When Mom's salary breaks even with daycare....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To think long-term.

+1

Now that kids are in school my salary, which is higher because of raises and promotions, is a great addition to the family budget. And I have a healthy TSP growing.

Instead of thinking of daycare coming out of mom's salary, why not think of it as a family expense from the overall budget including dad's salary?

NP. Because it's a cost that only exists with both parents working. For accounting purposes, it comes out of the salary of whoever would be the one to stay home. It's just basic economics, no reason to make it a feminist stand.

I agree with you. That poster says the same thing in every post relating to this.

Are you really that stupid that you can't see how sexist this is? Damn.

When a dad can stay home and breast feed his children then maybe it won't be sexist. But until then, there are differences in the sexes. Or do you really want males and females to be totally equal? Give away your unique female abilities?

News flash: lots of working moms breastfeed. I did until 18 months.

Not saying it isn't possible to pump and store milk. But statistically speaking most mothers drastically reduce or completely stop breast feeding after returning to work. Which is a poor choice health wise for your child. And there is nothing a Father can do to produce their own milk. Is that sexist? Or is that just biology?

I know many, many working moms who have breast fed and pumped, often for more than a year.

Answer to your original questions: yes, females and males should be totally equal...in how they are treated in the workplace, in how they are valued in society, etc. etc. etc.

Just STFU. Really. You are talking out your ass. If you are a woman, you should be deeply ashamed.

[Anonymous]

Well OP, what about families with two dads? You know those exist...right? Or one father and no mother?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To think long-term.

+1

Now that kids are in school my salary, which is higher because of raises and promotions, is a great addition to the family budget. And I have a healthy TSP growing.

Instead of thinking of daycare coming out of mom's salary, why not think of it as a family expense from the overall budget including dad's salary?

NP. Because it's a cost that only exists with both parents working. For accounting purposes, it comes out of the salary of whoever would be the one to stay home. It's just basic economics, no reason to make it a feminist stand.

I agree with you. That poster says the same thing in every post relating to this.

Are you really that stupid that you can't see how sexist this is? Damn.

When a dad can stay home and breast feed his children then maybe it won't be sexist. But until then, there are differences in the sexes. Or do you really want males and females to be totally equal? Give away your unique female abilities?

News flash: lots of working moms breastfeed. I did until 18 months.

Not saying it isn't possible to pump and store milk. But statistically speaking most mothers drastically reduce or completely stop breast feeding after returning to work. Which is a poor choice health wise for your child. And there is nothing a Father can do to produce their own milk. Is that sexist? Or is that just biology?

I know many, many working moms who have breast fed and pumped, often for more than a year.

Answer to your original questions: yes, females and males should be totally equal...in how they are treated in the workplace, in how they are valued in society, etc. etc. etc.

Just STFU. Really. You are talking out your ass. If you are a woman, you should be deeply ashamed.

You may know many, many working moms that do. But that does not reflect the actual statistics which clearly show breastfeeding rates drop sharply when mothers return to work. Are you saying the statistics are wrong? Or are you just getting pissy over the truth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To think long-term.

+1

Now that kids are in school my salary, which is higher because of raises and promotions, is a great addition to the family budget. And I have a healthy TSP growing.

Instead of thinking of daycare coming out of mom's salary, why not think of it as a family expense from the overall budget including dad's salary?

NP. Because it's a cost that only exists with both parents working. For accounting purposes, it comes out of the salary of whoever would be the one to stay home. It's just basic economics, no reason to make it a feminist stand.

I agree with you. That poster says the same thing in every post relating to this.

Are you really that stupid that you can't see how sexist this is? Damn.

When a dad can stay home and breast feed his children then maybe it won't be sexist. But until then, there are differences in the sexes. Or do you really want males and females to be totally equal? Give away your unique female abilities?

News flash: lots of working moms breastfeed. I did until 18 months.

Not saying it isn't possible to pump and store milk. But statistically speaking most mothers drastically reduce or completely stop breast feeding after returning to work. Which is a poor choice health wise for your child. And there is nothing a Father can do to produce their own milk. Is that sexist? Or is that just biology?

I know many, many working moms who have breast fed and pumped, often for more than a year.

Answer to your original questions: yes, females and males should be totally equal...in how they are treated in the workplace, in how they are valued in society, etc. etc. etc.

Just STFU. Really. You are talking out your ass. If you are a woman, you should be deeply ashamed.

You may know many, many working moms that do. But that does not reflect the actual statistics which clearly show breastfeeding rates drop sharply when mothers return to work. Are you saying the statistics are wrong? Or are you just getting pissy over the truth?

This isn't the DCUM demographic though for the most part. Yes many retail and restaurant workers etc. aren't able to continue BFing. Many women working in professional jobs have the luxury to pump. That said 80 percent of SAHMs in the US can't work because they can't afford to - they don't break even like OP. So not the demographic OP is in either.

[Anonymous]

People love to be outraged. This thread is a good example of that...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My husbands salary is the one that "breaks even" with daycare and not one person has suggested he stay home after the kiddo is born. Which is the opposite experience of his pregnant female colleague. Such a double standard!

Did you suggest it?
If not, aren't you part of the problem?

[Anonymous]

I SAH and those were the most cherished and special years of my life. The emotional cost and strain of working with young kids was not worth it. The dooms sayers were not correct. I hopped back into work at a higher pay than I left. I'm not making more money than I ever could have dreamed.

I'm so grateful for those early years. Our stress levels in our home were so low. I applied thr business principals and habits I had learned at my career into running our home. I also just loved being with the kids and being able to have that bond and raise them the was I wanted to aND to experience every milestone.

I feel like I have it all. I had those formative years and now have a great career.

[Anonymous]

We discussed it but thought it was not in our family's best interest for the same reasons others discussed on this thread (time out of the workforce, not getting retirement contributions). I think that conversation always makes sense to have within the partnership - my point was about the assumptions of people outside the partnership.

[Anonymous]

(Oops was trying to reply to 19:03)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I SAH and those were the most cherished and special years of my life. The emotional cost and strain of working with young kids was not worth it. The dooms sayers were not correct. I hopped back into work at a higher pay than I left. I'm not making more money than I ever could have dreamed.

I'm so grateful for those early years. Our stress levels in our home were so low. I applied thr business principals and habits I had learned at my career into running our home. I also just loved being with the kids and being able to have that bond and raise them the was I wanted to aND to experience every milestone.

I feel like I have it all. I had those formative years and now have a great career.

I'm NOW making more money that I could have ever dreamed.

SAH is not premanant. And so what if I lost 7 years of 401k? My kids are worth way more than the 140k in retirement I missed out on. Plus considering the salary I did work up to after opting out, it's a drop in the bucket.

My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things.

[Anonymous]

Can't we all agree that your choice is right and everyone else is wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I SAH and those were the most cherished and special years of my life. The emotional cost and strain of working with young kids was not worth it. The dooms sayers were not correct. I hopped back into work at a higher pay than I left. I'm not making more money than I ever could have dreamed.

I'm so grateful for those early years. Our stress levels in our home were so low. I applied thr business principals and habits I had learned at my career into running our home. I also just loved being with the kids and being able to have that bond and raise them the was I wanted to aND to experience every milestone.

I feel like I have it all. I had those formative years and now have a great career.

I'm NOW making more money that I could have ever dreamed.

SAH is not premanant. And so what if I lost 7 years of 401k? My kids are worth way more than the 140k in retirement I missed out on. Plus considering the salary I did work up to after opting out, it's a drop in the bucket.

My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things.

I think the end of your post got cut off:

Anonymous wrote:My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things. Since my family is rich, I don't need to worry about money so I can brag about how great my life is. Unfortunately, I don't have any empathy for other people who clearly make much less money than me, and for whom the financial part of the decision is much tougher. Tra la la....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I SAH and those were the most cherished and special years of my life. The emotional cost and strain of working with young kids was not worth it. The dooms sayers were not correct. I hopped back into work at a higher pay than I left. I'm not making more money than I ever could have dreamed.

I'm so grateful for those early years. Our stress levels in our home were so low. I applied thr business principals and habits I had learned at my career into running our home. I also just loved being with the kids and being able to have that bond and raise them the was I wanted to aND to experience every milestone.

I feel like I have it all. I had those formative years and now have a great career.

I'm NOW making more money that I could have ever dreamed.

SAH is not premanant. And so what if I lost 7 years of 401k? My kids are worth way more than the 140k in retirement I missed out on. Plus considering the salary I did work up to after opting out, it's a drop in the bucket.

My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things.

I think the end of your post got cut off:

Anonymous wrote:My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things. Since my family is rich, I don't need to worry about money so I can brag about how great my life is. Unfortunately, I don't have any empathy for other people who clearly make much less money than me, and for whom the financial part of the decision is much tougher. Tra la la....

Rich-lol! We were living on 95k/yr and in 900sq feet of house. I returned to work because we were not rich why would I have worked when I would have netted NO INCOME simply to fund a 401k? My 401k comes second to my kids. We all pick our priorities. The decision would have been a tougher one if my income was much higher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I SAH and those were the most cherished and special years of my life. The emotional cost and strain of working with young kids was not worth it. The dooms sayers were not correct. I hopped back into work at a higher pay than I left. I'm not making more money than I ever could have dreamed.

I'm so grateful for those early years. Our stress levels in our home were so low. I applied thr business principals and habits I had learned at my career into running our home. I also just loved being with the kids and being able to have that bond and raise them the was I wanted to aND to experience every milestone.

I feel like I have it all. I had those formative years and now have a great career.

I'm NOW making more money that I could have ever dreamed.

SAH is not premanant. And so what if I lost 7 years of 401k? My kids are worth way more than the 140k in retirement I missed out on. Plus considering the salary I did work up to after opting out, it's a drop in the bucket.

My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things.

I think the end of your post got cut off:

Anonymous wrote:My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things. Since my family is rich, I don't need to worry about money so I can brag about how great my life is. Unfortunately, I don't have any empathy for other people who clearly make much less money than me, and for whom the financial part of the decision is much tougher. Tra la la....

Rich-lol! We were living on 95k/yr and in 900sq feet of house. I returned to work because we were not rich why would I have worked when I would have netted NO INCOME simply to fund a 401k? My 401k comes second to my kids. We all pick our priorities. The decision would have been a tougher one if my income was much higher.

$140,000, invested for 30 years with 6% return, is almost a million dollars for your retirement. I'd say someone who is that casual about whether or not she has another million dollars must be pretty rich, or at least extremely confident about her financial future. Many people making the decision to stay home or keep working don't have that luxury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I SAH and those were the most cherished and special years of my life. The emotional cost and strain of working with young kids was not worth it. The dooms sayers were not correct. I hopped back into work at a higher pay than I left. I'm not making more money than I ever could have dreamed.

I'm so grateful for those early years. Our stress levels in our home were so low. I applied thr business principals and habits I had learned at my career into running our home. I also just loved being with the kids and being able to have that bond and raise them the was I wanted to aND to experience every milestone.

I feel like I have it all. I had those formative years and now have a great career.

I'm NOW making more money that I could have ever dreamed.

SAH is not premanant. And so what if I lost 7 years of 401k? My kids are worth way more than the 140k in retirement I missed out on. Plus considering the salary I did work up to after opting out, it's a drop in the bucket.

My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things.

I think the end of your post got cut off:

Anonymous wrote:My investment in my kids when they were babies was bigger than my investment in 401k. I value experiences over things. Since my family is rich, I don't need to worry about money so I can brag about how great my life is. Unfortunately, I don't have any empathy for other people who clearly make much less money than me, and for whom the financial part of the decision is much tougher. Tra la la....

Rich-lol! We were living on 95k/yr and in 900sq feet of house. I returned to work because we were not rich why would I have worked when I would have netted NO INCOME simply to fund a 401k? My 401k comes second to my kids. We all pick our priorities. The decision would have been a tougher one if my income was much higher.

$140,000, invested for 30 years with 6% return, is almost a million dollars for your retirement. I'd say someone who is that casual about whether or not she has another million dollars must be pretty rich, or at least extremely confident about her financial future. Many people making the decision to stay home or keep working don't have that luxury.

Actually, people who don't have secure finances can't contribute the max to 401k. Sats back that up. MAJORITY of Americans can't and don't fully fund their 401ks. BTW, the actual 401k lost to me based on contributions at the time at a generous 6% (current models say 4%, but whatever) is 521k.

Once again, being home with my kids and the wonderful experience I had being with them FT was worth the price. My marriage also benefited because I was able to do the heavy lifting while DH focused on his career, there was no stress. Stradling both worlds I can tell you that working is much much harder than not and I'm so happy that I could return when both my children were in school FT and independent. No way would I trade that for 500k of potential money.

Indeed, I was very confident about my financial future. I know I'm smart and resourceful and knew that even in 2009 when the job market was shaky, that I'd find work. I left work making 55k/yr and returned making 80k. I've since had two new jobs and each jump was calculated for a higher salary. I contribute max to my 401k once again and living all those years so frugally gave us excellent financial habits that are serving us well.