The "cost of working"

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2006
The "cost of working"
961
Thu, 03-15-2007 - 2:08pm

I have been reading a lot of articles on this issue which claim that the cost of working is not worth your salary. One article claimed that it isn't worth it for a mom to work unless she is making at least 70K a year.
I don't see it at all. They cite things like work clothing, lunches out (instead of making your own at home), and gas.
The way I see it, gas money is always something you are going to need. When I wasn't working, I always went out and did things to combat boredom. Not only that, but there were errands to run. And if I did stay home with my children, I don't think I'd just want them at home with me all day just so I can save on gas (or just taking them along on errands). I'd want to take them fun places and do fun things. I would need gas to do that.
Work clothing is a null issue for me. We have to wear polo shirts with our logo and black or khaki pants. Pants I have always gotten at thrift stores. The company gives us the shirts, and if we want more than they give us, the shirts are $18. (Big deal).
As far as lunches go, I bring my lunch not to save money, but because our cafe is horrid and there isn't anywhere to really drive to on our lunch breaks. I only eat in the cafe on break if it's an emergency. I don't even like walking past it because of the smell.
It just doesn't seem to me like the "cost of working is not worth my salary" thing will really fly in my own life. I already know that I make more than the cost of daycare, anyway. I would only be breaking even there if I had three or four kids.

Does anyone else just not know where people get these equations?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-15-2006
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 4:43pm

I see, so it was how you were raised to think? So does your mother still view sah this way?

As you know i disagree, sah is not a secondary role or a less improtant in a family.

Your fun to chat with you do not get all wound up by differing views.




Edited 3/22/2007 4:49 pm ET by xenozany
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-15-2006
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 4:46pm

<>

i agree with you how could they be a invovled parent if they are not spending time with their children?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2007
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 4:52pm
No, you did not. Stop making things up that are not true.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 4:57pm

It was more what I observed from my parents' (not happy) marriage.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 4:57pm
That's probably because you're more ahead of your time than you realized you would be when you made that decision, and also more so than most other women are willing to admit.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2007
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 5:03pm

You're an accountant and you still think Gr8tful has aptly demonstrated that the working mother who sah for just a few years has lost $1M?

That would mean that by staying on the job, all of the working moms make $1M every few years.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2007
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 5:05pm
We even lose touch with the "real world"!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 5:11pm

"That would mean that by staying on the job, all of the working moms make $1M every few years."


No, it doesn't.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-03-2006
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 5:11pm

Really, THAT"S what you got out of that? You might want to read that again and actually read it this time. That $4K difference is the dh's income not family income. And I never said they could or could not afford a SAHP on tha t$4K more. I simply stated what was reported before.

Try again.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2007
Thu, 03-22-2007 - 5:12pm
Wow. I didn't know the rest of the story. That explains a bit.

Pages