Anyone feel like they're not "keeping up with the Jonses"?

[tzolkin]

Being a SAHM is really for the super rich these days.

This is absolutely ridiculous. There are tons of SAHMs in lower income families (more than there are who are middle/upper middle class). For many, the cost of childcare is more than what they would earn at a job so there’s no point working.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

too many people fail to get life insurance on stay at home spouses and the results can be tragic if that spouse passes.

That really has nothing to do with being a stay at home spouse.

As soon as my husband and I got married we got $500K each life insurance policies on each other (which realistically are not intended to live off of but take care of immediate expenses). We also have other life insurance policies. I have my own from when I turned 18 and got one.

It's not about one person being a stay at home parent. It's something couples should think about doing regardless. It's totally their decision to get life insurance or not but it's not merely the aspect that the household is a 1 income household.

 

[Still Liberty Belle]

I find that if I focus much on what everyone else has, it makes me much less appreciative of what I do have. We haven't had a vacation in 5 years, for instance, but it wouldn't bother me much if I didn't keep seeing people go on vacation after vacation. I know there are people out there who never have had a vacation and I'm certainly much more fortunate than they are.

So, I sometimes feel that way (and as we're struggling to pay off a big medical debt, it's a warranted feeling), but I try not to dwell on those thoughts.

 

[DLgal]

too many people fail to get life insurance on stay at home spouses and the results can be tragic if that spouse passes. a friend dated a man whose late wife had been a sahm. the woman was tragically killed in an auto accident leaving her husband and 6'ish aged son. no life insurance on sahm b/c they just focused on the income that would be lost if something happened to the wage earner dh. they didn't think about the monetary cost to replace all the things mom did-esp. when it came to childcare for their son. before school/after school/weekends the husband worked/school holidays and vacations let alone all the sick days little kids are prone to have early in their school years. between that and finding out that it cost so much more to grab prepared meals vs. the couponing/sale shopping/scratch cooking the wife did to keep costs down it was a huge wake up call and financially devastating.

i realize that allot of people are on tight budgets but they are almost always better off in a tragedy to have shortchanged their roth or other retirement account by that $50 or less a month it costs to have term life insurance on a stay at home parent until those kids are raised at minimum.

Yup. Very true. We took out a 20 year term policy on me (a big one) when my oldest was 3 and we realized how much it would cost to have a full time, live in nanny for our 2 boys. I was 27 at the time. It costs $19/month. There is NO excuse not to have life insurance on a stay at home parent.

 

[SaintsManiac]

Ummm I just became a SAHM in October. I am not super rich.

 

[NYCgrrl]

Yup. Very true. We took out a 20 year term policy on me (a big one) when my oldest was 3 and we realized how much it would cost to have a full time, live in nanny for our 2 boys. I was 27 at the time. It costs $19/month. There is NO excuse not to have life insurance on a stay at home parent.

No excuse to not have insurance on any member of the family who works for money or who's services contribute to the family's well-being. There are many "Jones" type expenses I would give up to ensure all were financially secure no matter what happens.

 

[DLgal]

This is super morbid. Being a SAHM is really for the super rich these days. The US doesn’t have enough safety nets like our European peers. Who has money for life insurance on top of everything else?

When I became a SAHM, our net income was around $60k per year. Super rich? Hardly.

And yes, my husband and I both WANTED me to stay home. I wanted to be there for 100% of my kid's lives, and daycare was both too expensive and something that didn't fit into my personal idea of motherhood. At the time, I was working full time making $12/hour. My job would have been paying for the daycare. Totally pointless.

 

[LSUmiss]

We never owned name brand apparel, didn't eat out often, and our phones cost a total of about $200 for all 4 and $10/month each and we could not afford life insurance. It was $45 and only a $100,000 policy. When the 401k reached that level and things like heat increased from $140/month to $800/month, it was cancel both the $45 life insurance and the $50-75 going to 401k to survive.

It's a big difference between the bottom of middle class or working class and the top of middle class, especially when you are talking media depicted middle class which is indeed super rich compared to people who are actually in the middle.

I think this is definitely true. I grew up at the bottom of the middle class spectrum but am now more upper middle class & there is a HUGE difference in what I can save & do vs what my parents & grandparents could. That’s why my dad was so frugal b/c he was scared of not having any money in case he couldn’t work into his old age. He never planned to be able to fully retire until he physically could not work b/c he simply wouldn’t have been able to afford it. Lucky him he never made it to old age.

 

[Alli1988]

When I became a SAHM, our net income was around $60k per year. Super rich? Hardly.

And yes, my husband and I both WANTED me to stay home. I wanted to be there for 100% of my kid's lives, and daycare was both too expensive and something that didn't fit into my personal idea of motherhood. At the time, I was working full time making $12/hour. My job would have been paying for the daycare. Totally pointless.

Paying all or most of your income to daycare initially isn't always a waste. People that do this risk entering the workforce at the same $12 the left at, instead of doubling or tripling their income that could have been done in those handful of first employment years.

 

[Searc]

Ummm I just became a SAHM in October. I am not super rich.

Maybe you are and you just don't know it.

 

[Searc]

Paying all or most of your income to daycare initially isn't always a waste. People that do this risk entering the workforce at the same $12 the left at, instead of doubling or tripling their income that could have been done in those handful of first employment years.

Believe it or not, some people happily live on one income. Once the kids grow up and leave, if both partners support it, the SAH parent can go back to work. Or they can remain a stay at home spouse ~ or, as I refer to myself, a trophy wife.

 

[barkley]

Being a SAHM is really for the super rich these days.

hardly. i live in an area that is far from rich let alone 'super rich'-with an immense number of sahm's. for some it was a conscience choice, with others they came to find out that when they lost their jobs during the recession that between childcare, commute and other work related expenses that they were essentially paying out more to work than their income brought in. this was further financially reinforced when they chose to start cooking more vs. the necessity their former jobs created of buying convenience or to-go food for the family.

my kids went to school with a number of kids whose mom's (and in some case dads) were (for our region) well paid professionals but when they lost their jobs and took the time to run the numbers they were ahead of the game at this point in their kid's lives staying home. a significant number remained sahp's when their old jobs came calling.

As soon as my husband and I got married we got $500K each life insurance policies on each other (which realistically are not intended to live off of but take care of immediate expenses). We also have other life insurance policies. I have my own from when I turned 18 and got one.

It's not about one person being a stay at home parent. It's something couples should think about doing regardless. It's totally their decision to get life insurance or not but it's not merely the aspect that the household is a 1 income household.

dh and i did the same thing when we married-didn't have kids for years. the point i was making is that the expenses of a household with children is not always met with dollars and cents, and that for many with sahp's the dollar cost value of the 'services' the sahp provides is not adequately addressed when making financial decisions about life insurance.

 

[DLgal]

Paying all or most of your income to daycare initially isn't always a waste. People that do this risk entering the workforce at the same $12 the left at, instead of doubling or tripling their income that could have been done in those handful of first employment years.

I didn't have a career, I had a job. A job that did not have a lot of move up potential at that. If I was still there, now, I would be making $15/hr, like 15 years later. $15/hr is becoming the new minimum wage in many parts of CA nowadays (not legally, but in practice), so if I WANTED to, I could get a job paying that much with no effort, even with a 15 year gap in employment.

I have no plans to return to the workforce. I am happy being a homemaker/SAHM and it's financially feasible for us, and should continue to be in the future.

 

[DLgal]

Believe it or not, some people happily live on one income. Once the kids grow up and leave, if both partners support it, the SAH parent can go back to work. Or they can remain a stay at home spouse ~ or, as I refer to myself, a trophy wife.

I jokingly refer to my husband as my sugar daddy.

 

[disykat]

I believe that FOR US, one of us staying home and us choosing not to "keep up with the Joneses" lifestyle wise is what has helped us "keep up with Joneses" as the OP put it for retirement, etc. (Please note I said FOR US.)

Since we were able to live on one income successfully, we didn't do the lifestyle creep that so many seem to do. Most of what I brought home when I went back to work went to funding things like education for our kids, paying off our home early, retirement funding, etc. I'm also the one who was able to quit work again to help take care of aging parents while my siblings who have always worked need their income to maintain their lives.

 

[mrodgers]

I think this is definitely true. I grew up at the bottom of the middle class spectrum but am now more upper middle class & there is a HUGE difference in what I can save & do vs what my parents & grandparents could. That’s why my dad was so frugal b/c he was scared of not having any money in case he couldn’t work into his old age. He never planned to be able to fully retire until he physically could not work b/c he simply wouldn’t have been able to afford it. Lucky him he never made it to old age.

There's a lot of confusion I see.

Media and internet middle class seems to me to be defined starting at $125-150k and goes up.

The middle in the US is $65k. That is a household middle, of which we're talking the combination of 2 incomes with married people. I see a lot of comments all the time that look like when talking median income and a marriage, it is assumed that each person is making $65k. That would certainly make a significant difference when talking of finances.

 

[Deffenm]

Believe it or not, some people happily live on one income. Once the kids grow up and leave, if both partners support it, the SAH parent can go back to work. Or they can remain a stay at home spouse ~ or, as I refer to myself, a trophy wife.

This is my husband, I am his sugar mamma! LOL We have 3 kids and only 1 is left at home she is 16. When my husband worked, daycare for 3 kids cost about what he made, plus our kids were adopted from the Foster Care system so we had some challenges early on. He now works part time coaching club soccer and at a cycle shop and his income pays for our vacations. I make a very good salary ( 6 figures), and I cover all household expenses, including savings and retirement. We live well below our means (I am very frugal) and have a great life. Now others may look at our life and raise eyebrows because we don't eat out, don't have tv, cable, streaming media, old paid for phones, no credit card debt, house that is almost paid for but is small. I am a minimalist so I don't buy "stuff". The only reason we take vacations is because DH works to pay for them so it doesn't take away from our savings/retirement goals. We could have more money if he went to work full time but it works for us. We also told our kids that they would have to work hard in school to help subsizie the cost (scholarships, take college classes in high school, etc.) We wanted them to have some personal accountability. Our daughter is the only one that is going to college (one son joined the Army and other son just wants to work) and we have money set aside for her plus she is taking college level courses and will graduate with an Associate Degree along with her high school diploma. I grew up extremely poor and was the first person in my family to graduate college ( I am still the only kid to graduate, my mom went to college after she saw that I could do it). I always told myself that my family would never know what it was like to wonder if there was going to be food, would the lights turn on today, which family members house were we sleeping at tonight. I also didn't want my kids to grow up feeling entitled either. My parents built a strong work ethic in me and that is one reason I am so successful. All this to say your journey is yours, and people may not agree with it but it's not their life to live it's yours!

 

[mousefan73]

So thread has gone many OTs so I will add my .02 which is also a bit off topic.. I think a lot of being able to retire and live comfortably has a lot to do with cost of living. Keeping up with the Jones' is one thing but in the end being able to afford any lifestyle "Jones" or not will be struggle for many due to cost of living ( housing) increases. This really hit me today let explain.

I am an expat living in Germany and when I do homeoffice I have MSNBC on in the background.. Typical political discussion on how well the economy is doing now.. Discussion started with how the stock market is really no indicator of how the lower or middle class are doing as less than 50% of Americans dont have any hand in the stock market in way.. ( 401k, mutal funds etc..).. It was argued how great the economy is as lower incomes rate of increases has significantyl grown over the past years as other income brackets... that American Middle class families have an average 11,000 more in disposable income than a German family. And the political comment from the commentator was basically see how bad "socialistic" countries are... Which I had to laugh as I think many need an education on what socialism, capitalism, communism is.. Anywaysss... this statement, as being in Germany, raised my head and made me think.

I make significantly less than a person in the USA for the same job but live more comfortably mainly as cost of living is much lower. Another colleague worked in our NY office made 30% more and took that pay cut moving to Frankfurt. He states though he has less income now his standard of living is sooo much better as the cost of living is less. "Disposable" income is a funny thing. I assume MSNBC meant the true definition, income after income taxes... Yes American make much more have more "Cash" due to paying less taxes but what they pay to live is scary... What many American families for for groceries a month 500-800 dollars is what many germans pay for rent in a nice, safe, clean place.

So what I really wanted to say is that when I heard this I check rental prices for my old neighborhood back in the USA . For a while back in 2008 I rented my old condo - 1 bedroom 850 monthly rent.. I checked now for the same building and rates are now 1300-1400!!! I am not an expert, but that is a huge increase and I know my income from back then would not have increased that much unless I changed jobs... I am sure a lower skilled person wouldnt have that option.

I really don't have a point for all this rambling, but I would think it's harder for many to even try and keep up or plan for retirement when for some increases in cost of living are getting high..

 

[RamblingMad]

So thread has gone many OTs so I will add my .02 which is also a bit off topic.. I think a lot of being able to retire and live comfortably has a lot to do with cost of living. Keeping up with the Jones' is one thing but in the end being able to afford any lifestyle "Jones" or not will be struggle for many due to cost of living ( housing) increases. This really hit me today let explain.

I am an expat living in Germany and when I do homeoffice I have MSNBC on in the background.. Typical political discussion on how well the economy is doing now.. Discussion started with how the stock market is really no indicator of how the lower or middle class are doing as less than 50% of Americans dont have any hand in the stock market in way.. ( 401k, mutal funds etc..).. It was argued how great the economy is as lower incomes rate of increases has significantyl grown over the past years as other income brackets... that American Middle class families have an average 11,000 more in disposable income than a German family. And the political comment from the commentator was basically see how bad "socialistic" countries are... Which I had to laugh as I think many need an education on what socialism, capitalism, communism is.. Anywaysss... this statement, as being in Germany, raised my head and made me think.

I make significantly less than a person in the USA for the same job but live more comfortably mainly as cost of living is much lower. Another colleague worked in our NY office made 30% more and took that pay cut moving to Frankfurt. He states though he has less income now his standard of living is sooo much better as the cost of living is less. "Disposable" income is a funny thing. I assume MSNBC meant the true definition, income after income taxes... Yes American make much more have more "Cash" due to paying less taxes but what they pay to live is scary... What many American families for for groceries a month 500-800 dollars is what many germans pay for rent in a nice, safe, clean place.

So what I really wanted to say is that when I heard this I check rental prices for my old neighborhood back in the USA . For a while back in 2008 I rented my old condo - 1 bedroom 850 monthly rent.. I checked now for the same building and rates are now 1300-1400!!! I am not an expert, but that is a huge increase and I know my income from back then would not have increased that much unless I changed jobs... I am sure a lower skilled person wouldnt have that option.

I really don't have a point for all this rambling, but I would think it's harder for many to even try and keep up or plan for retirement when for some increases in cost of living are getting high..

I agree with you. It’s also why I don’t think we’re in a housing bubble yet. Rents have more than doubled since 08.

 

[ronandannette]

So thread has gone many OTs so I will add my .02 which is also a bit off topic.. I think a lot of being able to retire and live comfortably has a lot to do with cost of living. Keeping up with the Jones' is one thing but in the end being able to afford any lifestyle "Jones" or not will be struggle for many due to cost of living ( housing) increases. This really hit me today let explain.

I am an expat living in Germany and when I do homeoffice I have MSNBC on in the background.. Typical political discussion on how well the economy is doing now.. Discussion started with how the stock market is really no indicator of how the lower or middle class are doing as less than 50% of Americans dont have any hand in the stock market in way.. ( 401k, mutal funds etc..).. It was argued how great the economy is as lower incomes rate of increases has significantyl grown over the past years as other income brackets... that American Middle class families have an average 11,000 more in disposable income than a German family. And the political comment from the commentator was basically see how bad "socialistic" countries are... Which I had to laugh as I think many need an education on what socialism, capitalism, communism is.. Anywaysss... this statement, as being in Germany, raised my head and made me think.

I make significantly less than a person in the USA for the same job but live more comfortably mainly as cost of living is much lower. Another colleague worked in our NY office made 30% more and took that pay cut moving to Frankfurt. He states though he has less income now his standard of living is sooo much better as the cost of living is less. "Disposable" income is a funny thing. I assume MSNBC meant the true definition, income after income taxes... Yes American make much more have more "Cash" due to paying less taxes but what they pay to live is scary... What many American families for for groceries a month 500-800 dollars is what many germans pay for rent in a nice, safe, clean place.

So what I really wanted to say is that when I heard this I check rental prices for my old neighborhood back in the USA . For a while back in 2008 I rented my old condo - 1 bedroom 850 monthly rent.. I checked now for the same building and rates are now 1300-1400!!! I am not an expert, but that is a huge increase and I know my income from back then would not have increased that much unless I changed jobs... I am sure a lower skilled person wouldnt have that option.

I really don't have a point for all this rambling, but I would think it's harder for many to even try and keep up or plan for retirement when for some increases in cost of living are getting high..

I'll ramble back... I think you've got the definition of "disposable income" wrong. Net income is what's left after taxes. Disposable income is what's left of your net income after all necessities of life have been paid for. Money that can be saved or spent on luxuries, at one's own discretion. Sadly, many have no disposable income and possibly even struggle to cover life's basic needs like housing, utilities, food, education or child care for minors and transportation. Sometimes they sacrifice these things for luxuries or go into debt, and many prioritize spending over saving with the money they do have. Others find ways to control their spending on necessities to the point where their frugality in certain areas allows a bit of margin to save or spend.