s/o - How much should a DH who WOH earn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of DW's on this forum seem to have a DH who makes $155,000. Not sure why this is such a common figure, unless it is the same person posting again and again.

That's the top of GS-15, which is what a lot of BigLaw attorneys who flee to govt would make.

[Anonymous]

I'm a teacher who makes around $50K. Call me shallow but my future DH needs to earn at least that and hopefully more. I worked hard through college and grad school and hope to find someone else who did the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually really like this question because I think it highlights the fact that the debate is always over the value of a SAHM vs WOHM. No one ever really questions a man's value to his family or how much he should be financially contributing.

I imagine that was the spirit in which OP posted this thread (or at least that is how I interpreted it).

The bottom line is, every spouse has a different earning potential, families have different needs, and you can't place a dollar sign on a parent whether they work or stay home.

OP here. And yes, thank you, that is the spirit of asking this question.

And so I have bolded what has been written by you, as a thread ender.

Not really. There is value outside of your family if you believe giving back is an important part of your ethos.

If e family has enough money does that mean one person should be play golf everyday and/or drinking in a bar... Or getting her nails done a crowning a bottle of wine... Isn't there some value to give back in some way.

Actually, not really. What is giving back? Maybe just being "green" is giving back. Maybe being pleasant is giving back. Maybe getting nails done and patronising local business is giving back. Maybe just not being a racist is giving back.

There is nothing wrong with playing golf everyday, getting nails done, getting a spa treatment, drinking wine or going to a bar - If you have the money and time for it, and you are not harming anyone.

If you want to volunteer - it is up to you. I volunteer a lot. That is a part of my personality. However, I do not like when people who volunteer start getting upset about others who don't. That is a very condescending attitude and it basically signifies that you want praise and acknowledgement for your volunteering. You should volunteer because you want to and because it makes you feel good. Not for recognition and not to feel morally superior to others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually really like this question because I think it highlights the fact that the debate is always over the value of a SAHM vs WOHM. No one ever really questions a man's value to his family or how much he should be financially contributing.

I imagine that was the spirit in which OP posted this thread (or at least that is how I interpreted it).

The bottom line is, every spouse has a different earning potential, families have different needs, and you can't place a dollar sign on a parent whether they work or stay home.

OP here. And yes, thank you, that is the spirit of asking this question.

And so I have bolded what has been written by you, as a thread ender.

Not really. There is value outside of your family if you believe giving back is an important part of your ethos.

If e family has enough money does that mean one person should be play golf everyday and/or drinking in a bar... Or getting her nails done a crowning a bottle of wine... Isn't there some value to give back in some way.

Actually, not really. What is giving back? Maybe just being "green" is giving back. Maybe being pleasant is giving back. Maybe getting nails done and patronising local business is giving back. Maybe just not being a racist is giving back.

There is nothing wrong with playing golf everyday, getting nails done, getting a spa treatment, drinking wine or going to a bar - If you have the money and time for it, and you are not harming anyone.

If you want to volunteer - it is up to you. I volunteer a lot. That is a part of my personality. However, I do not like when people who volunteer start getting upset about others who don't. That is a very condescending attitude and it basically signifies that you want praise and acknowledgement for your volunteering. You should volunteer because you want to and because it makes you feel good. Not for recognition and not to feel morally superior to others.

No thanks, if 1 spouse makes "enough" money and the other is in a bar all day... Call me morally superior but that is not okay with me. If my spouse does not want to work I would expect them to do something valuable for society and if they did not I would not respect them enough to stay married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually really like this question because I think it highlights the fact that the debate is always over the value of a SAHM vs WOHM. No one ever really questions a man's value to his family or how much he should be financially contributing.

I imagine that was the spirit in which OP posted this thread (or at least that is how I interpreted it).

The bottom line is, every spouse has a different earning potential, families have different needs, and you can't place a dollar sign on a parent whether they work or stay home.

OP here. And yes, thank you, that is the spirit of asking this question.

And so I have bolded what has been written by you, as a thread ender.

Not really. There is value outside of your family if you believe giving back is an important part of your ethos.

If e family has enough money does that mean one person should be play golf everyday and/or drinking in a bar... Or getting her nails done a crowning a bottle of wine... Isn't there some value to give back in some way.

Actually, not really. What is giving back? Maybe just being "green" is giving back. Maybe being pleasant is giving back. Maybe getting nails done and patronising local business is giving back. Maybe just not being a racist is giving back.

There is nothing wrong with playing golf everyday, getting nails done, getting a spa treatment, drinking wine or going to a bar - If you have the money and time for it, and you are not harming anyone.

If you want to volunteer - it is up to you. I volunteer a lot. That is a part of my personality. However, I do not like when people who volunteer start getting upset about others who don't. That is a very condescending attitude and it basically signifies that you want praise and acknowledgement for your volunteering. You should volunteer because you want to and because it makes you feel good. Not for recognition and not to feel morally superior to others.

No thanks, if 1 spouse makes "enough" money and the other is in a bar all day... Call me morally superior but that is not okay with me. If my spouse does not want to work I would expect them to do something valuable for society and if they did not I would not respect them enough to stay married.

That is entirely your choice. People are different. What is of value to you could be worthless to someone else.

I have no problems at all if people are in marriages where they have a lot of leisure. That is not my life and I do not care if someone else's life is full of luxury and they do not have to work. I do not have a problem if some man wants his wife to be glamorous and spend his money.

Sheesh, it is their life and their earned money. They can choose to spend it the way they want. They can have the marriage they want. How does this concern me or someone else I do not understand?

You have a right to judge if it is your marriage and your finances. Have your own life and don't be concerned about how others choose to spend their money and time.

[Anonymous]

My DH makes $45k and I consider him a keeper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually really like this question because I think it highlights the fact that the debate is always over the value of a SAHM vs WOHM. No one ever really questions a man's value to his family or how much he should be financially contributing.

I imagine that was the spirit in which OP posted this thread (or at least that is how I interpreted it).

The bottom line is, every spouse has a different earning potential, families have different needs, and you can't place a dollar sign on a parent whether they work or stay home.

Tell that to an economist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every second person on this forum is wife of CEO or surgeon

or in big law (and hating it).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of DW's on this forum seem to have a DH who makes $155,000. Not sure why this is such a common figure, unless it is the same person posting again and again.

GS15 salary

[Anonymous]

WOH is a very dangerous proposition

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of DW's on this forum seem to have a DH who makes $155,000. Not sure why this is such a common figure, unless it is the same person posting again and again.

That is the GS15 salary.

[Anonymous]

My DH makes $160,000. I feel like it's tight when we are in D.C. When we are out in a field office somewhere, we feel wealthy. Either way, it's plenty of money to allow me to SAH. I am working part time now that our kids are older.

It's not a women vs man issue for us. My DHs income potential is much higher than mine. I was a teacher before we had kids. We knew we didn't want our kids in daycare or with a nanny, so one of us had to step out of the workforce. His income was much higher so it only made sense for me to be the one to SAH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't you give YOUR opinion OP? What do you think the financial definition of a failure in this area?

OP here. I think any amount that works for a family and any combination of earning and non-earning members or revenue stream (SAHP, WOHP, WAHP, Dual income, single income, single parent, divorced parent, alimony, child-support, govt. assistance) that is useful for raising a family is great.

The financial definition of failure in this area is so skewed and so messed up that I am aghast. Around the nation an HHI of 100K means something. And I am sure that there are many people on DCUM who are making less than that and they feel like failures because this forum is full of people bandying around paychecks of 1M +.

If you believe even half of what you read on here about people's incomes, I have a bridge I want to sell you. Do you also believe all the rich people drive beat up Hondas? That's another dcum truism that cracks me up.

True. My honda isn't beat up at all! A little dirty maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't you give YOUR opinion OP? What do you think the financial definition of a failure in this area?

OP here. I think any amount that works for a family and any combination of earning and non-earning members or revenue stream (SAHP, WOHP, WAHP, Dual income, single income, single parent, divorced parent, alimony, child-support, govt. assistance) that is useful for raising a family is great.

The financial definition of failure in this area is so skewed and so messed up that I am aghast. Around the nation an HHI of 100K means something. And I am sure that there are many people on DCUM who are making less than that and they feel like failures because this forum is full of people bandying around paychecks of 1M +.

If you believe even half of what you read on here about people's incomes, I have a bridge I want to sell you. Do you also believe all the rich people drive beat up Hondas? That's another dcum truism that cracks me up.

True. My honda isn't beat up at all! A little dirty maybe.

Mine either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If my DH made $225,000, I'd gladly stay home. Exercise, knit, cook, clean, help out at school, and shlep my kids to soccer practice. It would be awesome.

This is about right. He made $160 when I first started staying home but it's much nicer on $225. I was making $42k when I quit. His annual bonus is now than that. It just makes sense.