do none of you get the zoolander reference its been stated quite a few times.
I'll only speak for myself: I didn't get the Zoolander reference (I watched that movie many years ago and apparently it didn't leave much of an impression on me). Subsequently it was pointed out that it was a reference, which I took note of.
Teachstache's point is that there's a difference between knowing about something and understanding it through experience. Our understanding shapes our actions and behavior, and that includes spending choices when it comes to what we believe is best for our children.
Sometimes hypothetical optimal choices don't relate well to real-world decisions people have to make about their real children. Referencing the previous discussion about child care costs, just because some online document says the range of cost is $1,300-$2,100 or whatever, doesn't mean that it's "unmustachian" if someone ends up paying near or above the top of that range. It could be that the $1,300 options are
suboptimal for a number of reasons: poor care, far away from home/work, etc. Likewise, it could simply be that a very expensive option is
more optimal in some respects: on-site at the parent's workplace, staff with specialized training for non-neurotypical kids, better security/safety, etc.
I hope you can understand that child care isn't
solely a financial transaction subject to optimization where minimal cost is the only constraint.