a couple of years.
And then we have this property market bubble burst in 2006-7, bank implosion in 2008, and terrible economy/recession that we're seeing now. I was reading Sydney Morning Herald, which predicts that Australia will go into recession in 2009. Among the first to suffer is the youthful generation, with high youth unemployment in the making.
It reminds me of how things were like in 1992 in Sydney. I hope this generation (around the world) will pull it through ok, as I did; although I know alot of people will invariably fall through the cracks, with broken dreams and lost promises. It makes me sad, thinking of those prospects.
I guess I've seen more than a handful of economic hard times now, so far. I'm sure there will be more to come. That much is for sure. One main thing I learn from all these years is that, I have to self-reliant, and have to be prepared to be adaptive and improve myself constantly.
I still remember clearly one of the worst economic times, at the time, in 1990 in England. There were long lines waiting in government agency looking for work. By default, it's hard for overseas students to find proper/formal employment (not the under-the-table deals like working tables in Chinese restaurants when everything comes in cash, but you run the risk of immigration raid and you'll get kicked out of the country, if found). It's even harder at the time, since unemployment was more than 10%. I was lucky enough to have found part time employment at my university, supplementing that with typing thesis for graduate students.
The hard times continued when I arrived Australia in 1992. By the time my class in the university was looking for internship (which is one mandatory requirement for the bachelor degree), 98% of the class didn't get one. I was one of the lucky few to have found internship with an investment bank, which I stayed on and which provided me with the highest salary among my classmates.
While I have counted my stars and luck in all these past years, and I never really suffered those anxiety of looking for jobs amidst high unemployment, I know how it feels like.
By Providence, when I relocated to Boston in 1997, tides were running high. There was this charge of energy, as a result of the stock market bubble. It really did feel good. Of course we know how it turned out. The stock market bubble of tech stock burst in 2000, followed by recession for a couple of years.
And then we have this property market bubble burst in 2006-7, bank implosion in 2008, and terrible economy/recession that we're seeing now. I was reading Sydney Morning Herald, which predicts that Australia will go into recession in 2009. Among the first to suffer is the youthful generation, with high youth unemployment in the making.
It reminds me of how things were like in 1992 in Sydney. I hope this generation (around the world) will pull it through ok, as I did; although I know alot of people will invariably fall through the cracks, with broken dreams and lost promises. It makes me sad, thinking of those prospects.
I guess I've seen more than a handful of economic hard times now, so far. I'm sure there will be more to come. That much is for sure. One main thing I learn from all these years is that, I have to self-reliant, and have to be prepared to be adaptive and improve myself constantly.
On a fresh start of a new year!!!
Ah, first day of the year. I woke up this morning by my kids, as always, bouncing around my bed, calling "Wake Up! Wake Up!" as I blinked to the bright sun over still-clean, white snow on everything outside the windows. I feel great today, and of the year (and years) ahead of us.
Apparently, my husband is feeling the same kind of energy. Over the Christmas and New Year, he bought a piano for the kids, and a sewing machine for our girl since she likes to do all sorts of arts and crafts.
But the Singer sewing machine broke down after the first few trial runs. A big ball of threads were built up under the needle. I probably didn't do the bobbin properly or something. My mom used to have an old Singer mechanical sewing machine, which ran great and never broke down. She does all sorts of crafty stuffs, like making clothing patterns to make clothing for the whole family, knitting, tatting, and all sorts of crafty stuffs. Even though I'm a full-time working mother, I probably still love the idea of a versatile mother who knows all sorts of things, and I know that my kids like that too, judging from the way they feel the love when looking at me tatting etc.
My husband also took up the challenge of fixing our bedroom door. It would close properly after we had to take it down to move some furniture into the room. It's been ajar for the longest time. Since the bedroom windows are drafty in winter too, we're losing heat at home at an alarming rate, no doubt. So, this morning, out of his success in making the bobbin work in the sewing machine (after I cleaned out the stuck ball of threads in the bobbin case), he has this leftover energy to fix the door too.
He's one of those guys who would buy things everything he goes to Home Depot. He bought this new power drill (and it's our second or third power drill already), and felt the need to put it to good use. It might as well, since we finally got the door fixed. And he sealed the windows to stop the draft.
For this 1.5 weeks of school holidays (winter break for Christmas and New Year), we had originally thought the kids might get bored, and we should enroll them on some programs/activities to keep them interested. We ended up not doing any of those, saving a few hundred bucks, and the kids love the time at home (since they have busy schedules for school all the after-school activities, and private tutoring).
Sometimes, parenting is not so hard.
Apparently, my husband is feeling the same kind of energy. Over the Christmas and New Year, he bought a piano for the kids, and a sewing machine for our girl since she likes to do all sorts of arts and crafts.
But the Singer sewing machine broke down after the first few trial runs. A big ball of threads were built up under the needle. I probably didn't do the bobbin properly or something. My mom used to have an old Singer mechanical sewing machine, which ran great and never broke down. She does all sorts of crafty stuffs, like making clothing patterns to make clothing for the whole family, knitting, tatting, and all sorts of crafty stuffs. Even though I'm a full-time working mother, I probably still love the idea of a versatile mother who knows all sorts of things, and I know that my kids like that too, judging from the way they feel the love when looking at me tatting etc.
My husband also took up the challenge of fixing our bedroom door. It would close properly after we had to take it down to move some furniture into the room. It's been ajar for the longest time. Since the bedroom windows are drafty in winter too, we're losing heat at home at an alarming rate, no doubt. So, this morning, out of his success in making the bobbin work in the sewing machine (after I cleaned out the stuck ball of threads in the bobbin case), he has this leftover energy to fix the door too.
He's one of those guys who would buy things everything he goes to Home Depot. He bought this new power drill (and it's our second or third power drill already), and felt the need to put it to good use. It might as well, since we finally got the door fixed. And he sealed the windows to stop the draft.
For this 1.5 weeks of school holidays (winter break for Christmas and New Year), we had originally thought the kids might get bored, and we should enroll them on some programs/activities to keep them interested. We ended up not doing any of those, saving a few hundred bucks, and the kids love the time at home (since they have busy schedules for school all the after-school activities, and private tutoring).
Sometimes, parenting is not so hard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)