Reply to Predicting spousal support

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Predicting spousal support"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]"He experienced the opportunity cost of her not working as well. Her absence from the workforce was an opportunity cost for the HOUSEHOLD INCOME. So, he already paid for that as well."

+100 
This is a fact that is never acknowledged! Instead of them splitting assets from 10 years of him earning $100k and her earning $60k, he only gets half of the assets resulting from $100k. He also lost out on opportunities to take a chance on potentially better paying jobs or taking time out to get more training since he had to hold down the finances singlehandedly. [/quote]

No, in divorces where alimony matters (as seems to be the issue here), the husband is often a highly paid professional spending most of his time in his office. Childcare in the US is so expensive, as is after-school care that most families that go SAHM route figure out that it's not beneficial to pay $3000 for childcare per child per month (standard nowadays). Which is how you end up with SAHMs. It's not like the woman suddenly decided to give up her well-paid job to change diapers. Usually it's a family decision where the husband concentrates on earning income and the wife concentrates on the home front, sometimes the other way around. Generally, husbands are fine with this division of labor (paid and unpaid) when everything goes fine, as after all, it's financially prudent. So in your example sure, maybe the family income would be $160K if both work, but then with 2 children, your yearly cost for childcare is $72K. With 3 kids it's $108K. That's how families decide to go the SAHM route, got it?  You seem to think SAHMs want to be at their husband's mercy with no income just for fun. [/quote]

"Instead of them splitting assets from 10 years of him earning $100k and her earning $60k"

You're not earning 100k and living in a 3k childcare per child per month per area. 
[/quote]

Obviously each family does their own calculations. Or what exactly are you arguing about? [/quote]

I'm saying you're not earning 100k and living in a 3k childcare per child per month per area.

[quote=Anonymous]You think a woman gets pregnant and forces her husband to go to work at gunpoint while she's munching cookies on the couch? How do you think SAHMs come about in the US (non-existent in Europe and most other countries)? Btw, I can also tell you from living in several different countries that US laws about how old a child has to be to stay home alone or whether children can walk by themselves on the streets also plays a role. In the US, child supervision laws are way stricter than elsewhere, meaning someone has to be there to take care of a child. In many European countries you can leave a 6-7 yo child home alone. In DC for example a child under 10 cannot be unsupervised for any period of time, in Maryland you can leave an 8 yo for 1.5 hours during daytime and an 11-12 yo for up to 3 hours during daytime and even a 15 yo you cannot leave overnight alone! [/quote]

I'm simply saying you're not earning 100k and living in a 3k childcare per child per month per area. Also US households with two working parents manage to solve all the problems you mention.

[/quote]

And? [b]The OP and others were SAHMs, so obviously not in a two working parent household and didn't manage to solve all these problems as you say.[/b] In reality there are only 2 options when you have kids: either you outsource childcare or you do it on your own. So 2 working parent households in the US mostly outsource, hence childcare costs. You can hire a 24/7 nanny/tutor for example. In other countries, households that have 2 working parents often have very involved grandmothers. I personally know of families where a grandma stays home every time a child gets sick. It's not common in the US. And I haven't even touched upon families that  have children with serious health problems, prolonged disease or special needs![/quote]

SAHM solved the childcare problem. That's why you stay home. SAHM are not breaking any child supervision laws you mention, because they are supervising the children. I don't understand what you're talking about.

[quote] All in all, you can read that SAHM trend is going up, not down in the US. [/quote]

U.S. fertility rates are also dropping to a all-time lows. Staying at home with children isn't appealing to U.S. women. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics