4 ms·

2008 financial collapse showed how important it is to have a career and also showed how important it is for women to get educated and move forward as contributo

2008 financial collapse showed how important it is to have a career and also showed how important it is for women to get educated and move forward as contributors in household finances. There are lot of other factors at play here like student loans, financial independence and 4-6 year time frame to get college degree.

duxup 8y ago
It's unfortunate, because I loved having my wife at home, and hell I'd be happy to stay home.... but it's just financially too risky IMO. The big catch is insurance in the US... and that really pisses me off that it such a big deal. Also FMLA is kinda wonky in the us. I worked for a company based in CA... CA employees got paid on FMLA, I (being outside of CA) did not :P
- exotree 8y ago
  Recently married and thinking about kids soon. One of use would love to stay home. However, the risk of putting all earning power in one person seems too great, and neither of us have a deep interest in paying for childcare. So no kids for now.
  - Someone1234 8y ago
    My wife is a public school teacher with a masters degree, the pay is so low and cost of child care so high, that we would have almost broken even having her go back to work. I agree it is higher risk having only one wage earner, but sometimes it makes financial sense, and it definitely can have developmental benefits (e.g. 1:1 ratio instead of 1:6 or 1:8). I would suggest that if anyone does do stay-at-home, that when the kid has all of their shots, you send them to a play group or preschool so they can learn to socialize. PS - We also had kids fairly late, so got all our student loans paid off, and saved a little money which has helped as a buffer.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - astura 8y ago
      >the pay is so low and cost of child care so high, that we would have almost broken even having her go back to work. Wage growth compounds, so you have to take that into consideration. If your employer has a modest retirement contribution that you can take advantage of, that alone makes employment "worth it" from a purely financial prescriptive. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/staying-home-to-parent-can-cost-more-than-just-salary/ https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/staying-home-to-parent-can-...
      - Someone1234 8y ago
        And the cost of commuting to work, classroom supplies, unpaid leave when the kids get sick (3 sick leave days a year), and the fact teachers do countless hours of unpaid overtime, have a high stress job, and that spending time with your own children has a value all itself. So even if matching retirement contributions technically tipped the scales, it would still be nowhere close to worth while.
  - Domenic_S 8y ago
    There are two risks: death of the wage earner, and job loss. The impact of death can be mitigated with insurance, job loss can be mitigated with savings. But it also probably means living a less robust lifestyle to keep expenses reasonable for a one-income household. The trap many DINKs fall into (not accusing you, just riffing on my observations) is living a lifestyle that's on the edge of affordability for two earners, and thus feeling like they HAVE to have two earners indefinitely.
    - dudul 8y ago
      This last comment is very true. I remember when my wife and I were looking for a house to purchase, we did the math based on my single salary, not hers at the time. We knew we wanted kids soon, and she had already decided she wanted to stay home. The bank obviously approved us for a huge mortgage but we stuck to our calculations and we've been doing just fine since then. I know a few couples who didn't take the loss of 1 income into account and they are really struggling.
    - sbinthree 8y ago
      Not to mention that daycare in cities where people who tend to be dual earner make big incomes tend to live can often cost at least half of the gross of the lower earning parent. Meaning working is something people do for a net contribution of less than minimum wage, even as a high income earner.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      IMO the best strategies for people who aren't in the top 1% are extreme strategies. Our strategy is: single income, live in a neighborhood with bad schools for cheaper housing, then homeschool the kids.
      - arandr0x 8y ago
        This is not a strategy I would ever choose, but considering you probably live in the US, this is a very smart optimization of your local conditions and it must not have been easy to go against some of the default assumptions about school and family life. We live in an age where people absolutely need to get creative like this and think about the ways they may be able to get the things that truly matter.
  - ktpsns 8y ago
    It's a pity that you can't enjoy a good social health system where there is parental leave and all that. I just got a baby with being basically (university) student in Germany and it didn't ruin me. And Germans still look up to countries where the social system is even better, such as the Scandinavian countries.
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      Or they could make grandma and grandpa do some baby sitting here and there which is traditionally how this problem has been handled. Not everything needs to be solved by the state.
      - RankingMember 8y ago
        ...and for those who don't have grandma and grandpa or don't live in close enough proximity to make that feasible?
        dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        They pay out the ass for child care if they're rich or they find the one mother in the neighborhood who runs an under the table daycare for everyone's kids if they're poor, same as it's always been.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      FWIW, the amazing social health system in Germany doesn't really seem to be improving birth rates that much.
- ng12 8y ago
  Same. It's sad to me that my kid won't have the same experience growing up that I did.
- madengr 8y ago
  Link to the Idiocracy intro: https://youtu.be/CXSz0bA9CiE https://youtu.be/CXSz0bA9CiE The risk of job loss in this economy is a lot lower than several years ago, so now may be the time to do it. Once a kid is 3, then they can go to preschool, and that cost is lower than individualized care, and goes down with age. It’s also not going to get easier if you wait, as complications increase with age, even in early 30’s. My wife was on bed rest for 12 weeks, 10 of those in the hospital. A total of $140k, so better damn well have insurance, and I needed to use FMLA too. Also, 48% of pregnancies are paid for by Medicare. Plenty of illegal immigrants having border babies, which you are paying for, from birth through college.
  - UncleMeat 8y ago
    That's a comedy movie, not science.
    - madengr 8y ago
      The DINK family planning is fact.
  - duxup 8y ago
    Yeah well I lost my job at the end of last year so your "risk" is my reality.....let alone the absurd tagged on stuff at the end.
fein 8y ago
It's almost like forcing women into industry careers, thus increasing the number of workers in the workforce, leads to wage suppression and damages the family structure... Housewife is a fine career, one more worthy of praise than most college degrees.
- eahman12 8y ago
  That was the plan all along: push feminism so women are forced to work to keep wages down and kill the family. When you look at everything carefully, you'll see how all the pieces fit perfectly.
- arandr0x 8y ago
  It's not. It's hard to find a second job in that career once you get laid off, for once. There's no labor law restricting your work hours. And you never get a vacation.
  - fein 8y ago
    And the outcome of actual reality is that women are putting off childhood until its either too late, or the medical risk increases to dangerous levels. > There's no labor law restricting your work hours. And you never get a vacation. What kind of screwed up family did you come from that gave you this outlook, or is it just interpreting hollywood as reality as I assume much of this nonsense is? I'm sure through history a housewife never got a vacation or a husband that helped out around the house, no it must all be some dystopian version of Handmaidens Tale, because fiction is apparently truth.
  - dudul 8y ago
    How do you get laid off?
    - arandr0x 8y ago
      "Laid off" means your position is no longer available, so your husband leaves, dies, no longer has the resources to support you, or decides his money is better employed buying a sports car and you have to work for your own food. Even if in some of those cases you could find a different husband, it takes time and it may not offer the same financial conditions as the first one. There's no "market rate" for your services really.
Domenic_S 8y ago
Could you elaborate on what about the collapse showed that?

duxup 8y ago

It's unfortunate, because I loved having my wife at home, and hell I'd be happy to stay home.... but it's just financially too risky IMO. The big catch is insurance in the US... and that really pisses me off that it such a big deal. Also FMLA is kinda wonky in the us. I worked for a company based in CA... CA employees got paid on FMLA, I (being outside of CA) did not :P

exotree 8y ago
Recently married and thinking about kids soon. One of use would love to stay home. However, the risk of putting all earning power in one person seems too great, and neither of us have a deep interest in paying for childcare. So no kids for now.
- Someone1234 8y ago
  My wife is a public school teacher with a masters degree, the pay is so low and cost of child care so high, that we would have almost broken even having her go back to work. I agree it is higher risk having only one wage earner, but sometimes it makes financial sense, and it definitely can have developmental benefits (e.g. 1:1 ratio instead of 1:6 or 1:8). I would suggest that if anyone does do stay-at-home, that when the kid has all of their shots, you send them to a play group or preschool so they can learn to socialize. PS - We also had kids fairly late, so got all our student loans paid off, and saved a little money which has helped as a buffer.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - astura 8y ago
    >the pay is so low and cost of child care so high, that we would have almost broken even having her go back to work. Wage growth compounds, so you have to take that into consideration. If your employer has a modest retirement contribution that you can take advantage of, that alone makes employment "worth it" from a purely financial prescriptive. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/staying-home-to-parent-can-cost-more-than-just-salary/ https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/staying-home-to-parent-can-...
    - Someone1234 8y ago
      And the cost of commuting to work, classroom supplies, unpaid leave when the kids get sick (3 sick leave days a year), and the fact teachers do countless hours of unpaid overtime, have a high stress job, and that spending time with your own children has a value all itself. So even if matching retirement contributions technically tipped the scales, it would still be nowhere close to worth while.
- Domenic_S 8y ago
  There are two risks: death of the wage earner, and job loss. The impact of death can be mitigated with insurance, job loss can be mitigated with savings. But it also probably means living a less robust lifestyle to keep expenses reasonable for a one-income household. The trap many DINKs fall into (not accusing you, just riffing on my observations) is living a lifestyle that's on the edge of affordability for two earners, and thus feeling like they HAVE to have two earners indefinitely.
  - dudul 8y ago
    This last comment is very true. I remember when my wife and I were looking for a house to purchase, we did the math based on my single salary, not hers at the time. We knew we wanted kids soon, and she had already decided she wanted to stay home. The bank obviously approved us for a huge mortgage but we stuck to our calculations and we've been doing just fine since then. I know a few couples who didn't take the loss of 1 income into account and they are really struggling.
  - sbinthree 8y ago
    Not to mention that daycare in cities where people who tend to be dual earner make big incomes tend to live can often cost at least half of the gross of the lower earning parent. Meaning working is something people do for a net contribution of less than minimum wage, even as a high income earner.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    IMO the best strategies for people who aren't in the top 1% are extreme strategies. Our strategy is: single income, live in a neighborhood with bad schools for cheaper housing, then homeschool the kids.
    - arandr0x 8y ago
      This is not a strategy I would ever choose, but considering you probably live in the US, this is a very smart optimization of your local conditions and it must not have been easy to go against some of the default assumptions about school and family life. We live in an age where people absolutely need to get creative like this and think about the ways they may be able to get the things that truly matter.
- ktpsns 8y ago
  It's a pity that you can't enjoy a good social health system where there is parental leave and all that. I just got a baby with being basically (university) student in Germany and it didn't ruin me. And Germans still look up to countries where the social system is even better, such as the Scandinavian countries.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    Or they could make grandma and grandpa do some baby sitting here and there which is traditionally how this problem has been handled. Not everything needs to be solved by the state.
    - RankingMember 8y ago
      ...and for those who don't have grandma and grandpa or don't live in close enough proximity to make that feasible?
      - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        They pay out the ass for child care if they're rich or they find the one mother in the neighborhood who runs an under the table daycare for everyone's kids if they're poor, same as it's always been.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    FWIW, the amazing social health system in Germany doesn't really seem to be improving birth rates that much.
ng12 8y ago
Same. It's sad to me that my kid won't have the same experience growing up that I did.
madengr 8y ago
Link to the Idiocracy intro: https://youtu.be/CXSz0bA9CiE https://youtu.be/CXSz0bA9CiE The risk of job loss in this economy is a lot lower than several years ago, so now may be the time to do it. Once a kid is 3, then they can go to preschool, and that cost is lower than individualized care, and goes down with age. It’s also not going to get easier if you wait, as complications increase with age, even in early 30’s. My wife was on bed rest for 12 weeks, 10 of those in the hospital. A total of $140k, so better damn well have insurance, and I needed to use FMLA too. Also, 48% of pregnancies are paid for by Medicare. Plenty of illegal immigrants having border babies, which you are paying for, from birth through college.
- UncleMeat 8y ago
  That's a comedy movie, not science.
  - madengr 8y ago
    The DINK family planning is fact.
- duxup 8y ago
  Yeah well I lost my job at the end of last year so your "risk" is my reality.....let alone the absurd tagged on stuff at the end.

fein 8y ago

It's almost like forcing women into industry careers, thus increasing the number of workers in the workforce, leads to wage suppression and damages the family structure... Housewife is a fine career, one more worthy of praise than most college degrees.

eahman12 8y ago
That was the plan all along: push feminism so women are forced to work to keep wages down and kill the family. When you look at everything carefully, you'll see how all the pieces fit perfectly.
arandr0x 8y ago
It's not. It's hard to find a second job in that career once you get laid off, for once. There's no labor law restricting your work hours. And you never get a vacation.
- fein 8y ago
  And the outcome of actual reality is that women are putting off childhood until its either too late, or the medical risk increases to dangerous levels. > There's no labor law restricting your work hours. And you never get a vacation. What kind of screwed up family did you come from that gave you this outlook, or is it just interpreting hollywood as reality as I assume much of this nonsense is? I'm sure through history a housewife never got a vacation or a husband that helped out around the house, no it must all be some dystopian version of Handmaidens Tale, because fiction is apparently truth.
- dudul 8y ago
  How do you get laid off?
  - arandr0x 8y ago
    "Laid off" means your position is no longer available, so your husband leaves, dies, no longer has the resources to support you, or decides his money is better employed buying a sports car and you have to work for your own food. Even if in some of those cases you could find a different husband, it takes time and it may not offer the same financial conditions as the first one. There's no "market rate" for your services really.

Domenic_S 8y ago

Could you elaborate on what about the collapse showed that?