Are Men Success Objects?

[scaredyclassic]

right now, my wife is working A LOT, and frankly, i can’t believe how we are back to a healthy level of savings, in spite of throwing more money into our house recently for a refinance and some other large expenses.

i always wondered who in the hell could afford one of those catered bike tour vacations in the catalogues I would get that desperately made me want to hit the road. tuscany. southeast asia. long roads through south america…all supported and deluxe…. Actually, that would probably be us, right now. we could actually afford that. woah. weird….

of course, it would cause me too much physical pain to write the check. but we could afford it! hell, i might just break down and go…

i think i prefer to spend the money on really expensive wood floors, a few fine oriental rugs,some other strangely expensive furnishings, and college tuition, but even then we might have a few bucks left over…more than enough for a cheap vacation somewhere local…

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun] Plus adequate time off to spend with family in summer or whatever.
[/quote]

That’s what you want, but that doesn’t work unless everyone is on board.

If only a minority wants to live with less and enjoy family, culture, nature, etc.., that minority eventually falls behind as the rest works harder and has more money to spend. Costs go higher and that relaxed minority can no longer keep up.

Trust me, people in general don’t want culture and leisure, They want houses, cars, trinkets… they want to “upgrade” their cars every 5 years; they want a new house every 10 to 15 years; they want electronics, etc… All so they feel like they’re getting ahead. Make them work hard and give them 1 week per year at Disney and they’re happy.

[FlyerInHi]

scaredyclassic, you should go to Cambodia and hangout with your buddy.

Cambodia is too damn hot with too many mosquitos though. I don’t know if I could make it biking in the tropical heat.

http://www.bikingcambodia.net/html/

[The-Shoveler]

That’s why the TPTB made Vegas LOL.
This year we could not get away for more than a few days, if you got 3-4 days Vegas has everything in one place .
OK so it’s all fake, but it works LOL

[spdrun]

The only thing that’s unique about Vegas these days (in the US) is that it has legal bordellos outside of city limits.

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=spdrun]The only thing that’s unique about Vegas these days (in the US) is that it has legal bordellos outside of city limits.[/quote]

Outside county limits…

Its illegal in Clark county but really its only a 45 minute trip…

CE

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=spdrun] Plus adequate time off to spend with family in summer or whatever.
[/quote]

That’s what you want, but that doesn’t work unless everyone is on board.

If only a minority wants to live with less and enjoy family, culture, nature, etc.., that minority eventually falls behind as the rest works harder and has more money to spend. Costs go higher and that relaxed minority can no longer keep up.

Trust me, people in general don’t want culture and leisure, They want houses, cars, trinkets… they want to “upgrade” their cars every 5 years; they want a new house every 10 to 15 years; they want electronics, etc… All so they feel like they’re getting ahead. Make them work hard and give them 1 week per year at Disney and they’re happy.[/quote]

That’s because we’ve been conditioned to think like this. If people ever woke up from their stupor, they would be shocked to learn about all of the energy and resources that go into creating the consumption culture.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]making more over a one year period or over a 20 year period?

I know a SAHM, who, frankly, is pretty bad at it. she’s been out of the workforce for about 20 years and has become kind of unemployable, based on her mindset, expectations, and general lack of skills.

is the family richer now 20 years out? no. they’re a hell of a lot poorer. there might have been a few good years there for the kids, but IMO they wouldve been better off in day care.

she can get longterm alimony i suppose if they split, but the guy can work under the table, and probably will, and work a lot less, if its all going to her.

seems like the savings were primarily over the first few years, adn the return got smaller and smaller and then went negative.

the other problem of course is when the SAHM truly is not good at it. bad housekeeper, lame with money, not so great with kids, les and less necessary as they get older, spends a lot of money, etc…seems like not a partner. encourages divorce…in its own way…[/quote]

Yes, I agree that there are some bad SAHPs out there, but there are also some bad wage-earners out there, too. Should we all divorce each other just because they don’t live up to our standards, or should we try to work with our spouses in a constructive way to maximize each person’s potential in a relationship. IMO, a lot of bad SAHPs are only doing it because they feel that they are supposed to be doing it; not because they have any particular love or passion for the job. They might contribute more to the family by working outside of the home, or doing something completely out of the ordinary. And there’s no guarantee that this spouse will suddenly become useful by entering the paid workforce, either. If someone is sloppy, uncaring, takes shortcuts, is bad with money/resources, and doesn’t take their work seriously; chance are they will be horrible employees as well. Why do you think they will be better in the paid workforce? There’s a good chance that this type of person will feel even more entitled to spend more if he/she is in the paid workforce and can’t find time to cook, clean, take care of the kids, etc. after work…and will pay/hire others to do these tasks, instead.

I would also argue that a *good* SAHP can be very valuable even when the kids are grown…but the parents start requiring more care. There are often four different parents who will likely need some type of regular care as they get sick and age. Having someone around to care for them (even full-time, if necessary), take them to doctor’s appointments, etc. can take a huge burden off the rest of the family.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]right now, my wife is working A LOT, and frankly, i can’t believe how we are back to a healthy level of savings, in spite of throwing more money into our house recently for a refinance and some other large expenses.

i always wondered who in the hell could afford one of those catered bike tour vacations in the catalogues I would get that desperately made me want to hit the road. tuscany. southeast asia. long roads through south america…all supported and deluxe…. Actually, that would probably be us, right now. we could actually afford that. woah. weird….

of course, it would cause me too much physical pain to write the check. but we could afford it! hell, i might just break down and go…

i think i prefer to spend the money on really expensive wood floors, a few fine oriental rugs,some other strangely expensive furnishings, and college tuition, but even then we might have a few bucks left over…more than enough for a cheap vacation somewhere local…[/quote]

Let’s be honest: your wife is a doctor. Yes, the opportunity cost for her to remain out of the workforce to be a SAHP (for life?) would be quite high. Still possible that it would be worth it, though, especially if you were HS’ing all of the kids F/T, and/or if you had a family member who needed chronic care. It just depends on her outside opportunities, and the specific needs of your individual family. And it depends on your non-monetary priorities, beliefs, and desires, as well.

But a family with a spouse who perhaps just has a high school diploma or is in a low-paying field that has little potential for upward mobility? It could very well be that this family would be better off with a SAHP, even 20, 30 or 40 years later; yes, even financially.

And that’s the point I’m really trying to make. Every family’s situation will be different, so we should push to have as many options available to us as possible. Forcing everyone into the paid workforce dramatically reduces the number of options available, not only for a particular family, but for everybody (see Elizabeth Warren’s lecture that I’ve posted here; read her book if you get the chance).

[CA renter]

[quote=spdrun]CA-Renter: the best idea would be for BOTH people in a couple to be able to stay in the workforce while having the same total working hours as a family in the 1960s. Say 60-70 hours, assuming a full-time employed husband at 40 hr and a part-time wife at 20-30 per week.

So split the difference and structure legislation to encourage more jobs to have 30-35 hr per week schedules and flexible time. Plus adequate time off to spend with family in summer or whatever.

We’d of course need health insurance and most benefits to be divorced from employment (to reduce fixed hiring costs) for this to work.[/quote]

Yes, though the working hours were lower than that in the 1960s. You and I are largely in agreement on all of this. I advocate for choice, and for every family to be able to make the decisions that best work for them. What I hate is the belief that what is right for one family should be the only acceptable option for everyone else, no matter what the costs/benefits or other considerations are for those families.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=CA renter][quote=scaredyclassic]right now, my wife is working A LOT, and frankly, i can’t believe how we are back to a healthy level of savings, in spite of throwing more money into our house recently for a refinance and some other large expenses.

i always wondered who in the hell could afford one of those catered bike tour vacations in the catalogues I would get that desperately made me want to hit the road. tuscany. southeast asia. long roads through south america…all supported and deluxe…. Actually, that would probably be us, right now. we could actually afford that. woah. weird….

of course, it would cause me too much physical pain to write the check. but we could afford it! hell, i might just break down and go…

i think i prefer to spend the money on really expensive wood floors, a few fine oriental rugs,some other strangely expensive furnishings, and college tuition, but even then we might have a few bucks left over…more than enough for a cheap vacation somewhere local…[/quote]

Let’s be honest: your wife is a doctor. Yes, the opportunity cost for her to remain out of the workforce to be a SAHP (for life?) would be quite high. Still possible that it would be worth it, though, especially if you were HS’ing all of the kids F/T, and/or if you had a family member who needed chronic care. It just depends on her outside opportunities, and the specific needs of your individual family. And it depends on your non-monetary priorities, beliefs, and desires, as well.

But a family with a spouse who perhaps just has a high school diploma or is in a low-paying field that has little potential for upward mobility? It could very well be that this family would be better off with a SAHP, even 20, 30 or 40 years later; yes, even financially.

And that’s the point I’m really trying to make. Every family’s situation will be different, so we should push to have as many options available to us as possible. Forcing everyone into the paid workforce dramatically reduces the number of options available, not only for a particular family, but for everybody (see Elizabeth Warren’s lecture that I’ve posted here; read her book if you get the chance).[/quote]

it’s true. everyone is different. consumption isn’t everything. indeed, it may be well down the list. we are a very strange society ata very strange time.

still, it all seems kind of interesting and I feel glad Im here now as opposed to any other time or place.

[The-Shoveler]

[quote=spdrun]The only thing that’s unique about Vegas these days (in the US) is that it has legal bordellos outside of city limits.[/quote]

Seriously when was the last time you were in Vegas?

You can do a grand canyon Air tour, see a water canon show see Paris, venice the mediterranean sea and then take in a show all in one day LOL.

I know it’s all fake but it’s good for a few days V-Time.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=The-Shoveler][quote=spdrun]The only thing that’s unique about Vegas these days (in the US) is that it has legal bordellos outside of city limits.[/quote]

Seriously when was the last time you were in Vegas?

You can do a grand canyon Air tour, see a water canon show see Paris, venice the mediterranean sea and then take in a show all in one day LOL.

I know it’s all fake but it’s good for a few days V-Time.[/quote]

plus go to the PAWN STARS shop. wait in line. see the actual joint.

[spdrun]

The only thing that’s interesting out of those things is the G.C. air tour. Other cities have theatres, you know.

If I’m to see Paris or Venice, I’d prefer to see the real thing. The Mediterranean Sea? We have plenty of beautiful coastline to our own right that beats it. San Diego, parts of Long Island, the Nor Cal/Oregon coast, Maine, Southern NJ, Assateague in Virginia, Florida.

[The-Shoveler]

seriously you have never been to Vegas have you?

It’s kind of a Disney world for adults.

You should go once,

[Author]

Posts