Does a second income pay?

[Apathy]

http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/30/commentary/everyday/sahadi/index.htm

Ok, I'm not anything special with numbers and I don't know anything about current tax laws, but this article really got under my skin.

At one point the wording is written to make it seem as if a family making 80k a year is somehow better off than a family making 120k because the extra income is taxed so much harder...give me a break.

The point of the article is to show how it may or may not be worth it to have both spouses working when children are around. It is written to give the impression that it shows both sides of the coin, but the scales are in favor of not working.

Money doesn't grow on trees. Have you ever heard a person who wasn't making a 6digit income bitch about how all their money is just ruining their life? There's a reason you haven't.

I don't know why this article got to me so much. Maybe it's because I just read Chadj's journal (that was a joke I made btw, don't get offended. been there) and it got me remembering certain points of growing up, but it's a freaking educational article that tells people to not make more money.

I just can't get the words out to describe how I feel.

LACK OF
Money is the root of all evil.

[Tsa`ah]

Reading the article gave me a real chuckle when I got to the bottom portion where it read No right answer

They go through the list of expenses like the things listed are necessities.

Dry cleaning, lunch, daycare/nanny.

The situation will vary from family to family and region to region.

If someone making 80k a year is questioning the benefit of the spouse going out and making an additional 40k, then perhaps they don't have a grip on reality.

I work nights, my wife works through the day. No day care expense during the summer. School starts real soon, so no daycare expense then either. Dry cleaning? What, too good to wash your own fucking clothes? Lunches? If you're so worried about making the dollar stretch when you're in the upper medium of middle class ... take your lunch. Bologna is cheap and so is generic pop. Gas consumption of two vehicles going to different directions? Car pool, ditch the fucking Escalade and get a damn economy car. You'll save on gas and insurance.

I'm sorry, the article was a joke and just pointed out too many hypotheticals without touching base on the real issue... how the money is spent.

[Edited on 8-9-2004 by Tsa`ah]

[Drew]

Originally posted by Apathy

Have you ever heard a person who wasn't making a 6digit income bitch about how all their money is just ruining their life?


Yes, many times. I had the good fortune that later in my youth my dad sold his business that he started himself and we moved to a very rich area. I've lived in all sorts of conditions, from abject poverty when I was younger to near palatial splendor as I grew older, and everything in between.

By far, with no margin of error, the saddest, least happy people I've ever met were the wealthiest. People have this idea that money cures problems or will make you happy, but unless you are happy before you have money (and I mean really happy, content, sure of your purpose in life) you will be much less happy with money. All these people (my parents live in a small town, there a 6 billionaires in the town, many many more "hundred-millionaires", the point is, they are all fabulously wealthy) are horribly unhappy. They all spent much of their lives trying to get money, that was their purpose, they thought it was the goal. Once they got it, they realized money is worthless, you can only buy things, not satisfaction. I know that those of you who haven't lived this lifestyle will snort in disbelief at reading this, because there is no way for you to really know this unless you've seen it with your own eyes.

It's easy enough to figure out once you know what to look for, look at all the movie stars with drug addictions (trying to fill a void that they've found money can't), who commit suicide, who divorce their wives or husbands. These people are famous, wealthy, every thing that many people aspire for and yet most of them are sad people on the inside.

The only rich people I know who are sincerely happy with their lives are those with a strong faith in God, they are assured that they have a purpose in life that is greater than any amount of money they can earn. But, rich people who believe in God are very few and far between.


All that said, I hope I'm never wealthy (you may continue snorting here), I'd like to live comfortably, but anything more complicates things.







Edited because I'd mixed up their/there in one spot

[Edited on 8-9-2004 by Drew]

[Tsa`ah]

While I agree that money does not equate happiness, it does alleviate a great deal of stress. And without turning this into a religion/anti-religion thread, I would say that unless you are happy before you find your god/religion, you won't be happy with that either.

The wife and I have a nice size savings, hefty investment plans for retirement and a not too shabby net worth. By no means are we multi-millionaires, but we are far from wanting. I know what it's like to be poor. I grew up a farm boy and was taught the value of money the hard way. Was I unhappy without money as a child? Not even close. In college I made enough cash to keep myself on 20 bucks a week, my clothes clean, the car never dropped below 1/4 tank and my insurance and all the bills were paid. If I had a spot of cash to drink on and buy smokes, it was always the cheapest possible. Was I unhappy then? No where near unhappy.

I was most unhappy working a well paying job. Hours, days, weeks and months spent away from home so one man and his board of 20 VPs could bitch about the water being to rough to yacht on, security and the weather causing one or two of them to miss the first quarter of a Bills game, and how it was unfair for one guy to use a company plane for a week in the Bahamas while 4 others had to use a tight schedule for the one of the other two left ... Cause the pres has to have one available at all times.

I hated sacrificing so much of my time for the good paychecks. I hated coming home and being too tired to do much of anything with my children and wife outside of being a couch bum.

So to me, god nor money can make you happy or satisfied unless those are the things important to you. For me it's the time vs the money. If I can make 65k a year working 42 hours a week and get a four month paid vacation a year ... That's better than 110k a year, no vacation and 65-70 hours a week. More time for my family, more time for myself, and more time to explore my interests.

But back to the topic and the article. It's one use the 120k or better scenario, that happens to be completely unrealistic, it's another to knock that income bracket down to a family that is lucky to make 50k a year and tell the wife ... you may be better off just staying at home. These are the people that really have to look at the pros and cons of two jobs and really consider the outcome of their children. No second income? Then likely no braces if insurance refuses the claim. College? Only if you get a scholarship. Letting the kid be a kid at 16? Hell, 10 years down the road I don't think it will be uncommon for lower income families to need the third income a burger flipper brings in.

The article is so out of touch, I wonder what the hell journalists are thinking at times.

[Artha]

The article is so out of touch, I wonder what the hell journalists are thinking at times.

"Maybe I can convince my wife that if I quit, it'll all work out."

[SpunGirl]

Heh. Funny thing. I missed two hours of work in the last pay period because I went home not feeling well one night. My paycheck for 78 hours was actually $4 more than my paychecks for 80 hours are, I'm guessing because less taxes are taken out. Hahaha funny.

Anyway, I've read "The Two-Income Trap" and stuff like that, but that doesn't change the fact that we need two incomes. Jake and I currently bring in about $1200/month more than we spend in expected bills and expenses. That's a lot of expendable income, but we also save a lot (we're buying a house soon!) It also goes to UNEXPECTED expenses, like the fucking $500 I just spend on fixing something in my car. Don't ask.

In any case, we could probably survive on just one of our incomes, but we certainly wouldn't be looking in this area of town for our new house, I would still be driving my old Volvo and we wouldn't be able to do what we love most: Travel.

I have to guess that money would make us happier, because when we fight, 9/10 times it's over something money-related.
But we're already happy, so I don't know if that counts.

-K

[Jazuela]

Well me and the hubby went from a 2-income household with 2 people, 2 cats, no kids, to a 1-income household (minus one cat).

We weren't making any kind of "riches" to begin with...so maybe our situation doesn't apply.

But going from almost 60k a year to barely over 40k a year HURTS.

It isn't even just the money issue, it's the boredom factor. Try being unemployed, and unemployable in today's market, for an entire year. No money to go out and have fun during the year of "nothing to do," and nothing to do in the house after you've spent the first hour of each day cleaning and the second hour of each day looking for more work.

You wanna talk about cabin fever - meh. I would've volunteered for some kind of charity, but I couldn't afford the gas and the wardrobe required to volunteer. Volunteering COSTS money afterall, and we didn't have it to spare.

We paid all the bills - no problem. We have a modest pension and annuity plan for our retirement - no problem. Life insurance is paid up, and all premiums are paid by the dividends so we don't have to pay out of pocket anymore. Our monthly and yearly expenses are covered by hubby's income - but we have nothing left over for the "little luxuries" such as a night out at a restaurant, a drive in the country, buying a 9-ounce can of lobster meat to cook a gourmet dinner at home.

Things are looking up now - I got a part time job (finally, yay!) at Quiznos and start tomorrow. It's grunt work, sure, but it's grocery money that hubby doesn't have to deal with. We'll be able to have those home-cooked gourmet meals now, and take that drive in the country if it suits us, and go to a nice restaurant on our wedding anniversary.

Sure, it would be awesome to have another 30k a year and live in the style that I was brought up in. But I've lived with less than what we have now, and my only gripe is that I can't contribute more to paying the expenses. Hubby deserves more time off and the right to say no to overtime when he's asked to stay late. He isn't in a position to refuse it now, because I can't contribute enough to cover the loss.

Now with this new part time minimum wage job, if I can get 25 hours a week scheduled, he'll be able to say "Oh, no thanks, I don't need the OT" once in awhile. And that makes ME very happy.

Money doesn't make you happy - but it damned well contributes to the happiness factor.

[AnticorRifling]

If you're spending 1 hour a day looking for work then I don't think you're really allowed to complain about it, but that's just my opinion.

Yeah my wife is currently looking for work, she's had 1 offer to teach middle school and is waiting to hear about a K-1st grade teaching position at another school. She's basically been out of work since school let out but hopefully that will change this week. I hate not being able to golf or go to the movies heh.

[Weedmage Princess]

I agree with both Tsa'ah and Drew.

If someone has a job that pays well (let's say 100k+ a year) it's possible (CURRENTLY) to live well off just that salary in certain situations--like if they have one child and they don't go too nuts with spending. (IE credit cards, the true evil) You might have to forego some of the more extravagant customs you might be used to, but you can have a house in a pretty nice area, send your child to private school, put something away for college, do some traveling and afford some other luxuries. If my spouse or I were bringing in that much, I'd definitely talk to him about staying at home (actually, I'd rather go out and work anyway..I have no issues with having a stay at home dad, he might though..heh.) or maybe working part time only. Not bringing in quite that much yet, but when that day comes if we still only have one child, I'm definitely going to bring that up.

Of course, with two or more kids, the buck has to stretch a little more, so the possibility of this decreases. There are also other factors, like what each family's budget is like (do you have a shitload of debt? College loans, crazy credit card bills from when you were younger?), health issues (cause as Tsa'ah hinted at, health insurance doesn't always cover everything.) ...things that need to be taken into consideration, but it can be done.

[Edited on 8-9-2004 by Weedmage Princess]

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Drew
People have this idea that money cures problems It cures the hell out of the bills.
The only rich people I know who are sincerely happy with their lives are those with a strong faith in GodHaha, sweet, now I just need to get filthy rich somehow.

[Wezas]

When my girl has a bad day at work she whines about she wish it was like the old days where she could just stay at home, cook and clean.

Too bad she makes a few thousand more then me. Maybe I should be the housewife. Seems like a good gig.

[Apathy]

Originally posted by Wezas
When my girl has a bad day at work she whines about she wish it was like the old days where she could just stay at home, cook and clean.

Too bad she makes a few thousand more then me. Maybe I should be the housewife. Seems like a good gig.

Hey man, it's the 21st century and gender lines are blurring. Nothing wrong with the stay-at-home dad/husband/boyfriend. Embrace change.

I'm glad that my point got across the way I wanted it to because I was worried I wasn't making myself clear.

[SpunGirl]

If I ever have kids (big if) I want to try and stay home for at least the first year. My parents have said that when (it's a question of when in their minds) Jake and I have kids, they'll buy a condo in Vegas and spend their winters here, so that's some nice free babysitting for me.

I was unemployed for the first two months we lived here, and I found out I'm not that great of a housewife. I was bored off my ass and wound up laying by the pool and reading five hours out of the day.

-K

[Weedmage Princess]

I think being a housewife sucks. I'd totally want my husband to be the one to stay at home.

[Chyrain]

Originally posted by Apathy

LACK OF
Money is the root of all evil.

Just a couple of comments.

1. The actual phrase is the LOVE of money is the root of all evil. Money itself is not evil. However, there are those that let either their want and gain of money take over their lives in spite of their other responsibilities (like children) or other moral and legal things (organized crime comes to mind), That is what could be so evil about money. But for those who have their priorities in an order that benefits both them and their families in ways that aren't just financial, then there is nothing evil about having money.

2. This idea floating around that driving a luxury SUV is more important than having your kid come home to an empty house, or shipped off to some impersonal daycare after school really ticks me off.

I've experienced both sides of this coin. I'm lucky to be living what is considered a "prosperous life" right now. My husband makes 6 figures on his own. But when I grew up, my family was poor as hell. My mom stayed home to take care of us, though. To make a few bucks, she ran a daycare from our home. So I was constantly surrounded by kids who were never with their parents. And seeing the relationship that I have with my parents vs the relationships my friends have with their parents who worked constantly and were never home: I will never, ever put my want for a bigger house or a better car above the more important reasons to stay home - my kids.

If you can work out some schedule so that one or the other parent is there 99% of the time, then more power to you. But really...there are so many things that are more important than a few extra bucks.


I would just really push the numbers around and see exactly how much money you would be making after taxes, daycare, commuting expenses, extra food expenses for eating lunch out all the time and see if whatever you have leftover is worth you children spending nearly ZERO time with their parents in their own home.

I'd be interested in what the going price for mentally and emotionally stable children is these days.


[edit] posting during an insomnia episode. i cant spell at 3:15am.

[Edited on 8-10-2004 by Chyrain]

[AnticorRifling]

My parents both worked. My house was empty. You're high if you think that's the root of unstable childred. There is a thing called coddling your kids. If you're always there then they always depend on you. Let them learn to be at least alittle self sufficent.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
My parents both worked. My house was empty. You're high if you think that's the root of unstable childred. There is a thing called coddling your kids. If you're always there then they always depend on you. Let them learn to be at least alittle self sufficent. Well, I don't want to start hippie vs. Marine, but my mom was a housewife until my younger brother was going into sixth grade (so like 12? 11?), and we all turned out just fine (so far) in terms of independence. A parent can always be there and still be a good parent. A parent can sometimes be there and still be a good parent. I would say the actual parent matters more than the amount of time they're there.

[Chyrain]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
My parents both worked. My house was empty. You're high if you think that's the root of unstable childred. There is a thing called coddling your kids. If you're always there then they always depend on you. Let them learn to be at least alittle self sufficent.

just because you're home for your children doesn't mean you're coddling them.

If you've got a 16 year old, then I don't see anything wrong with not being there constantly. What I'm talking about are small children raised by daycare providers. Shipping your children off to daycare doesn't make them self-sufficient. Just to make things clear.

[AnticorRifling]

They get to interact and gain social skills early. Keeping them at home until they start school might be ok but I think the kids that go to early day care and such end up adapting to social changes easier.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

If I made about 12k a year more I think I'd be at the median annual income in this area -- incidently, that would also probably solve any financial woes I have :)

[Drew]

It's been studied and proven time and time again; children who have a parent stay at home do better in school, are less likely to turn to criminal behavior, and wait until they are older to do drugs. This isn't to say that it's not possible to turn out ok without your parents there, I think I did, but it's better with them there.

[Shari]

I know I'm helping pull this off-topic but my mother stayed home with us 3 kids and we are all fiercely independent. Mostly because once we got old enough to figure out how to cook for ourselves we were on our own. Hungry? Go find something to make in the pantry.

[CrystalTears]

So basically it depends on the individual parenting and not on whether they were home enough or not. ;)

[Chyrain]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
They get to interact and gain social skills early. Keeping them at home until they start school might be ok but I think the kids that go to early day care and such end up adapting to social changes easier.

finding a play group for your kids and letting them play with the neighbors does this too.

shoving your kid into a daycare doens't automatically make them social butterflies who adapt well to changes. My sister is a supervisor at one of these big day care centers and she has serious issues with kids who have been going to this center literally their entire lives who are angry and closed off and don't have the ability to get along with anyone.

Not everyone is like this, but would you like to take the chance that your kid turns out like that if you didn't absolutely have to?

[Trinitis]

Originally posted by Drew
It's been studied and proven time and time again; children who have a parent stay at home do better in school, are less likely to turn to criminal behavior, and wait until they are older to do drugs. This isn't to say that it's not possible to turn out ok without your parents there, I think I did, but it's better with them there.

Any study can proove anything true or false. If you dig deep enough, you will find things to support your ideas.

Thus, studies are pretty pointless to use as support.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
So basically it depends on the individual parenting and not on whether they were home enough or not. ;)

That defies all sensible logic meanie!