3 ms·
Well let’s take me. Stay at home parenting... assumes I make enough money to cover her, the child, and her retirement, and medical. Which is 70-80k that she is
by what-the-grump 8y ago
Well let’s take me. Stay at home parenting... assumes I make enough money to cover her, the child, and her retirement, and medical. Which is 70-80k that she is providing right now. So We either take an 80k hit or 30k hit.
It’s pretty simple these days. I’m pushing a household income of close to 200k and I haven’t been on vacation in 3 years.
I could make a shitload sure, drop the wife, move into a studio and eat ramen.
- bzbarsky 8y agoIf there's even a single 70-80k income involved, then I expect that household is no longer in the "can’t afford a basic monthly budget for housing, food, transportation, child care, health care and a monthly smartphone bill" bucket, unless it's insisting on living in a specific location with very high housing costs. All I was saying above is that I am not surprised that a large fraction of households _are_ in that bucket as defined in the United Way report, because child care is expensive. And I expect the fraction of households in that bucket would likely be a lot smaller if "child care" were not being included in basic life necessities. I am not going to comment on your personal financial situation; you are obviously a better judge of that than I am! I certainly know people with 200k household incomes who also have significant fixed expenses (student loans, medical expenses, whatever) that lead to them not having as much disposable income as one might think. But that's not really related to the United Way study.