Who do men who make 5 figures marry?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The median income in the DC area is $100k plus or minus

Which "DC area" are you talking about? Does it include Fredericksburg, Frederick, Baltimore, Anne Arundel County, or Prince William County?

[Anonymous]

the term “Washington metropolitan region” includes the District of Columbia, the Counties of Montgomery and Prince Georges in the State of Maryland, the Counties of Arlington and Fairfax and the Cities of Alexandria and Falls Church in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The median income in the DC area is $100k plus or minus

Which "DC area" are you talking about? Does it include Fredericksburg, Frederick, Baltimore, Anne Arundel County, or Prince William County?

The median income in Bethesda is roughly $165,000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The median income in the DC area is $100k plus or minus

Which "DC area" are you talking about? Does it include Fredericksburg, Frederick, Baltimore, Anne Arundel County, or Prince William County?

I think actually DC itsepf has an average of $100k. Outside of it is more like $60k average. As you say, it depends on what is included. Although some counties like Howard are probably wealthier than the inner ring suburbs. Baltimore and Fredericksburg are not in any DMV calculations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people are confusing salary with financial literacy. I didn't care about salary or even earning potential. I did care about my partner's spending and saving habits and worth ethic.

DH did wind up making a very high salary and that's nice, but even if he had only made five figures that would be fine because a) I would be working too and b) After you reach an HHI of maybe 100K, financial literacy is far more important than salary when you're talking the things you need in life to be comfortable.

But we are talking $50k. Not $100k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people are confusing salary with financial literacy. I didn't care about salary or even earning potential. I did care about my partner's spending and saving habits and worth ethic.

DH did wind up making a very high salary and that's nice, but even if he had only made five figures that would be fine because a) I would be working too and b) After you reach an HHI of maybe 100K, financial literacy is far more important than salary when you're talking the things you need in life to be comfortable.

But we are talking $50k. Not $100k.

Not if both spouses are working! And I make $95k, which is 5 figures.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

Plus the idea that people with more money value time with their kids more because they can afford to take time off and have shorter commutes....WHEW. This is very much the perspective of someone who has always been comfortable and waited until they were professionally established and knew where they were going to live to choose a spouse and have children. Some of us got married younger, had to move around a few times (i.e "DC commute times" were not even on the radar when i got married 500 miles away), and in many cases make less BECAUSE we valued having kids at a stage when maybe others were working crazy hours and socking away tons of money, and choosing more flexible and often lower paid jobs as a result.

Also, it's super unrealistic for lots of people across the financial spectrum to quit their jobs for just a year just for a longer maternity leave. And that's on this country for our horrible maternity leave policies. It's ghoulish and gross to imply that people who can't do that just don't value time with their newborns as much as wealthier people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

Plus the idea that people with more money value time with their kids more because they can afford to take time off and have shorter commutes....WHEW. This is very much the perspective of someone who has always been comfortable and waited until they were professionally established and knew where they were going to live to choose a spouse and have children. Some of us got married younger, had to move around a few times (i.e "DC commute times" were not even on the radar when i got married 500 miles away), and in many cases make less BECAUSE we valued having kids at a stage when maybe others were working crazy hours and socking away tons of money, and choosing more flexible and often lower paid jobs as a result.

Also, it's super unrealistic for lots of people across the financial spectrum to quit their jobs for just a year just for a longer maternity leave. And that's on this country for our horrible maternity leave policies. It's ghoulish and gross to imply that people who can't do that just don't value time with their newborns as much as wealthier people.

It’s on “this country” but it’s not like it’s a secret that is kept hidden from us until we marry: if you want to have a year with each newborn, you need a partner who shares that priority and makes enough money to make it a reality. That’s not ‘ghoulish’ it’s the fact. It’s also not necessary to quit your job to accomplish that if you’re adequately established to take a leave of absence or similar but, again, you have to have a partner who prioritizes your career success.

It’s not judgmental— if someone is happy with their choices and their life then that’s fantastic. I know I would have been distraught to leave an infant and so prioritized differently. What’s judgmental is the poster who calls that choice “frivolous”.

[Anonymous]

I too prioritized a partner that would allow me the flexibility to stay home during the infant years. We all get to pick who we marry. That was part of the criteria for me. I'm not sure if we could have done that on five figures without moving back in with my parents, and that WAS NOT an option (oy!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

Plus the idea that people with more money value time with their kids more because they can afford to take time off and have shorter commutes....WHEW. This is very much the perspective of someone who has always been comfortable and waited until they were professionally established and knew where they were going to live to choose a spouse and have children. Some of us got married younger, had to move around a few times (i.e "DC commute times" were not even on the radar when i got married 500 miles away), and in many cases make less BECAUSE we valued having kids at a stage when maybe others were working crazy hours and socking away tons of money, and choosing more flexible and often lower paid jobs as a result.

Also, it's super unrealistic for lots of people across the financial spectrum to quit their jobs for just a year just for a longer maternity leave. And that's on this country for our horrible maternity leave policies. It's ghoulish and gross to imply that people who can't do that just don't value time with their newborns as much as wealthier people.

It’s on “this country” but it’s not like it’s a secret that is kept hidden from us until we marry: if you want to have a year with each newborn, you need a partner who shares that priority and makes enough money to make it a reality. That’s not ‘ghoulish’ it’s the fact. It’s also not necessary to quit your job to accomplish that if you’re adequately established to take a leave of absence or similar but, again, you have to have a partner who prioritizes your career success.

It’s not judgmental— if someone is happy with their choices and their life then that’s fantastic. I know I would have been distraught to leave an infant and so prioritized differently. What’s judgmental is the poster who calls that choice “frivolous”.

I’m the PP who used the word “frivolous.” If you go back and read the original post, you’ll see that I wrote we don’t spend money on “frivolous things we don’t need.” You decided to equate that with childcare, yet the original post did not. Frivolous things? Daily Starbucks, for example. Want judgmental? Suggesting that people who need to work are somehow worse parents than you because they weren’t “distraught” about leaving a child. I read your judgment correctly. You inferred judgment from me that wasn’t there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

DP. I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “ Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures,” because honestly, even if you marry someone who earns six figures, it would take many multiples of six figures for one partner to be able to stay home. If that is the goal, low six figures is not going to get you there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

Plus the idea that people with more money value time with their kids more because they can afford to take time off and have shorter commutes....WHEW. This is very much the perspective of someone who has always been comfortable and waited until they were professionally established and knew where they were going to live to choose a spouse and have children. Some of us got married younger, had to move around a few times (i.e "DC commute times" were not even on the radar when i got married 500 miles away), and in many cases make less BECAUSE we valued having kids at a stage when maybe others were working crazy hours and socking away tons of money, and choosing more flexible and often lower paid jobs as a result.

Also, it's super unrealistic for lots of people across the financial spectrum to quit their jobs for just a year just for a longer maternity leave. And that's on this country for our horrible maternity leave policies. It's ghoulish and gross to imply that people who can't do that just don't value time with their newborns as much as wealthier people.

It’s on “this country” but it’s not like it’s a secret that is kept hidden from us until we marry: if you want to have a year with each newborn, you need a partner who shares that priority and makes enough money to make it a reality. That’s not ‘ghoulish’ it’s the fact. It’s also not necessary to quit your job to accomplish that if you’re adequately established to take a leave of absence or similar but, again, you have to have a partner who prioritizes your career success.

It’s not judgmental— if someone is happy with their choices and their life then that’s fantastic. I know I would have been distraught to leave an infant and so prioritized differently. What’s judgmental is the poster who calls that choice “frivolous”.

I’m the PP who used the word “frivolous.” If you go back and read the original post, you’ll see that I wrote we don’t spend money on “frivolous things we don’t need.” You decided to equate that with childcare, yet the original post did not. Frivolous things? Daily Starbucks, for example. Want judgmental? Suggesting that people who need to work are somehow worse parents than you because they weren’t “distraught” about leaving a child. I read your judgment correctly. You inferred judgment from me that wasn’t there.

The Starbucks example? Really? Someone who gives up a daily Starbucks order saves $3650. That’s it. Unless you’re making $96,350 Starbucks is not standing between you and six figures.

What people who make more than five figures are spending on is not Starbucks. It’s things like longer parental leave, more vacations, and homes closer to work and good schools. I’m sorry you feel judged by the fact that people make different choices than you do, some people are very happy returning to work after six weeks. I just wasn’t one of them. Maybe you weren’t happy either and that is why you feel judged?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

DP. I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “ Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures,” because honestly, even if you marry someone who earns six figures, it would take many multiples of six figures for one partner to be able to stay home. If that is the goal, low six figures is not going to get you there.

I mean the OP wants to know who marries men who make lower incomes. I think it comes down to women who want to work full time and do not prioritize the flexibility/security of having a higher HHI?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people in my parents area are like this. They have a stay at home spouse or she also makes $50k (or less). They live in cheap housing, maybe a double wide, use public school and Maine’s state health care. They supplement with income from plowing drive ways or summer tourist related jobs or hunting their own meat. They don’t worry about dental care.

Love the idea that anyone making less than six figures has to live in a trailer, hunt, and doesn't visit the dentist. This thread is so out of touch it's amazing.

Seriously. The vast majority of us, even in DC, do not make 6 figures. Maybe we live in an apartment/condo/townhouse and can't afford private schools, overseas vacations, or much in the way of college/retirement savings, but we get by just fine. And we have great teeth. Not everyone is a shallow social striver. Some of us just marry the people we love.

That’s why I find this thread fascinating. It’s as if a few posters here haven’t had the opportunity to see real life. You don’t need massive salaries to live comfortably. Just live within your means. A family with two 5-figure earners can save for retirement, for children’s college educations, for vacations, etc. Perhaps the vacation is to the beach and not Bora Bora, but that’s okay. Perhaps the college is an in-state school, but that’s also okay.

A lot of dual working families have multiple problems making that work. And they are struggling. It also completely matters if the person is 25 or 55. None of this is being discussed.

I’m sure some do. Many don’t. It’s about living within your means. When we searched for a home, we looked for neighborhoods we could comfortably afford. We make sound financial choices and don’t waste money on frivolous things we don’t need. We aren’t struggling. We have two high school-aged students. We’ve saved enough (without help) that they should be able to attend a state school with no loans. We save for retirement. Sure, we won’t be retiring to Banff, but we won’t suffer. If you live within your means and avoid the “keeping up with the Joneses” mentality, it can be done.

This is the “don’t eat avocado toast” of financial advice. Two people in the DC metro area making five figures each will certainly struggle with things like what to do when a family member needs expensive medical care, or a child needs supplemental education, or if they prioritize 6-12 months at home for a newborn, early retirement or any other very normal expense which does not in any way constitute “frivolous”.

People need to marry people who share their values. Someone who wants to work to 75, send their kids to care at 6 weeks, live in a far out suburb and vacation for one week a year at the beach needs a different partner than someone who values a year with a newborn, retirement at 60, a short commute and longer vacations. Before you deem the second lair “frivolous” remember they’re for the most part rights in European countries, even for poor people.

No, we won’t “certainly” struggle. We will never make more than $200K combined and we are very comfortable. Medical emergency? We can cover it. Kids in parochial school? Affordable and budgeted. Kid needs therapy not covered by insurance? We pay it weekly. It is absolutely doable and we do NOT struggle. I’m not sure why that’s hard for some posters to understand. The DC region does not require an extremely high salary to get by. How do you think two teacher households, for example, live? We do it just like you. I’m not sure why some posters need to feel that 5-figure salaries are horrible. I suspect many of us who have them selected our jobs because we found value in the work, not in the paycheck. We made our choices and we live happily. Get off DCUM and take a drive around the region. We’re all over the place.

I feel like your sort of arguing for my point. You married someone whose values align with yours and your values don’t require a six-figure income. If you’re satisfied with the amount of time you have to spend with your children, your retirement, your commute, then there’s no reason you shouldn’t be an ideal candidate for marrying a man who makes five figures (other than that you’re married but you get my point). Teach your daughters that they should never be SAHM’s and they will also be good candidates to marry men who make five figures.

Someone who wants to take a longer maternity leave, someone who wants to retire earlier, someone who doesn’t want to spend hours commuting, will value different things and shouldn’t marry a partner who doesn’t want the same things. That does not make them frivolous, it means they have different values. I, for example, could never send my children to parochial school following the decades of child abuse and coverup perpetrated by the Catholic Church but I don’t think you’re “frivolous” for doing so.

Wow the dripping judgment in this post! Nowhere does PP say she barely sees her kids due to a long commute or had to start daycare super early or will never retire or anything like that. There's plenty of ppl with high salaries who complain about these things btw.

Plus the idea that people with more money value time with their kids more because they can afford to take time off and have shorter commutes....WHEW. This is very much the perspective of someone who has always been comfortable and waited until they were professionally established and knew where they were going to live to choose a spouse and have children. Some of us got married younger, had to move around a few times (i.e "DC commute times" were not even on the radar when i got married 500 miles away), and in many cases make less BECAUSE we valued having kids at a stage when maybe others were working crazy hours and socking away tons of money, and choosing more flexible and often lower paid jobs as a result.

Also, it's super unrealistic for lots of people across the financial spectrum to quit their jobs for just a year just for a longer maternity leave. And that's on this country for our horrible maternity leave policies. It's ghoulish and gross to imply that people who can't do that just don't value time with their newborns as much as wealthier people.

It’s on “this country” but it’s not like it’s a secret that is kept hidden from us until we marry: if you want to have a year with each newborn, you need a partner who shares that priority and makes enough money to make it a reality. That’s not ‘ghoulish’ it’s the fact. It’s also not necessary to quit your job to accomplish that if you’re adequately established to take a leave of absence or similar but, again, you have to have a partner who prioritizes your career success.

It’s not judgmental— if someone is happy with their choices and their life then that’s fantastic. I know I would have been distraught to leave an infant and so prioritized differently. What’s judgmental is the poster who calls that choice “frivolous”.

I’m the PP who used the word “frivolous.” If you go back and read the original post, you’ll see that I wrote we don’t spend money on “frivolous things we don’t need.” You decided to equate that with childcare, yet the original post did not. Frivolous things? Daily Starbucks, for example. Want judgmental? Suggesting that people who need to work are somehow worse parents than you because they weren’t “distraught” about leaving a child. I read your judgment correctly. You inferred judgment from me that wasn’t there.

The Starbucks example? Really? Someone who gives up a daily Starbucks order saves $3650. That’s it. Unless you’re making $96,350 Starbucks is not standing between you and six figures.

What people who make more than five figures are spending on is not Starbucks. It’s things like longer parental leave, more vacations, and homes closer to work and good schools. I’m sorry you feel judged by the fact that people make different choices than you do, some people are very happy returning to work after six weeks. I just wasn’t one of them. Maybe you weren’t happy either and that is why you feel judged?

Your judgment is way off. I took 4 months with my 1st child. People with lower salaries have options, like jobs with generous leave. You continue to suggest that people with lower salaries somehow prefer work to family? Wow. You make such judgments. And my commute? 18 minutes.

I’m done with this thread. It’s as if some posters refuse to acknowledge that people can be happy with less. You assume we have some deficiency… we don’t value our children, being just one of them. It’s insulting to the many millions of people who live in this salary range.