Anonymous wrote:Was i lower middle class growing up? No. When I was married and not working , I had zero income. Not sure what you mean.

How did I protect myself financially? I didn't, I relied on the law to do that. It didn't do a great job of it and I'm too proud to rely on alimony so I got a job and made it work. Lots of women do this ~ usually because we have to, sometimes just because we can and will do anything for our kids. I made sacrifices for them and would do it again, and now I get to show them that we focus on what is important to us and we work hard to do it. It wasn't easy being a SAHM of lots of young kids with a financially and emotionally and verbally abusive spouse, and it isn't easy being a working mom with a high income and no partner, but we grow and change and do whatever we believe is best for our children in any given scenario. We all do ~ working mom or SAHM or in between part time mom or moms who start their own gig or moms who do what they believe makes them good moms.

SAHM are no different in that regard, people here just seem to love to lavish faux concern about their intelligence and future options/work/hustle. The "must be nice till your husband leaves you for a younger thing and you work for miminum wage" posters seem to fetishize a riches to rags story for women who this happens to, so I enjoy showing them that the same motivation that it took to care for young kids round the clock is easy applied in other venues, only now they benefit me and my kids financially instead of just in terms of emotional support and stability. My ex is dating a low income earner with multiple kids, I'm dating a high earning man. Its much easier to find high earning men than it is to find high earning women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was i lower middle class growing up? No. When I was married and not working , I had zero income. Not sure what you mean.

How did I protect myself financially? I didn't, I relied on the law to do that. It didn't do a great job of it and I'm too proud to rely on alimony so I got a job and made it work. Lots of women do this ~ usually because we have to, sometimes just because we can and will do anything for our kids. I made sacrifices for them and would do it again, and now I get to show them that we focus on what is important to us and we work hard to do it. It wasn't easy being a SAHM of lots of young kids with a financially and emotionally and verbally abusive spouse, and it isn't easy being a working mom with a high income and no partner, but we grow and change and do whatever we believe is best for our children in any given scenario. We all do ~ working mom or SAHM or in between part time mom or moms who start their own gig or moms who do what they believe makes them good moms.

SAHM are no different in that regard, people here just seem to love to lavish faux concern about their intelligence and future options/work/hustle. The "must be nice till your husband leaves you for a younger thing and you work for miminum wage" posters seem to fetishize a riches to rags story for women who this happens to, so I enjoy showing them that the same motivation that it took to care for young kids round the clock is easy applied in other venues, only now they benefit me and my kids financially instead of just in terms of emotional support and stability. My ex is dating a low income earner with multiple kids, I'm dating a high earning man. Its much easier to find high earning men than it is to find high earning women.

What kind of work do you do? Do you think your $374K with no college degree is something most women could duplicate?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband maxes out on SS contributions ($300k + income) and I mostly SAH but sometimes substitute teach. When we collect SS, he will receive the max payout, and I will take a “spousal” on him which will equal 50% of his because mine alone would be much lower.

So we will collect 150% of the individual maximum. 2 high earners would each collect 100%, so more than my husband and I.

Those two high earners contributed to SS. You didn’t contribute most of what you plan to take.

Anonymous wrote:Was i lower middle class growing up? No. When I was married and not working , I had zero income. Not sure what you mean.

How did I protect myself financially? I didn't, I relied on the law to do that. It didn't do a great job of it and I'm too proud to rely on alimony so I got a job and made it work. Lots of women do this ~ usually because we have to, sometimes just because we can and will do anything for our kids. I made sacrifices for them and would do it again, and now I get to show them that we focus on what is important to us and we work hard to do it. It wasn't easy being a SAHM of lots of young kids with a financially and emotionally and verbally abusive spouse, and it isn't easy being a working mom with a high income and no partner, but we grow and change and do whatever we believe is best for our children in any given scenario. We all do ~ working mom or SAHM or in between part time mom or moms who start their own gig or moms who do what they believe makes them good moms.

SAHM are no different in that regard, people here just seem to love to lavish faux concern about their intelligence and future options/work/hustle. The "must be nice till your husband leaves you for a younger thing and you work for miminum wage" posters seem to fetishize a riches to rags story for women who this happens to, so I enjoy showing them that the same motivation that it took to care for young kids round the clock is easy applied in other venues, only now they benefit me and my kids financially instead of just in terms of emotional support and stability. My ex is dating a low income earner with multiple kids, I'm dating a high earning man. Its much easier to find high earning men than it is to find high earning women.

Anonymous wrote:My husband maxes out on SS contributions ($300k + income) and I mostly SAH but sometimes substitute teach. When we collect SS, he will receive the max payout, and I will take a “spousal” on him which will equal 50% of his because mine alone would be much lower.

So we will collect 150% of the individual maximum. 2 high earners would each collect 100%, so more than my husband and I.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be worthwhile to hear from SAHMs who are from lower middle class or below, with no college education or employable skills.

I have no college education stayed him for 10 years and made $374,000 last year. What would you like to hear about?

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be worthwhile to hear from SAHMs who are from lower middle class or below, with no college education or employable skills.

Anonymous wrote:

So basically you think that dual income couples are the only married people who deserve to get a full social security benefit. Couples who choose to have a SAH spouse should each take 1/2 of the working spouse's benefit.

What about dual income couples who have a large disparity in income. Maybe he earns 80K and she watches the kids during the day and works retail at night only bring in 15K/year for 20 years. You think that in that example, the husband should get social security based on his 80K income and she should get a benefit based on her 15K income? Because, you know, you work so much harder than she does.....(ha!)

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife has not worked in 20 years. She came into marriage 20k cash and a Toyota with a loan.

My net worth was 100k

Today our net worth 5 million of which she gets 2.5 million in divorce. She also collects my full SS as married over 10 year

. +1. This is DH and I, the numbers are slightly different, but in the same ballparks. Plus, I have a small pension from before- which would e split or accounted.

We need to stop paying SS to those that did not contribute to the fund.

+1000.

A spousal SS is only half of the primary. You have to choose between your own, or half of your spouses.

If you worked. If you never worked, or didn’t work enough to qualify for SS, you still are eligible for up to half of your spouses (or ex-spouses benefit). That is what PPs are referring to when they say we need to get rid of the benefit. We are paying SS to people who never worked. And it’s not like their spouse paid in 1.5 x their contribution to offset what will be withdrawn.

At a very general level, we all benefit as a society from the unpaid labor of SAHMs, who frequently (but obviously not always) take on additional work helping out in our schools, local communities, etc. Perhaps spousal SS payments are not the best and most efficient way to provide some minimal support to those individuals, but it's certainly the one that's best baked into our current system.

Oh please. I work and pay taxes, which includes SS that some housewife will get when she retires (snort). I also pay for childcare and contribute to someone else’s income and their taxes. Once the kids are in school, there isn’t much to contribute outside of filling Pilates classes and tennis lessons.
If you are wealthy enough to be a housewife, you are wealthy enough to forgo collecting SS you haven’t paid into.

I'm a SAH spouse and I paid into social security and I have earned my own benefit. I have also been married for 10+ years and qualify for a spousal benefit (1/2 of my spouse's benefit). I will either collect my own benefit or my spousal benefit, whichever is highest. If you've been married for 10+ years, you'll get the same deal. It's not like I'm getting something special that you aren't.

Right. We are discussing getting rid of the spousal benefit for everyone

And I do not agree with that at all. Marriage is a legal union and there are benefits and protections that come with that union.

Sure marriage is a legal union. But why should it permit people to withdraw from a savings program they haven’t paid into? Should my husband’s 401K match be offered to me because I am his spouse?

You do not think that your husband's 401K should go to you if he dies? Maybe it should be divided up among his coworkers instead?

Apples and oranges. With a 401k you would receive your husbands contributions and associated growth. What he puts in comes back to him (or his beneficiaries). A SAHM can collect 50% of her husbands benefit while the husband collects 100% of his benefit. The wife never contributed. Why do you think you are entitled to receive a benefit you never contributed toward?

You can contribute to a family in many ways that are not financial.

No one is arguing otherwise. Why do you think the government, and working citizens, should financially find you?

So basically you think that dual income couples are the only married people who deserve to get a full social security benefit. Couples who choose to have a SAH spouse should each take 1/2 of the working spouse's benefit.

What about dual income couples who have a large disparity in income. Maybe he earns 80K and she watches the kids during the day and works retail at night only bring in 15K/year for 20 years. You think that in that example, the husband should get social security based on his 80K income and she should get a benefit based on her 15K income? Because, you know, you work so much harder than she does.....(ha!)

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife has not worked in 20 years. She came into marriage 20k cash and a Toyota with a loan.

My net worth was 100k

Today our net worth 5 million of which she gets 2.5 million in divorce. She also collects my full SS as married over 10 year

. +1. This is DH and I, the numbers are slightly different, but in the same ballparks. Plus, I have a small pension from before- which would e split or accounted.

We need to stop paying SS to those that did not contribute to the fund.

+1000.

A spousal SS is only half of the primary. You have to choose between your own, or half of your spouses.

If you worked. If you never worked, or didn’t work enough to qualify for SS, you still are eligible for up to half of your spouses (or ex-spouses benefit). That is what PPs are referring to when they say we need to get rid of the benefit. We are paying SS to people who never worked. And it’s not like their spouse paid in 1.5 x their contribution to offset what will be withdrawn.

At a very general level, we all benefit as a society from the unpaid labor of SAHMs, who frequently (but obviously not always) take on additional work helping out in our schools, local communities, etc. Perhaps spousal SS payments are not the best and most efficient way to provide some minimal support to those individuals, but it's certainly the one that's best baked into our current system.

Oh please. I work and pay taxes, which includes SS that some housewife will get when she retires (snort). I also pay for childcare and contribute to someone else’s income and their taxes. Once the kids are in school, there isn’t much to contribute outside of filling Pilates classes and tennis lessons.
If you are wealthy enough to be a housewife, you are wealthy enough to forgo collecting SS you haven’t paid into.

I'm a SAH spouse and I paid into social security and I have earned my own benefit. I have also been married for 10+ years and qualify for a spousal benefit (1/2 of my spouse's benefit). I will either collect my own benefit or my spousal benefit, whichever is highest. If you've been married for 10+ years, you'll get the same deal. It's not like I'm getting something special that you aren't.

Right. We are discussing getting rid of the spousal benefit for everyone

And I do not agree with that at all. Marriage is a legal union and there are benefits and protections that come with that union.

Sure marriage is a legal union. But why should it permit people to withdraw from a savings program they haven’t paid into? Should my husband’s 401K match be offered to me because I am his spouse?

You do not think that your husband's 401K should go to you if he dies? Maybe it should be divided up among his coworkers instead?

Apples and oranges. With a 401k you would receive your husbands contributions and associated growth. What he puts in comes back to him (or his beneficiaries). A SAHM can collect 50% of her husbands benefit while the husband collects 100% of his benefit. The wife never contributed. Why do you think you are entitled to receive a benefit you never contributed toward?

You can contribute to a family in many ways that are not financial.

No one is arguing otherwise. Why do you think the government, and working citizens, should financially find you?

So basically you think that dual income couples are the only married people who deserve to get a full social security benefit. Couples who choose to have a SAH spouse should each take 1/2 of the working spouse's benefit.

What about dual income couples who have a large disparity in income. Maybe he earns 80K and she watches the kids during the day and works retail at night only bring in 15K/year for 20 years. You think that in that example, the husband should get social security based on his 80K income and she should get a benefit based on her 15K income? Because, you know, you work so much harder than she does.....(ha!)

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife has not worked in 20 years. She came into marriage 20k cash and a Toyota with a loan.

My net worth was 100k

Today our net worth 5 million of which she gets 2.5 million in divorce. She also collects my full SS as married over 10 year

. +1. This is DH and I, the numbers are slightly different, but in the same ballparks. Plus, I have a small pension from before- which would e split or accounted.

We need to stop paying SS to those that did not contribute to the fund.

+1000.

A spousal SS is only half of the primary. You have to choose between your own, or half of your spouses.

If you worked. If you never worked, or didn’t work enough to qualify for SS, you still are eligible for up to half of your spouses (or ex-spouses benefit). That is what PPs are referring to when they say we need to get rid of the benefit. We are paying SS to people who never worked. And it’s not like their spouse paid in 1.5 x their contribution to offset what will be withdrawn.

At a very general level, we all benefit as a society from the unpaid labor of SAHMs, who frequently (but obviously not always) take on additional work helping out in our schools, local communities, etc. Perhaps spousal SS payments are not the best and most efficient way to provide some minimal support to those individuals, but it's certainly the one that's best baked into our current system.

Oh please. I work and pay taxes, which includes SS that some housewife will get when she retires (snort). I also pay for childcare and contribute to someone else’s income and their taxes. Once the kids are in school, there isn’t much to contribute outside of filling Pilates classes and tennis lessons.
If you are wealthy enough to be a housewife, you are wealthy enough to forgo collecting SS you haven’t paid into.

I'm a SAH spouse and I paid into social security and I have earned my own benefit. I have also been married for 10+ years and qualify for a spousal benefit (1/2 of my spouse's benefit). I will either collect my own benefit or my spousal benefit, whichever is highest. If you've been married for 10+ years, you'll get the same deal. It's not like I'm getting something special that you aren't.

Right. We are discussing getting rid of the spousal benefit for everyone

And I do not agree with that at all. Marriage is a legal union and there are benefits and protections that come with that union.

Sure marriage is a legal union. But why should it permit people to withdraw from a savings program they haven’t paid into? Should my husband’s 401K match be offered to me because I am his spouse?

You do not think that your husband's 401K should go to you if he dies? Maybe it should be divided up among his coworkers instead?

Apples and oranges. With a 401k you would receive your husbands contributions and associated growth. What he puts in comes back to him (or his beneficiaries). A SAHM can collect 50% of her husbands benefit while the husband collects 100% of his benefit. The wife never contributed. Why do you think you are entitled to receive a benefit you never contributed toward?

You can contribute to a family in many ways that are not financial.

No one is arguing otherwise. Why do you think the government, and working citizens, should financially find you?

So basically you think that dual income couples are the only married people who deserve to get a full social security benefit. Couples who choose to have a SAH spouse should each take 1/2 of the working spouse's benefit.

What about dual income couples who have a large disparity in income. Maybe he earns 80K and she watches the kids during the day and works retail at night only bring in 15K/year for 20 years. You think that in that example, the husband should get social security based on his 80K income and she should get a benefit based on her 15K income? Because, you know, you work so much harder than she does.....(ha!)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that no one wants to think of a marriage ending but i just saw a post about a SAHM who wants to leave her husband but financially it seems too difficult. If you are a SAHM who is helping advance husband’s career by taking on the brunt of childcare and housework do you have a post nup agreement? Does he put money into a bank account for you that only you can access? Can you live off alimony if you divorce?

Most Wohms make pitiful amounts of money and cannot have the same standard of living if they divorced. If you are working, you also get less alimony.

I WOH and don't consider $165K a year and good benefits to be "pitiful." But whatevs.

well, I don’t consider you representative of all women. But whatevs.

You maayyyyyy want to consider your audience before posting. You may want to consider that DCUM is by and large a site frequented by well-to-do DC dwellers. Just a thought.