Anonymous wrote:To everyone who was able to keep working, even if you were "losing" money at the time, how did you do it? I am legitimately curious. We would have literally depleted all of our savings in some of these scenarios described.

We are a 2 income household. Did not look at it just from the mom's income. The reason we lost money is because we continued to both contribute the max to our 401Ks. We had our eye on the big picture, not just the moment in time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I had my first child I was making 55k/yr. I was also contributing the max into my 401k, which was 15k. After all that I was only netting $2300/mo. 1200/no was going towards daycare. I then had a commute, lunches out and at that job had to dress in business clothes (casual only allowed on fridays). 3 years after my 1st son was born I was making 110k and then came my other son and a nanny that cost (at a bargain rate) of $600/wk plus PT preschool for my oldest. My kids are now 12 and 15 and I’m making 275k/yr and have over 1M in my 401k and have 200k in my mega Roth. I also have the peace of mind knowing if my DH lost his job or fell I’ll I would be able to support my family on my own.

The bigger question is how much in future earnings would not working those early years have cost me?

In what year were you paying $1200 for full time childcare? When we started looking at daycare in 2017 the cheapest option I found was $1900 and I felt it was overcrowded and not an option for us. Every other provider I found was 2400+/ month and that just goes up every year.

This was a home daycare in 2006-2009, $300/wk. I'm still in touch with her and she now charges $350/wk.

My kids are now 12 and 15. I have worked the whole time, save for a 3 month layoff. OP... I'm tired. Two parents working Washington DC-type hours is exhausting. I have to be honest and say that I VERY MUCH enjoyed my short layoff where I got to be a SAHM of school-aged children. I don't think I have ever been as well-rested and content as I was during that time. SAHM of school aged kids is a GREAT GIG. The kids are still needy enough to keep you busy, but you actually have a minute to breathe and take care of yourself. I went back to work because of my own hangups with regard to having my own income and being able to support my family on my own if I should need to, but I'm not going to lie and tell you that it is fun. If you are VERY secure in your marriage, have a spouse that brings in enough money to fully fund kids educations PLUS fully fund a comfortable retirement, only then would I consider quitting your job, regardless of how much you bring in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were paying $2560 per month when I was bringing home $1800 a month. Only for a few years were we losing money, but worth every penny for my sanity

It's really great that you could afford to do that. Lots of people don't have an extra $850 a month. Even on a mid six figure income we would not have been able to swing that. But glad it worked for you.

You make $400-600k/year and can't afford $850/month? What?

Maybe they mean $150k?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are two different questions.

Break even isn’t necessarily the same as worth it.

People often make this mistake - they figure that working isn’t worth it because 90% of their compensation goes to pay a nanny. They forget that in a decade their nanny won’t exist and they’ll be making 3X what they were back then.

But to answer break even for us was about $5000 a month, after tax. At the time it was probably about $90K a year or so pre tax.

But case in point, I now make $280K. So I’m glad I kept working. My friends who didn’t are puttering around at $70.

Lol, most people's incomes don't triple in a decade.

many do. my DC's has tripled in 7 years as have most of her work friends'.

Maybe fork just starting out, but most people aren’t going from $100k at 5 years to $300k ever.

We paid about $35k/year for full-time childcare for two (youngest now in K). I agree with others that what you spend on office clothes/food is discretionary for most people and that you should consider the long-term impacts of taking a break. As another poster alluded too, whether there is a parent who wants to stay home also matters a lot. My family could have squeaked by with one parent at home full-time, but that was not appealing for either of us while it's obviously very important and meaningful for others. All that is to say the decision should be more holistic than trying to calculate a current break-even point (not to say you're doing that since you just asked a question!).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were paying $2560 per month when I was bringing home $1800 a month. Only for a few years were we losing money, but worth every penny for my sanity

It's really great that you could afford to do that. Lots of people don't have an extra $850 a month. Even on a mid six figure income we would not have been able to swing that. But glad it worked for you.

You make $400-600k/year and can't afford $850/month? What?

PP here, meant mid 100s

To everyone who was able to keep working, even if you were "losing" money at the time, how did you do it? I am legitimately curious. We would have literally depleted all of our savings in some of these scenarios described.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were paying $2560 per month when I was bringing home $1800 a month. Only for a few years were we losing money, but worth every penny for my sanity

It's really great that you could afford to do that. Lots of people don't have an extra $850 a month. Even on a mid six figure income we would not have been able to swing that. But glad it worked for you.

You make $400-600k/year and can't afford $850/month? What?

Anonymous wrote:We were paying $2560 per month when I was bringing home $1800 a month. Only for a few years were we losing money, but worth every penny for my sanity

It's really great that you could afford to do that. Lots of people don't have an extra $850 a month. Even on a mid six figure income we would not have been able to swing that. But glad it worked for you.

We need $300k net after taxes. So many things add up, like Private school, college savings, child care, kids' activities, and taking care of my in-laws.

One earner, 250.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are two different questions.

Break even isn’t necessarily the same as worth it.

People often make this mistake - they figure that working isn’t worth it because 90% of their compensation goes to pay a nanny. They forget that in a decade their nanny won’t exist and they’ll be making 3X what they were back then.

But to answer break even for us was about $5000 a month, after tax. At the time it was probably about $90K a year or so pre tax.

But case in point, I now make $280K. So I’m glad I kept working. My friends who didn’t are puttering around at $70.

Lol, most people's incomes don't triple in a decade.

many do. my DC's has tripled in 7 years as have most of her work friends'.