Anonymous wrote:I don't see what's so crazy or disrespectful about this post. The only place the OP went wrong was in not securing a higher earner from the start- if money is that important to you you need to respect that and screen for it in the dating stage instead of hoping vaguely that everything just works out.

I agree with this. Everyone, of both genders, has to own what's important to them, and hold themselves responsible for finding/choosing that. I've known women who marry blue collar guys, or lower-income professionals like teachers and then spend the next 10 years trying to bitch and bully them into making more money so they can stay at home, go to society events, whatever.

I've also known men who married "Real Housewives" type women who then complain to anyone within earshot that all their wives want to do is get their nails done, run up huge bills while shopping, and aren't spending enough time with the kids.

The upshot: Be brutally honest about what you want, and don't settle for less. If you marry a trophy, expect that you're going to have to polish it. If you want to BE a trophy, marry someone who can afford the polish.

I get it OP.

My husband has had a series of career setbacks and it's killed his drive. He hates his job, complains about it 24-7. I also hate my boring dead-end fed job. We make $160k combined, financially we are ok but not great. We are never going to take a family trip to Europe, or know what comfortable feels like.

He's a good man,just not driven.

I've been trying to get a new job for 2-3 years.

Another 60's baby who assumed I would always earn my own money. I always have, and I continue to think it is important, even though my husband now out-earns me and has for some time.

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry OP. This is sad. You should be able to stay home with your kids if you want to.

She can, but then she can't send her kids to private school and whatnot. Plenty of blue collar workers have stay at home partners but that's not the life OP envisioned.

I think OP is a troll.

I wish we BOTH made more money, but since I am the person more interested in the topic I will probably be the one who makes the bigger effort to do so. It's ok, I guess, since DH is frugal, somewhat handy, and does more of the chores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I make my own money. Do you have a high paying career yourself?

No. But by the looks of it, I probably will have to if I want to give my children the life I envision.

Why did you assume you wouldn't have to do so? I'm guessing you were born in the 1970s. I was born in the 1960s and always assumed I couldn't rely on a man for money. DH and I make about the same amount.

16:35 here. Also born in the 60s. Maybe it really is a generation thing.

NP, born in 1966. Never thought for a minute that it was anyone else's job to support me.

Same here. 1967.

Anonymous wrote:What does being born in the 60s vs 70s have to do with anything?

Fo real. I'm 1980 and I can pay for whatever it is I want Thankyou very much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I make my own money. Do you have a high paying career yourself?

No. But by the looks of it, I probably will have to if I want to give my children the life I envision.

Why did you assume you wouldn't have to do so? I'm guessing you were born in the 1970s. I was born in the 1960s and always assumed I couldn't rely on a man for money. DH and I make about the same amount.

16:35 here. Also born in the 60s. Maybe it really is a generation thing.

Me too. Born in the 60s and make more than DH. It is probably a generational thing. On the other hand, our distribution of home labor differs from couples who are 10 years younger than us. Their's is more equal. I don't resent that but I do hate being the default parent, default household runner on top of it though. DH is tail-end boomer, and I am early Gen X (but really boomer sensibility - I remember the moon landing). DH defaults to gender roles without being conscious he is doing it.

What does being born in the 60s vs 70s have to do with anything?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I make my own money. Do you have a high paying career yourself?

No. But by the looks of it, I probably will have to if I want to give my children the life I envision.

Why did you assume you wouldn't have to do so? I'm guessing you were born in the 1970s. I was born in the 1960s and always assumed I couldn't rely on a man for money. DH and I make about the same amount.

16:35 here. Also born in the 60s. Maybe it really is a generation thing.

NP, born in 1966. Never thought for a minute that it was anyone else's job to support me.

I'm sorry OP. This is sad. You should be able to stay home with your kids if you want to.

I wish we both made more money! Or won the lottery.

I did actually go through a period when I was unhappy with the fact that my DH made very little money. I was stupid and decided to work for a big law firm and he decided to go back to school to find something more interesting. I was completely, utterly miserable at my soul-sucking job while he was happily taking classes in a field he loved. He did work during school, but made very little (around $30k/year), so I felt trapped at the law firm until he was done with school. Did I mention I hated the law firm job with the fire of a thousand suns? When he finally was about to graduate, he thought about keeping the same low-paying job that he had during school because he liked it and I really did resent that because he wanted to stay in the area, in the same house, with the same expenses. So it basically would have meant I was tethered to the firm forever. Thank goodness he decided to take another position that paid enough so that I could quit my horrid job and go to a great government position. Together, we now make about what we made when I was at the firm and he was at the low-paying job. I honestly don't know if our marriage would have survived if he had insisted on taking the lower-paying job while expecting our joint income to remain the same. We probably would have ended up divorced and/or I would have had a nervous breakdown.

I wish he did in the sense that if we're going to see so little of him, it would nice to have greater financial freedom. But at the same time, I'd take a cut in his paycheck to see him more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP said 88k combined. That's not really doable for someone to stop working and have a child

My husband's salary was 60K when we decided that I would SAH with our child. It was tight, but we managed.

If OP makes more than her DH, we can be sure that he isn't earning $60K.