Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daycare is the cost of working split between both parents. It’s not a cost that’s only charged to women. Ugh!!

Well, when your family is completely stressed out because of having 2 working parents and young kids in daycare, and you have very little weekday time with your kids, it starts to feel 'not worth it' for the difference in net HHI.

Depends on your personalities. Neither my DH or I wanted to be a SAHP so we dealt with the stress and fatigue, and then were able to retire in our 50s. Neither of us was willing to work until 67 or 70 just so the other could SAH. Different strokes and all that.

Totally agree. You have to know yourself. My dad just retired at 74 from biglaw and I think we all already wish he hadn’t, including himself. He doesn’t know what to do with all the time he has now, although hopefully he’ll get started on his book soon. Some people don’t like having 40+ years of unstructured time to live through. My parents have always been able to travel extensively and raised a relatively well adjusted family I can’t imagine retiring that young, but zero judgement! We’re all different.

Isn’t it more … retire from career, get a fun job, take classes, volunteer … to stay active and have a schedule.

I really don’t know anybody that worked their career past 62, retiring from 54-62. But then have a hobby job after.

My mom worked the infant room at the JCC.
My dad saved birds and worked “at the golf course”
My brother does pro bono lawyering.
My other brother rehabs motorcycle and donates the proceeds to a charity.

Anonymous wrote:Ok all you people who say they bring their lunch every day....come on! Surely you forget or wake up late and end up with that $13 salad a few times a month.

This has been an interesting look at the lifestyles of DCUM. I know most of DCUM is WFH but surely you all realize that there is a good segment of the workforce who is not? That commuting costs can really hurt a family budget?

But isn’t this true if you SAH. Surely you eat out with the kids too, so it’s a wash.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daycare is the cost of working split between both parents. It’s not a cost that’s only charged to women. Ugh!!

Well, when your family is completely stressed out because of having 2 working parents and young kids in daycare, and you have very little weekday time with your kids, it starts to feel 'not worth it' for the difference in net HHI.

Depends on your personalities. Neither my DH or I wanted to be a SAHP so we dealt with the stress and fatigue, and then were able to retire in our 50s. Neither of us was willing to work until 67 or 70 just so the other could SAH. Different strokes and all that.

Totally agree. You have to know yourself. My dad just retired at 74 from biglaw and I think we all already wish he hadn’t, including himself. He doesn’t know what to do with all the time he has now, although hopefully he’ll get started on his book soon. Some people don’t like having 40+ years of unstructured time to live through. My parents have always been able to travel extensively and raised a relatively well adjusted family I can’t imagine retiring that young, but zero judgement! We’re all different.

Many women are terrified of being mommy tracked. I went part-time when my oldest was 9 months because I couldn't do it anymore and my boss warned me that I could forget about being promoted ever again. My boss and her boss are both childless women and have been unsympathetic. I will probably just start over at a new hospital when my kids are older and hope I can get my career on track. I don't particularly care because for me this was 100 percent worth it. I love going places with my kids during the week.

Ok all you people who say they bring their lunch every day....come on! Surely you forget or wake up late and end up with that $13 salad a few times a month.

This has been an interesting look at the lifestyles of DCUM. I know most of DCUM is WFH but surely you all realize that there is a good segment of the workforce who is not? That commuting costs can really hurt a family budget?

Anonymous wrote:To be honest when my wife stopped working we estimated the first 60k of income was lost due to added expenses.

But it is more than that. Once my wife stopped working I could work late, join outside professional organizations, work longer hours. Be available. Not always as not necessary. But I was not the run out the door type.

Out of all my family and cousins my brother and I have the highest HHI with SAHM wives. I no longer make big money. But I was making 400k for a 15 year run that started when my kids were 6, 4 and a new born. No way could we manage that HHI with both working with 3 kids. Childcare, maid, take out, commute would have been nightmare and neither of us would have held a high paying job.

My brother has held down a 400k to 650k job for 23 years. His. Wife quit when oldest was 1.

Absentee parent = priceless

Thought I would try this...

From the OP:

Daycare - $3300 (though part of that is preschool I would have likely had to pay for, at least a few days a week)
Commute - Gas, wear and tear (?) - $100
Parking - $120
Cleaning Services - $400
Clothing - $200 (suits, dress shoes etc)
Dry Cleaning - $100
Lunches - $80
Coffees/Breakfast on the Run - $30
Takeout - $200

Mine:

Daycare - $0 (teenagers)
Commute - Gas, wear and tear (?) - $100- probably the same
Parking - $0 (free parking at work)
Cleaning Services - $300- not sure if we would keep if I was SAH, but probably would
Clothing - $0 (I'm putting zero because I wear what I would wear if SAH)
Dry Cleaning - $0
Lunches - $0 (I bring lunch- no options at work unless I drive somewhere)
Coffees/Breakfast on the Run - $0
Takeout - $0

Anonymous wrote:I paid $36K a year for childcare and make $180K. this seems like stupid math. Plus my husband makes the same as me so we are both able to work.

So you are rich. The math works different when you are not. And yes, it is stupid! But not for the reasons you think.

Anonymous wrote:The biggest cost to us was time and flexibility. Our schedules were the time equivalent of living paycheck to paycheck. Any little thing (sick kid, flat tire, etc.), and we were in a panic. There was just no reserve.

Now I work part time, and I have periods of time that aren't already scheduled or dedicated to anything. This gives us both a little wiggle room.

Very valuable point.

A lot of people make these sweeping statements about WOH or SAH moms and the things is: it depends so much on your jobs, what other supports you have, your finances, etc.

My DH and I both had very time-inflexible jobs when we had our kid. It was painful. It leads to a lot of conversations that feel like they boil down to whose job matters the most, when really what you are arguing over is who can more feasibly leave work 30 minutes early or get their 30 minutes late, or take a sick day, etc. Negotiating that constantly is exhausting. And daycares are rigid about drop off and pick up, plus you have t pack up your kids whole life every day and follow all their rules... it's exhausting. Life got so much better when I quit and started doing a flexible PT work instead. No more conflict. No more stress over drop-off or pick-up. No more worry that so-and-sos boss isn't going to be happy about this sick day or whatever. It's a massive relief.

Often when I meet women who are adamant that mothers should work full time, it turns out that either they or their DH has the kind of work flexibility where they can work from home whenever they need to, or they make enough money to afford a nanny or on-demand childcare, or they have family nearby who can provide childcare or do daycare pickup with no notice. That's great! We didn't have any of that. The best thing for our well being was for one of us to leave our jobs and then work part-time as the child got older and started school. It was me because (1) I made less money (2) I had more options for PT work in my field (3) I actually really enjoyed being home with our DC, much more than my DH did.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution. It would be interesting if we had subsidized childcare and/or real workplace protections for families (that would keep parents from being penalized for things like leaving early to pick up kids or needing to take a day off to care for a sick kid). But we don't. I made the best choice for my family given reality, and I have zero regrets.

I paid $36K a year for childcare and make $180K. this seems like stupid math. Plus my husband makes the same as me so we are both able to work.

The biggest cost to us was time and flexibility. Our schedules were the time equivalent of living paycheck to paycheck. Any little thing (sick kid, flat tire, etc.), and we were in a panic. There was just no reserve.

Now I work part time, and I have periods of time that aren't already scheduled or dedicated to anything. This gives us both a little wiggle room.

To be honest when my wife stopped working we estimated the first 60k of income was lost due to added expenses.

But it is more than that. Once my wife stopped working I could work late, join outside professional organizations, work longer hours. Be available. Not always as not necessary. But I was not the run out the door type.

Out of all my family and cousins my brother and I have the highest HHI with SAHM wives. I no longer make big money. But I was making 400k for a 15 year run that started when my kids were 6, 4 and a new born. No way could we manage that HHI with both working with 3 kids. Childcare, maid, take out, commute would have been nightmare and neither of us would have held a high paying job.

My brother has held down a 400k to 650k job for 23 years. His. Wife quit when oldest was 1.

Anonymous wrote:

I also think SAHP sometimes think they will never spend on convenience, but they often spend more on 'needing to get out of the house' than WOHP. I think people should work/stay at home because of what they want for their family but it is almost always financially better to work.

Yes, this. I knew so many SAHP who got very expensive gym memberships and "classes" at the gym or elsewhere that they refused to call daycare but were in fact daycare. There is NOTHING wrong with that but it's never zero cost to stay at home.

Come on. I had a pretty expensive family gym membership and it was 300 a month for my family. That included 3 hours of childcare daily. Yes, it gave me a break and my kids got to play with with other kids and take classes like gymnastics and ballet. But it’s a tiny fraction of what daycare would cost. Daycare would have been 3K —5K for the two kids.

Anonymous wrote:The point about social security is worth considering- taking into account odds for a long life, etc. but also, thinking long term - what’s the physical toll of any stress the partner who stays home avoids, and does that affect quality of life in older years? Also if a couple is able to save, can they invest in an index fund for example to offset the social security loss?

SAH was more stressful for me than WOH.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't forget compound interest for retirement contributions made while working - that is a negative cost. I.e., a gain.

I am past the days of working in an office with small children. I now work remotely full time (started 2 years before Covid). But we did the calculations when we had 4 kids under 10. With childcare costs, commute and dry cleaning I was not really bringing home much $. But there was enough for me to fully fund my 401K and my company had a very generous matching at the time of 10% of my salary. When we compared the costs of me working and staying home that is what tipped it to me working. We also realized that when I was home on mat leave I would spend more at places like Target on things we didn't need but I was going to get out of the house. So that cost balanced out me eating out at work once in a while. When we sat down to do this comparison I had been taking the metro to work because parking seemed so expensive. After this analysis I started driving to work. The amount of time spent taking a bus and metro was worth way more than the cost of gas and parking.

Or ...folks just starting their families can opt for 1 or 2 kids instead of 4.