3 ms·

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

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.