Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who make $450k and above HHI: Do you have time to spend breakfast, dinner and weekends with your children? My only consolation from not earning 3 times what I earn is that I get to work a relatively strict 40h workweek with typical fed vacation time, and can contribute to raising my children. I do realize that daycare does most of the raising, but I can't see a job where our HHI would pop over $300k and we'd still work simple 40 h workweeks.

If it makes you feel better, DH only sees the kids on the weekend. But I SAH so they're not completely missing out on parental interaction.

Yeah- that would depress the fuck out of me.

We make less than half - about $200K per year, but b/c we're both teachers, we see the kids after school and have them all summer long! We have our nanny do morning care b/c we both leave very early for work.

wouldn't trade that for the world

I'm not used to having a father who's not involved. We had a family business. So my father was always around - or we were at work with him. I wouldn't trade those memories for all of the money in the world.

It would depress the fuck out of me to make 200k.

enjoy never seeing your kids then.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who make $450k and above HHI: Do you have time to spend breakfast, dinner and weekends with your children? My only consolation from not earning 3 times what I earn is that I get to work a relatively strict 40h workweek with typical fed vacation time, and can contribute to raising my children. I do realize that daycare does most of the raising, but I can't see a job where our HHI would pop over $300k and we'd still work simple 40 h workweeks.

If it makes you feel better, DH only sees the kids on the weekend. But I SAH so they're not completely missing out on parental interaction.

Yeah- that would depress the fuck out of me.

We make less than half - about $200K per year, but b/c we're both teachers, we see the kids after school and have them all summer long! We have our nanny do morning care b/c we both leave very early for work.

wouldn't trade that for the world

I'm not used to having a father who's not involved. We had a family business. So my father was always around - or we were at work with him. I wouldn't trade those memories for all of the money in the world.

It would depress the fuck out of me to make 200k.

sorry - But we're living w/in our means.

no regrets here - But when your kids have fond memories of their caretakers and not their parents, let's see if depression sets in.

I am happy to spend time with my children AND to have a job I enjoy that doesn't suck the life out of me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who make $450k and above HHI: Do you have time to spend breakfast, dinner and weekends with your children? My only consolation from not earning 3 times what I earn is that I get to work a relatively strict 40h workweek with typical fed vacation time, and can contribute to raising my children. I do realize that daycare does most of the raising, but I can't see a job where our HHI would pop over $300k and we'd still work simple 40 h workweeks.

If it makes you feel better, DH only sees the kids on the weekend. But I SAH so they're not completely missing out on parental interaction.

Yeah- that would depress the fuck out of me.

We make less than half - about $200K per year, but b/c we're both teachers, we see the kids after school and have them all summer long! We have our nanny do morning care b/c we both leave very early for work.

wouldn't trade that for the world

I'm not used to having a father who's not involved. We had a family business. So my father was always around - or we were at work with him. I wouldn't trade those memories for all of the money in the world.

It would depress the fuck out of me to make 200k.

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who make $450k and above HHI: Do you have time to spend breakfast, dinner and weekends with your children? My only consolation from not earning 3 times what I earn is that I get to work a relatively strict 40h workweek with typical fed vacation time, and can contribute to raising my children. I do realize that daycare does most of the raising, but I can't see a job where our HHI would pop over $300k and we'd still work simple 40 h workweeks.

Yes. My husband has breakfast with the kids (I leave while he's making their breakfast). Unless one of the kids has a sports practice or other activity, we eat together. I work 45 hours a week, my husband works 40. If we don't eat dinner as a family, it's not due to either of us working late. Our HHI is around $460,000 but we have both been in the workforce for over 20 years and didn't have kids until our mid 30s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who make $450k and above HHI: Do you have time to spend breakfast, dinner and weekends with your children? My only consolation from not earning 3 times what I earn is that I get to work a relatively strict 40h workweek with typical fed vacation time, and can contribute to raising my children. I do realize that daycare does most of the raising, but I can't see a job where our HHI would pop over $300k and we'd still work simple 40 h workweeks.

If it makes you feel better, DH only sees the kids on the weekend. But I SAH so they're not completely missing out on parental interaction.

Yeah- that would depress the fuck out of me.

We make less than half - about $200K per year, but b/c we're both teachers, we see the kids after school and have them all summer long! We have our nanny do morning care b/c we both leave very early for work.

wouldn't trade that for the world

I'm not used to having a father who's not involved. We had a family business. So my father was always around - or we were at work with him. I wouldn't trade those memories for all of the money in the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHi varies but is around 350-450 depending on bonuses.

$3k mortgage and taxes
$400 car (finally bought a new one, DH glady drives a beater)
Maybe $1k a month home maintenance stuff
$1k a month groceries
$500 month utilities
Rest savings

So many of our work peers love paycheck to paycheck because they have the big house, the NEED the new BMW every other year, etc.

+1. We have a similar income and a similar small mortgage. I so wish we could have a slightly bigger house. Our house is in a great location but small and uncomfortable. I wish to spend more, but every time we get close, we can't quite pull the trigger.

This is actually pretty true of us too except we don't do a lot of home maintenance but do have a nanny and preschool to pay for which is about 4K/mo. I KNOW that's crazy expensive but for our kids, it was the best choice and our nanny-employment days are almost over. Then we will only have about 2K in child care expenses a month.

We save a lot every month. Have a beater and a new(ish) car. I don't think we live in/around/near people who are materialistic so that helps.

Anonymous wrote:NP here, but I'll answer the car payment question..... with super low car interest rates (1-2%), you can better leverage the money. If you can instead invest that money where you make more than you pay in interest, it's actually a better financial decision to keep the cash for as long as you can...

This can also be true for student loan interest rates. Furthermore, holding student loans don't tend to hurt credit scores at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You think someone with 1m annual income is going to be satisfied retiring for 30+ years on 5m? You are off by an order of magnitude.

Life is short. Being a miserable biglaw striver with minimal chance of making equity, all the while the woman quits to have kids?

Yes, I think retiring on a 4-5 million nut isn't out of the question.

They can also choose to strive for the bigger goal, end up with kids they never see at the nanny, and likely end up divorced.

They should be saving as much as possible for when the gravy train dries up.

Life is not an either/or choice. We make a good amount of money, have two very hectic careers going, but we also spend a ton of time with kids. You have to find the right work/life balance. Working for 5 years and then quitting is just swinging from one extreme to the other. I also don't think it's the right message to send to kids that mommy/daddy stays at home all day.

In a nutshell, you hope for the best but plan for the worst. If you want a better quality of life, then you'll need to give up a hard-charging career path. It doesn't mean you need to quit altogether. This is why many BIGLAW partners take political appointments for a few years, then jump back to their firms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You think someone with 1m annual income is going to be satisfied retiring for 30+ years on 5m? You are off by an order of magnitude.

Life is short. Being a miserable biglaw striver with minimal chance of making equity, all the while the woman quits to have kids?

Yes, I think retiring on a 4-5 million nut isn't out of the question.

They can also choose to strive for the bigger goal, end up with kids they never see at the nanny, and likely end up divorced.

They should be saving as much as possible for when the gravy train dries up.

Life is not an either/or choice. We make a good amount of money, have two very hectic careers going, but we also spend a ton of time with kids. You have to find the right work/life balance. Working for 5 years and then quitting is just swinging from one extreme to the other. I also don't think it's the right message to send to kids that mommy/daddy stays at home all day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're making $750K this year -- I'm 35, she's 29. I'm in Biglaw. But can't take it anymore. Planning on quitting at the end of the year with about $2M. We only spend $50K a year so should be no big problem. Will plan on relocating to cheaper part of country.

Good for you. It's important to realize what's at risk - your sanity, marriage, kids, etc - before you've lost it. Too many associates and junior partners get caught up in the race. We lawyers are hyper-competitive after all. I spent many years in BIGLAW, sacrificing a great deal in the process. Fortunately, I learned that the grass was greener in house. That said, even BIGLAW pales in comparison to sales guys that I advise. Many make 1-2 million on software and maintenance sales a few are in their late 20s and cleaning up. Yes, that's a hard life too, but the odds of making great money are better in sales than BIGLAW. Needless to say, I'm still not tempted. When you're in house though, BIGLAW partners are still your bitch.

+1 this is our strategy too. Currently planning lawexit in the next few years and DH is about to transition into the government. I think we banked enough that we should be good to go with the lower HHI and will certainly have a more relaxed work life. If DH stays in government long enough we'll have that pension too so I think it's a good move for us.

Advice to all lawyers who want to go in house - don't wait until you're ready to go in house to start networking. Start networking with in-house lawyers NOW. Go to local in-house bar events as one of your firm's representatives. Yes, you'll take a few hours hit on your billables. So what? You're only making money for the firm (remember, you're on salary). Work the room, but make it clear you're not doing so to get clients - but rather to learn about what the in-house lawyer your speaking with does on a daily basis. Couch your conversation in terms of wanting to tailor your practice - and ultimately your career - towards giving practical legal advice, rather than advising on esoteric points of law. When you're ready to move, you'll have a network of in-house counsels to contact for possible openings. Take it from an in-house counsel, we hear about jobs all the time, but often don't have anyone to recommend to a recruiter or colleague looking to fill a job. Most BIGLAW associates I know are too arrogant (i.e., they think they'll make partner) or married to BIGLAW money to ever consider expressing a desire to move in-house. The funny thing is, some of them have come crawling back a few years later when they have no shot at making partner. Likewise, most BIGLAW partners I know are too guarded with their associates (afraid of poaching) to suggest that I interview them for an in-house position - not realizing that having one of their own working for me virtually guarantees that I'll continue using their BIGLAW firm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're making $750K this year -- I'm 35, she's 29. I'm in Biglaw. But can't take it anymore. Planning on quitting at the end of the year with about $2M. We only spend $50K a year so should be no big problem. Will plan on relocating to cheaper part of country.

Good for you. It's important to realize what's at risk - your sanity, marriage, kids, etc - before you've lost it. Too many associates and junior partners get caught up in the race. We lawyers are hyper-competitive after all. I spent many years in BIGLAW, sacrificing a great deal in the process. Fortunately, I learned that the grass was greener in house. That said, even BIGLAW pales in comparison to sales guys that I advise. Many make 1-2 million on software and maintenance sales a few are in their late 20s and cleaning up. Yes, that's a hard life too, but the odds of making great money are better in sales than BIGLAW. Needless to say, I'm still not tempted. When you're in house though, BIGLAW partners are still your bitch.

+1 this is our strategy too. Currently planning lawexit in the next few years and DH is about to transition into the government. I think we banked enough that we should be good to go with the lower HHI and will certainly have a more relaxed work life. If DH stays in government long enough we'll have that pension too so I think it's a good move for us.

Anonymous wrote:We're making $750K this year -- I'm 35, she's 29. I'm in Biglaw. But can't take it anymore. Planning on quitting at the end of the year with about $2M. We only spend $50K a year so should be no big problem. Will plan on relocating to cheaper part of country.

Good for you. It's important to realize what's at risk - your sanity, marriage, kids, etc - before you've lost it. Too many associates and junior partners get caught up in the race. We lawyers are hyper-competitive after all. I spent many years in BIGLAW, sacrificing a great deal in the process. Fortunately, I learned that the grass was greener in house. That said, even BIGLAW pales in comparison to sales guys that I advise. Many make 1-2 million on software and maintenance sales a few are in their late 20s and cleaning up. Yes, that's a hard life too, but the odds of making great money are better in sales than BIGLAW. Needless to say, I'm still not tempted. When you're in house though, BIGLAW partners are still your bitch.

We're making $750K this year -- I'm 35, she's 29. I'm in Biglaw. But can't take it anymore. Planning on quitting at the end of the year with about $2M. We only spend $50K a year so should be no big problem. Will plan on relocating to cheaper part of country.

We have made $400-450K the past few years and have focused on paying off student loans, paying off the cars, and saving aggressively. We did purchase a single family home with a large yard in a fantastic school district. We plan public school for the kids. We don't have a fancy lifestyle other than the occasional piece of jewelry or nice dinner out, but we do like to travel when we can (it's harder with kids). We don't feel rich but definitely feel comfortable and will feel even more so the more we can save.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You think someone with 1m annual income is going to be satisfied retiring for 30+ years on 5m? You are off by an order of magnitude.

Life is short. Being a miserable biglaw striver with minimal chance of making equity, all the while the woman quits to have kids?

Yes, I think retiring on a 4-5 million nut isn't out of the question.

They can also choose to strive for the bigger goal, end up with kids they never see at the nanny, and likely end up divorced.

They should be saving as much as possible for when the gravy train dries up.

We have $4 million, both of us left Big Law. One of us in house, one government. We're late 40s. Kids too old for a nanny; we see them plenty and if not, that's due to their social life, academics and sports, not due to our work schedules. No interest in retiring until we get to 7 or 8 million.