Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised to hear "so many men" want their wives to SAH. I think some baby boomers may, but for most younger people all of that went out the window with present-day economic realities.
Then why are there so many SAHMs in this area???
Because this area is relatively affluent and not representative of the country at large.
Anonymous wrote:Do people really get the impression that lots of men want SAH wives? Or working wives? I think often it's a combination of circumstances and the wife's wishes.
Yes, there are people who say "My husband would NEVER want to be married to someone who doesn't work" or "My husband LOVES that I stay at home" but I always wonder what those people are boasting about, since life changes so much and the whole point of marriage is to stick together through thick and thin. Just because someone works doesn't mean they're ambitious, and just because someone stays at home doesn't mean they're doing your laundry and cooking...
Ideally, I want a spouse who is happy and satisfied and has a full and rich life, and I don't want to have to worry about finances. I want my kids to be cared for and to feel secure and loved.
WOH, SAH...those labels are not predictors of any of the above. And many people, when they get married, have no true idea of what life is going to be like with children, where they're going to be in their careers, and what is going to work for their family.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised to hear "so many men" want their wives to SAH. I think some baby boomers may, but for most younger people all of that went out the window with present-day economic realities.
Man here with SAH wife. Not sure I realized I wanted one till wife decided to stay home after first kid. Sort of like how you have no clue what it will be like having kids till you have them. I make a decent salary, my wife was making about 60k per year, so when you tax her income at my highest rate, then add in extra costs of work stuff and meals out that come with dual working spouses, the extra money from her job was somewhat negligible. Our house runs smoothly. We relax once kids are in bed.
If she wanted to go back to work, I would support her. But all else equal, I much prefer having a SAH wife.
The flat in this is that she isn't saving for retirement. She could invest 18k a year tax free if she had a job. Over many years this adds up. Same with social security. Your wife will be severely disadvantaged come retirement age just so that your house runs smoothly. Pretty selfish imho.
Np. I am a SAHM and we invest $100k a year extra for retirement. Plus we max out any tax advantage vehicles open to us (one 401k, 2 IRAs, and one HSA). Why would you assume they are not?
Because you can't invest in a 401k with pre-tax money if you don't have a job. That's great you and your husband invest a lot. We do as well. However you still won't have your own retirement account and you aren't paying into social security. If you end up divorced you'll end up working at Walmart. The 5k a year ira isn't going to do much. The money you invest isn't protected like retirement money and is owned by both of you. Whereas your husband owns the 401k and he also is paying into social security. You're at a disadvantage.
Well we don't count on SS in our retirement figures. If we divorce, I will take half of DH's 401k and other retirement accounts AND the equity he owns in his business which is worth several million dollars. We both pay taxes on these stocks so we own them jointly. A divorce would be very expensive for him. You don't need to worry about me. Thanks for your fake concern though![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I wish my wife would go back to work. 2 401ks at the least would make an enormous impact on retirement.
Who would have raised your children before they were old enough for school? Daycare? (Perhaps you missed the thread about "The Hell of American Daycare"?) A sitter off the street? Who? You?
You had best kiss your wife's feet for doing the work that few people actually *want* to do.
And before you make any assumptions about me, I'm a single mother.
We raised our kids you ding bat.
Anonymous wrote:Do people actually think SS will still be around? That's silly.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised to hear "so many men" want their wives to SAH. I think some baby boomers may, but for most younger people all of that went out the window with present-day economic realities.
Man here with SAH wife. Not sure I realized I wanted one till wife decided to stay home after first kid. Sort of like how you have no clue what it will be like having kids till you have them. I make a decent salary, my wife was making about 60k per year, so when you tax her income at my highest rate, then add in extra costs of work stuff and meals out that come with dual working spouses, the extra money from her job was somewhat negligible. Our house runs smoothly. We relax once kids are in bed.
If she wanted to go back to work, I would support her. But all else equal, I much prefer having a SAH wife.
The flat in this is that she isn't saving for retirement. She could invest 18k a year tax free if she had a job. Over many years this adds up. Same with social security. Your wife will be severely disadvantaged come retirement age just so that your house runs smoothly. Pretty selfish imho.
Np. I am a SAHM and we invest $100k a year extra for retirement. Plus we max out any tax advantage vehicles open to us (one 401k, 2 IRAs, and one HSA). Why would you assume they are not?
Because you can't invest in a 401k with pre-tax money if you don't have a job. That's great you and your husband invest a lot. We do as well. However you still won't have your own retirement account and you aren't paying into social security. If you end up divorced you'll end up working at Walmart. The 5k a year ira isn't going to do much. The money you invest isn't protected like retirement money and is owned by both of you. Whereas your husband owns the 401k and he also is paying into social security. You're at a disadvantage.
Anonymous wrote:Do people actually think SS will still be around? That's silly.
Anonymous wrote:Do people actually think SS will still be around? That's silly.
Yeah, people actually think that. I can't believe this either
Anonymous wrote:Is this thread a joke? Why would a man want to come home to a home cooked meal, a peaceful house, a relaxed spouse and all the bills, chores and other household things taken care of?
What person, man or woman, wouldn't want that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised to hear "so many men" want their wives to SAH. I think some baby boomers may, but for most younger people all of that went out the window with present-day economic realities.
Man here with SAH wife. Not sure I realized I wanted one till wife decided to stay home after first kid. Sort of like how you have no clue what it will be like having kids till you have them. I make a decent salary, my wife was making about 60k per year, so when you tax her income at my highest rate, then add in extra costs of work stuff and meals out that come with dual working spouses, the extra money from her job was somewhat negligible. Our house runs smoothly. We relax once kids are in bed.
If she wanted to go back to work, I would support her. But all else equal, I much prefer having a SAH wife.
The flat in this is that she isn't saving for retirement. She could invest 18k a year tax free if she had a job. Over many years this adds up. Same with social security. Your wife will be severely disadvantaged come retirement age just so that your house runs smoothly. Pretty selfish imho.
Np. I am a SAHM and we invest $100k a year extra for retirement. Plus we max out any tax advantage vehicles open to us (one 401k, 2 IRAs, and one HSA). Why would you assume they are not?
Because you can't invest in a 401k with pre-tax money if you don't have a job. That's great you and your husband invest a lot. We do as well. However you still won't have your own retirement account and you aren't paying into social security. If you end up divorced you'll end up working at Walmart. The 5k a year ira isn't going to do much. The money you invest isn't protected like retirement money and is owned by both of you. Whereas your husband owns the 401k and he also is paying into social security. You're at a disadvantage.
Anonymous wrote:
Because you can't invest in a 401k with pre-tax money if you don't have a job. That's great you and your husband invest a lot. We do as well. However you still won't have your own retirement account and you aren't paying into social security. If you end up divorced you'll end up working at Walmart. The 5k a year ira isn't going to do much. The money you invest isn't protected like retirement money and is owned by both of you. Whereas your husband owns the 401k and he also is paying into social security. You're at a disadvantage.