Q. How much money should a man make?

A. As much as he legally can.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t wage/hours more relevant as a metric.

The big law/finance high pay for 80 hours isn’t really attractive

200k/70 hours a week is not as impressive as 120k/30hrs a week

I totally agree with this. Some 'high earners' (out of the top law schools etc) are working for minimum wage.

Also - most people I know making statistically high cash at 32 (biglaw, finance in NYC, pharma reps) often weren't able to keep those lives and jobs going full steam by the time 40 hit. The hours in those careers are often brutal, so people do their 5-7 years and then shift out to something more manageable in the long term (in house, govt etc). Now that we're in our 40s, a lot of the people we know making high salaries ($300k and up) had to work their way up slowly, and their salaries at 30 didn't give any hint to their future earnings.

Point is -- what my friends were making at 30 didn't correlate SO strongly with what they are making at 40. Some of the big earners at 30 and moderate earners now. And some of the low earners at 30 are big earners now.

Anecdotally, I think my DH was making $70-80k at 32. He makes $500-700k now depending on bonus. I was making $200k at 32 and am making only a bit more than that now (PT).

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t wage/hours more relevant as a metric.

The big law/finance high pay for 80 hours isn’t really attractive

200k/70 hours a week is not as impressive as 120k/30hrs a week

I totally agree with this. Some 'high earners' (out of the top law schools etc) are working for minimum wage.

The answer for myself is "More than I do." I am a teacher and if a man makes less than I do, I am not interested. Maybe that makes me a snob but I make very little and I don't need someone making a lower salary than myself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was making $220k at 32 but would never share it with a greedy bitch like you. What are you bringing to the table besides a vagina?

Exactly. If I were making 220 at 32, I'd never get married, and would never stay in a relationship for very long. There is nothing but downside risk for a high-income young man marrying.

You obviously haven't read all those threads about how people with HHIs of $300k are barely scraping by if you think $220k is considered high income by people on this weirdo board.

This whole conversation is so bizarre. Is it a drunk teenager looking to pique the olds who started this thread?

I had this same thought. Since when is $150k considered a high income on dcum?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was making $220k at 32 but would never share it with a greedy bitch like you. What are you bringing to the table besides a vagina?

Exactly. If I were making 220 at 32, I'd never get married, and would never stay in a relationship for very long. There is nothing but downside risk for a high-income young man marrying.

You obviously haven't read all those threads about how people with HHIs of $300k are barely scraping by if you think $220k is considered high income by people on this weirdo board.

This whole conversation is so bizarre. Is it a drunk teenager looking to pique the olds who started this thread?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was making $220k at 32 but would never share it with a greedy bitch like you. What are you bringing to the table besides a vagina?

Obviously a charming personality

Says the woman who's only asset is her vagina.

A catch is a guy who doesn't mansplain, who does half the housework, and fields calls from his own mother. I can support myself plus kids, thank you, but a guy with the above mentioned qualities in this town is rare as hen' s teeth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's the least amount a man must make around here to be considered a catch?

I say 150k by 32.

Ok. 99% of women are then lonely

Uh...not in D.C.?

Honestly it depends entirely what circles you run in. I work in finance in NYC as a woman in her late twenties, so $150k would be on the low end, though I wouldn't ever be dismissive over something as superficial as current salary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:01:30 again. You're talking about men as if they're only valuable as a personal ATM.

Because that's how most women here see men.

The more education a woman receives in her life, the more emphasis she places on finding a husband who is a high earner, above all other factors. It's important that they marry well, but more important that they divorce even better.

Wait, but the more education a woman has, the better position she is in to make the money herself. I would expect uneducated women are more desperate to trade their "assets"' for a wealthy spouse. I have two graduate degrees but met my spouse back when I was 22 and poor, as did most of my friends.

$1MM annually plus 5-8MM bonus

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:01:30 again. You're talking about men as if they're only valuable as a personal ATM.

Because that's how most women here see men.

The more education a woman receives in her life, the more emphasis she places on finding a husband who is a high earner, above all other factors. It's important that they marry well, but more important that they divorce even better.

I actually think this is more how most men see themselves. How many threads on here: "he doesn't help with family responsibilities" only to be met with: "bringing in a paycheck is helping."
It has been my experience that most men in their thirties will work their butts off to provide financially for their families even as their wives tell them explicitly over and over again that this isn't the kind of help and support they need. And no one "divorces well." Divorce sucks for everyone involved.

Enough to support a non-working spouse once the kids are born.

Anonymous wrote:01:30 again. You're talking about men as if they're only valuable as a personal ATM.

Because that's how most women here see men.

The more education a woman receives in her life, the more emphasis she places on finding a husband who is a high earner, above all other factors. It's important that they marry well, but more important that they divorce even better.

Isn’t wage/hours more relevant as a metric.

The big law/finance high pay for 80 hours isn’t really attractive

200k/70 hours a week is not as impressive as 120k/30hrs a week