Recession: A Return to Tradition?

[jyl]

When one parent makes >$200K/yr, whether the other parent works or stays home with the kids is largely a lifestyle/parenting philosophy-driven decision, and seldom a financial/tax-driven decision.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

How realistic is this scenario for most people?

Well, in 5-10 years, the guy at McDonald's will probably be making over $200k a year what with inflation is going to do to us, but that's also not what I'm getting at here...

Also, I think anyone that's making $200k a year right now has a big giant bulls-eye painted on themselves. They're a prime target for layoffs and even if they're not laid off by their own employer, they're most definitely being targeted by the liberals because they make too much $$$ that really should go to other people.

[jyl]

I was responding to the notion that higher marginal income tax rates on AGI >$200K (or is it $250K?) will drive spouses to become homemakers. My point is, if one spouse makes >$200K, the other spouse's decision to work vs parent full-time is typically not a financially-driven decision and certainly not a tax-driven decision.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by legion

Nice strawman.

I asked if this was a trend, which next to no one has answered.

Chris, you're too sensitive. BTW, Donna Reed was a hottie in her day.

[legion]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

Chris, you're too sensitive. BTW, Donna Reed was a hottie in her day.

Sorry, I was sans-caffeine when I posted that.

I didn't start this to be a misogynistic thread, I just wondered if something I had observed was being observed by other people, or if it was an isolated incident.

[cgarr]

I think the trend is to just give up on finding a job for the ladies, The new trend of choice is the paid off mortgage.

A funny note: My wife has not worked for the past 18 years when we had our kids and most looked down at her back then as if she was screwy or something, now that the kids are older she went back to work two years ago, I do feel bad because she does not have to work and there are people that could really use her job and need it, I told her she can quit anytime she wants.

[Noah930]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

I know two people personally who have been actively looking for work over a year already (that's 52 weeks) with nothing other than part-time or temporary crap paying a fraction of what they made previously. One's benefits run out I think in three months, the other I think goes until December. That's not really all that great for them.

I can't understand why someone would feel the need to pick on people in these sorts of predicaments - it's like beating up on a disabled kid. What's the point?

I think trying to get people back on their feet is about the best thing government CAN spend money on, if it's going to spend money... IMHO it should be going further by extending massive tax credits to businesses that permanently hire full-time employees (with benefits) right now in order to give incentives for job creation. I've heard a couple of programs in this area, but they're very half-hearted efforts and most businesses don't even know they exist.

People need to get back to work at meaningful jobs, for real salaries before we've got any chance of a recovery. This is absolutely crucial.

Jeff, I'm surprised that you're suddenly so P.C. I'm also surprised that you now seem to support ever-increasing handouts over personal responsibility.

I'm sorry if I offended those who have recently lost their jobs. I sincerely hope your stressful times are short-lived. Those of you who bristled at my original post seem to have lost your jobs fairly recently, and have been trying to find employment. I think that's what umemployment is for: to help bridge the temporary gap between job loss and re-employment, while you're actively trying to find another job. I apologize if I suggested that all unemployed are lazy or unmotivated.

What I'm quite against is the attitude of "Oh, I'll worry about finding a job when my unemployment runs out." I've seen it in the past, and even now. Maybe not on this thread, but it's certainly prevalent in society.

I'm also against extending unemployment benefits for long periods of time. I suppose that's where we differ in our opinions. Unemployment used to be for about half a year (twenty-some weeks) in California. It was then extended to a little over a year (fifty-some weeks) a few years ago. Recently, using federal bailout money, it has been extended to cover something like 79 weeks of unemployment. That's ridiculous. Perhaps I'll offend everyone in the PSUP, but if you can't find a job in a year, you're not trying hard enough.

No BS about there not being adequate jobs to pay a decent living wage. That's cr@p. I agree there are many jobs that pay didly. That's why you take 2 or 3 of those jobs at the same time. It's not ideal. It sucks. But if the options are being homeless/hungry versus working multiple menial jobs to keep a roof over my family's heads, I certainly know what I'll be doing. What kind of sense of entitlement is going on that people won't work because they can't find high paying jobs? If you're unemployed for a year and can't find work in your usual and customary occupation, go find work doing something else.

Oh, and your analogy to a disabled kid is quite poor. A disabled kid has a tough time in life because he simply can't do certain things for himself. People who are unemployed are (in general) fairly able-bodied and functional. They can do a lot of things for themselves. Big difference, IMO.

Apologize for the threadjack.

[Oh Haha]

Talk about "when it rains, it pours".

I had a couple of phone interviews in the last 24 hours that are not going to pan out for various reasons. This morning I decided that I am going to go to school to work on getting a certificate to become a master mechanic. I just don't see any jobs on the horizon so i figured now is the time to make the change. I went to the college and got the process started with plans to start full time at the end of June.


In the meantime, I get a VM from a local employer that wants a face to face interview with me ASAP. Great. Now what? If I get this job it will be full time. Can I go to school,too? Don't know but I am going to find out.

Several of the guys that worked for me ARE going to wait until the benefits run out and then try to find something. Stupid move, I say.


My wife has already had an interview with a major retail store and will probably get the job(part-time). It's not a job I could do but she will be great at it.

Noah--I didn't take your post personally but I wanted to give a side that maybe wasn't represented.

[jyl]

How much, $ per month, are typical unemployment benefits?

[Oh Haha]

Here in Michigan the maximum is $387.00 per week.

Woohoo.

[jyl]

So $1,664/mo. Not a huge sum. Doesn't seem like an incentive to kick back and not look for work. Not suggesting that anyone here is doing that.

[einreb]

Originally Posted by cgarr

The new trend of choice is the paid off mortgage.

Interesting trend in a historically low interest rate environment.

I think folks don't fully appreciate the impact of two spouses working. Daycare, extra vehicle wear and tear, lunch out, 'work clothes', etc.

I little dose of fiscal sanity and realizing that you don't need to live a dual income lifestyle and $150/month direct TV subscription is a good thing .

[BLEW911]

Originally Posted by Noah930

Jeff, I'm surprised that you're suddenly so P.C. I'm also surprised that you now seem to support ever-increasing handouts over personal responsibility.

I'm sorry if I offended those who have recently lost their jobs. I sincerely hope your stressful times are short-lived. Those of you who bristled at my original post seem to have lost your jobs fairly recently, and have been trying to find employment. I think that's what umemployment is for: to help bridge the temporary gap between job loss and re-employment, while you're actively trying to find another job. I apologize if I suggested that all unemployed are lazy or unmotivated.

What I'm quite against is the attitude of "Oh, I'll worry about finding a job when my unemployment runs out." I've seen it in the past, and even now. Maybe not on this thread, but it's certainly prevalent in society.

I'm also against extending unemployment benefits for long periods of time. I suppose that's where we differ in our opinions. Unemployment used to be for about half a year (twenty-some weeks) in California. It was then extended to a little over a year (fifty-some weeks) a few years ago. Recently, using federal bailout money, it has been extended to cover something like 79 weeks of unemployment. That's ridiculous. Perhaps I'll offend everyone in the PSUP, but if you can't find a job in a year, you're not trying hard enough.

No BS about there not being adequate jobs to pay a decent living wage. That's cr@p. I agree there are many jobs that pay didly. That's why you take 2 or 3 of those jobs at the same time. It's not ideal. It sucks. But if the options are being homeless/hungry versus working multiple menial jobs to keep a roof over my family's heads, I certainly know what I'll be doing. What kind of sense of entitlement is going on that people won't work because they can't find high paying jobs? If you're unemployed for a year and can't find work in your usual and customary occupation, go find work doing something else.

Oh, and your analogy to a disabled kid is quite poor. A disabled kid has a tough time in life because he simply can't do certain things for himself. People who are unemployed are (in general) fairly able-bodied and functional. They can do a lot of things for themselves. Big difference, IMO.

Apologize for the threadjack.

[ruf-porsche]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

Chris, you're too sensitive. BTW, Donna Reed was a hottie in her day.

Actually both the mother and daughter (Shelley Fabres) were hotties.

[herr_oberst]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

Perhaps Chris is longing for the days when husbands came home from work and the little woman is all dressed up, the kids are clean and obedient, and dinner is ready to hit the table.

(that's dinner, for a family of four you're seeing on the stove.)

20 hour workweeks with no bennies will mean less meat on the table.

[artplumber]

Then there are folks asking for disability when they are not disabled, so they can get to Medicare benefits....

[Crowbob]

As the economy tanks, disability applications rise. It's an inverse relationship, proven by time.