Building a life together. Still possible?

[jeff0011]

I think I have a problem with comparing my childhood to current day society.  

After my divorce I spoke to a therapist. Not because I really needed to, but to stay on the right track.  One thing she said was “today are strange times.  Nobody knows their role and people have too many options”

My mom and dad had me at a later age. They were born in 30’s and 40’s.  Never divorced. Mom worked up until marriage then stayed home.  

So for me, that was the perfect model.  My dad worked, handed check to mom, and she spent her days finding ways to collect coupons.  Save money.  Cook from scratch.  Sew clothes. Keep the home clean. Help us with studies. So when dad was off work he was free, and then spent his time taking us too sports, training us, playing etc. Both parents were relaxed.  Not overburdened. But worked hard. A true partnership. So she didn’t work outside of home,but money she saved more than compensated for it. It made sense.  

But this is what I have found:

Some women I dated truly have this same dream . However, they have enormous debt, and their poor spending habits are already ingrained in them. College debt, credit cards, car etc. So they have to keep working, and I’m not about to pay off all Of their mistakes and spend the time teaching them about money.  Saving etc  It’s hard to change people.

Some women like this idea, but they have no real skills.  They could stay home, but they don’t have the mindset of working together.  They are consumed with Facebook, spending, competing with other women.  They can’t even boil an egg or pick up after themselves.  Then they are still “not happy” and want to work, but then hate work lol. For them having sex should compensate for everything else.
 

Then with career women I dated they typically do not love their job, but it consumes their life.  Lay out clothes night before, bed early, wake up early to do hair, get dressed, work and repeat.  Also, it’s again, no advantage to me as that is “their money” and they typically do not want to be a true 50/50 partner sharing bills.  In that case I am tying my life  to one woman who spends 80 percent of her life working , preparing for work, and sleeping.   It’s sort of like keeping the old fashioned ways that only benefit them. 
 

Logically speaking, none of the above scenarios make enough sense to completely entangle myself with a woman financially and legally, especially if they take divorce lightly.  What is the advantage?

And more or less most of them are saying “I want to marry but no good men want a relationship”   

 

 

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by jeff0011

[Blind-Sided]

I feel you.  Since my divorce... it's kind of the same. There is one girl who I'm attracted to, but I know she has debt, and may have to declare bankruptcy.  I spent the better part of my life making sure my credit was spotless.  I know another girl who is a Layer, and is very career driven.  I think the only difference is... I already have kids, so I'm not looking for a "Stay Hone Mom" kind of deal.  But in both of my cases, the reality is... do I want someone who is financially not stable.... or someone who may not put enough time into a "Family" situation?

Unfortunately... the "Norman Rockwell" family you are looking for may be hard to get these days. And I am sorry for that. And the real question is... do you settle for something different, or do you keep searching for someone that fits exactly.  Unfortunately... if you find love... things may change.

Now real answers... just Empathy.

[jeff0011]

11 minutes ago, Blind-Sided said:

 

Unfortunately... the "Norman Rockwell" family you are looking for may be hard to get these days. And I am sorry for that. And the real question is... do you settle for something different, or do you keep searching for someone that fits exactly.  Unfortunately... if you find love... things may change.

Now real answers... just Empathy.

Yes exactly. How much do people "settle" just to be in a marriage or relationship these days? Do they think logically?  Or just try to fit their life around what makes a woman happy constantly?  "ok, Ill do the cooking.. Ill pay the bills.. Ok, lets just always go out to eat.. Sure quit your job.. Sure start another job"

Edited January 23, 2020 by jeff0011

[chillii]

l dunno what sort of ages you guys are or these women , where you are probably has a lot to do with it to and the mentality. But l was divorced late 40s so met women 40s and later early 50s . l mean for a start , l'm very very picky. ln 7yrs l only spent time with two women and the second one l'm still with. They've both been very sensible very smart girls feet on the ground and know exactly what they're about and want out of life now.  Along the way l also met others much the same that would make fantastic partners but it was just that none of those were my thing was all.  But the quality of the person and her ideals , wants out of life and what she's about are very very easy to see straight of with some talking and if they aren't what your looking for just don't even bother.

l  noticed 100s of others though , more the norm actually , met a few to, that l wouldn't touch with a barge pole but that was very obvious minute one too . Crazy or life's a mess or they're so emotionally screwed up but really . same again they're very easy to pick and you just don't even bother with them.

l mean it's a challenge for sure finding one with her head still screwed on and not fkd up in some or many ways at this age but at the same time it does make that decent girl much easier to pick when you do see her because she'll be very clearly 100 cuts above the rest at a glance.   Just look for decent quality still sane women and with the other things and like mindedness in ideals you look for, forget the rest. They are out there , but it is gonna take time.

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by chillii

[jeff0011]

4 minutes ago, chillii said:

 

l mean it's a challenge for sure finding one with her head still screwed on and not fkd up in some or many ways at this age but at the same time it does make that decent girl much easier to pick when you do see her because she'll be very clearly 100 cuts above the rest at a glance.   Just look for decent quality still sane women and with the other things you look for, forget the rest. They are out there.

 

Makes perfect sense. I think in the past some of the "messed up" ones stick to you like glue, offer looks, great sex, etc, then over time you end up trying to decide "ok, how much crazy is too much crazy". Then already being invested you try to fix things. 

So at a certain point one wonders is this how most women are? And some guys just deal with it?  Or do sane and logical single women exist that make good decisions. 

[chillii]

Ahh for sure . That's why l've only been involved with 2 in almost 8yrs. l know myself too well haha and if l start spending time with someone that isn't right for me l'll just end up sticking round for the goodies until l finally can't stand it anymore.  So for me it's just better all round if l just wait for the right woman.

But hell yeah , most of them are just such a mess it's literally scary, well by the sorta age l was looking for anyway. My gf isn't prefect she does have some big problems legal stuff from her marriage but she's working hard to clear all that up. No ones gonna be perfect we've all got stuff later on but the right person and you help each other and work through things together. But we think alike have all the same ideals and want the same things , life, get along really well and if she can sort out the other stuff , l really couldn't ask for more..

She is out there but l dunno , maybe it's just my way but l always tell people you've just gotta be very very selective .

[Gaeta]

Nowadays it's hard for EVERYBODY to find someone. It's not a woman thing or a man thing. I went through hell and back before finding my boyfriend at 50, my daughter met the same type of problems while dating at 30, our office secretary of 25 cannot, for the love of god, find a decent man! So far men mid-20 to 30 years old have been manipulative, jealous, rude, and this only a couple of weeks into dating. This world is upside down, yes. But there are still good people, you just need to search harder. 

 

[Els]

How much do you earn? It's fine to want your parents' relationship, and I'm sure you can find a woman who suits you if that's your main priority. But, maintaining a household (of, say, 4 people) on one income in the vast majority of the developed world requires the breadwinner (you) to be earning well over $100k. In the city I live in, make that $200k.

[jeff0011]

30 minutes ago, Elswyth said:

How much do you earn? It's fine to want your parents' relationship, and I'm sure you can find a woman who suits you if that's your main priority. But, maintaining a household (of, say, 4 people) on one income in the vast majority of the developed world requires the breadwinner (you) to be earning well over $100k. In the city I live in, make that $200k.

Yes, money is not the issue.

But that brings up a good point. it does not seem like someone is "happy" with the old fashioned lifestyle. But then they are not happy working and being in debt either.  So it all leads to confusion.

But as I pointed out in my first post, my parents for example WORKED TOGETHER and they made it easily on one income largely because of my moms selflessness and frugality. If my mom was the type to say "Nah, I don't cook!.. I want to eat out and vacation like everyone on Facebook. We all need new clothes and furniture! I have 50 k in debt!" it never would have worked. She would have jumped to a "higher earner", or they both would have worked and nobody would pay attention to the kids etc

 

 

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by jeff0011

[Els]

The cost of living in most places was different 60(?) years ago. Frugality plays a part, sure, but the cost of living is still an undeniable factor.

 

[jeff0011]

2 minutes ago, Elswyth said:

The cost of living in most places was different 60(?) years ago. Frugality plays a part, sure, but the cost of living is still an undeniable factor.

 

Or lifestyle.  You don't need 20,000 a month to live. Im not talking about Manhattan or San Francisco. Most women I have ever know that do work don't make much more than 4k a month

[Els]

7 minutes ago, jeff0011 said:

Or lifestyle.  You don't need 20,000 a month to live. Im not talking about Manhattan or San Francisco. Most women I have ever know that do work don't make much more than 4k a month

$100k a year is only ~$8k a month. You DO need at least that much to support a family of 4 in most of the developed world today.

[jeff0011]

The median household income in the USA is 63.000. Which means half of all households earn less than that. 

[Els]

10 minutes ago, jeff0011 said:

The median household income in the USA is 63.000. Which means half of all households earn less than that. 

That includes single people living alone and couples without children. I imagine you could survive as 4 people on $63k, but life would not be pleasant, and you are correct that most women would not sign up for being a SAHM with that income. It would make much more sense for the woman to work in that situation.

[jeff0011]

2 minutes ago, Elswyth said:

That includes single people living alone and couples without children. I imagine you could survive as 4 people on $63k, but life would not be pleasant, and you are correct that most women would not sign up for being a SAHM with that income. It would make much more sense for the woman to work in that situation.

Well I don't have 4 people lol.. Anyway, I make over 100k..  

[sothereiwas]

1 hour ago, Elswyth said:

How much do you earn? It's fine to want your parents' relationship, and I'm sure you can find a woman who suits you if that's your main priority. But, maintaining a household (of, say, 4 people) on one income in the vast majority of the developed world requires the breadwinner (you) to be earning well over $100k. In the city I live in, make that $200k.

It depends a lot on how you define a family and where that family lives. A household can do OK in some places in the USA on the median income IMO. In a big city, probably not. When it comes to saving for retirement, college, and so on it can be done but it's going to be tricky. Also, how that money is earned matters. If it's a single earner family, that frees the other parent to take steps to save money in a multitude of ways. So I'd say it's possible but not easy.

I choose to work in a low cost place to live and I earn significantly more than the median. In fact this year I'll probably pay about the median income in taxes. So money isn't a big problem here, but not rich either. 

But I don't think a person has to earn that much to make it possible. 

Edited January 23, 2020 by sothereiwas
Phrasing

[jeff0011]

11 minutes ago, Elswyth said:

That includes single people living alone and couples without children. I imagine you could survive as 4 people on $63k, but life would not be pleasant, and you are correct that most women would not sign up for being a SAHM with that income. It would make much more sense for the woman to work in that situation.

The median income for a family of 4 is 81,000. Half of all families of 4 make less than that. Half make more. 

 

[Els]

I think there's a difference between a family that falls on hard times or had unexpected reasons preventing one person from working, and a woman who explicitly signs up to be a SAHM. There are very few women I know who aspire to be SAHMs, and they all give HUGE priority to the man's income when making their choice of a partner. If you plan to both work and share the household chores and childcare, or if you don't want kids, it matters less.

[jeff0011]

Just now, Elswyth said:

I think there's a difference between a family that falls on hard times or had unexpected reasons preventing one person from working, and a woman who explicitly signs up to be a SAHM. There are very few women I know who aspire to be SAHMs, and they all give HUGE priority to the man's income when making their choice of a partner. If you plan to both work and share the household chores and childcare, or if you don't want kids, it matters less.

Well most women I have met really can't afford to be a stay at home mom because of their spending habits and debt.And after all of their work they are in more debt.. 

[jeff0011]

15 minutes ago, Elswyth said:

I think there's a difference between a family that falls on hard times or had unexpected reasons preventing one person from working, and a woman who explicitly signs up to be a SAHM. There are very few women I know who aspire to be SAHMs, and they all give HUGE priority to the man's income when making their choice of a partner. If you plan to both work and share the household chores and childcare, or if you don't want kids, it matters less.

This the point. I have a nice home... So if I say I am paying for all the bills, food etc, how much is that single woman really earning on her own? her work goes to tax, clothes, rent, food, etc. How far ahead is she on her own?

Edited January 23, 2020 by jeff0011

[nospam99]

After my ex-wife was 'laid off', I supported a family of FIVE with a high standard of living on just my salary with living expenses under $100k/year. Most expenses were taxes and health insurance premiums which increases about 250% under Obamacare. This is pretty typical of NY past Westchester/Rockland. And NY has a higher COL than most states because of the high taxes.
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-highest-lowest-tax-burden/20494/
https://taxfoundation.org/state-gas-tax-rates-2019/
Taxes in NY are actually higher than the web pages indicates. Sales tax alone is 8% and there are taxes added to the phone bills that mostly 'fly under the radar'. Plus 'fees' for state services.

So it's still possible to build a life together in most states in the US. I'll let the Californians chime in with whether the higher salaries on the 'left coast' are enough to offset the higher COL. The higher salaries in Manhattan (New York County) are enough to offset the higher COL there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_locations_by_per_capita_income

[jeff0011]

1 hour ago, Elswyth said:

I think there's a difference between a family that falls on hard times or had unexpected reasons preventing one person from working, and a woman who explicitly signs up to be a SAHM. There are very few women I know who aspire to be SAHMs, and they all give HUGE priority to the man's income when making their choice of a partner. If you plan to both work and share the household chores and childcare, or if you don't want kids, it matters less.

I can’t tell if these replies are snarky?  Or do women really have this thought process? 
 

There is typically a natural flow in life .  Few of us would be here if our moms thought “hmmm. That single guy doesn’t make enough for me and our future kids.  And I want to stay home.  So I will find someone else. The way you are writing seems to say :

a.  Women decide far ahead if they will stay at home or not before they even meet a guy? And that is somehow set in stone?

B. Women Who want to stay at home then take a look at what the man CURRENTLY makes and decides “well I won’t be with him.  He isn’t currently making enough for our future family of four!”

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by jeff0011

[mark clemson]

It sounds like you need to perma-fiancee and not marry. Or keep searching for the right gal. Talk to a lawyer about perma-fiancee/moving in together in case there are common law marriage laws in your area. (Don't listen to well meaning friends, talk to an actual lawyer.)

If you live in an area without common law marriage, you can give a woman most of the "the benefits of marriage" without actually marrying. You can write her into your will, create two bank accounts, one of which is in both of your names. Name her as beneficiary of your savings/retirement accounts. Get life insurance with her as a beneficiary.

I'd draw the line at putting her name on a house if you own it to avoid any problems if you break up, but you can leave it to her in your will.

Do all that and then buy 3 rings - one for you and two for her. Viola.

Maybe all that's not for you. IF I was to ever divorce and find someone else, that's what I'd probably do. She can feel there's commitment without having a legal stranglehold on any of my assets. Doesn't work in all areas though I believe.

For myself, I've always expected my wife to work. I don't feel right about a woman who doesn't bring in some of her own money. My wife is exceptionally busy with her job and some other life issues. But I expect and insist she make time for me and she does. I do the same for her. But everyone's different and our marriage practices wouldn't be ideal for all.

[Ruby Slippers]

I recently broke up with someone 2 months into a relationship. We were very much beginning to live the kind of life you describe.

There was a recent episode where he had too much to drink and was a jerk, tried to demean me while out on a date, so I broke it off. I'm not sure we could recover from this, but I'll do my part to transition peacefully, whatever the next phase looks like.

I just wanted to chime in and say that, however flawed we may be, there are people out there who want that life and are happy and willing to do what's required to bring it to life. We were both giving a lot and making certain sacrifices for the greater good, thriving within that.

There are positives to being single, but I personally feel marriage and family (whether bio, adopted, fostered, or whatever form it takes) offers a richer, fuller experience.

[Els]

27 minutes ago, jeff0011 said:

I can’t tell if these replies are snarky?  Or do women really have this thought process? 
 

There is typically a natural flow in life .  Few of us would be here if our moms thought “hmmm. That single guy doesn’t make enough for me and our future kids.  And I want to stay home.  So I will find someone else. The way you are writing seems to say :

a.  Women decide far ahead if they will stay at home or not before they even meet a guy? And that is somehow set in stone?

B. Women Who want to stay at home then take a look at what the man CURRENTLY makes and decides “well I won’t be with him.  He isn’t currently making enough for our future family of four!”

 

 

Yes, some women do know ahead of time that they want to be a SAHM if possible, and also some women know ahead of time that they don't ever want to be one. I don't see why this is so surprising to you - YOU seem to know what sort of relationship and roles you want in a marriage, why do you think women do not?

And yes, in my experience women who feel that they want to be a SAHM will primarily base their selection of a mate on his ability to provide. Yes, they probably will not date you seriously if they think you cannot fulfill that role. Again, you are clearly basing your choice of a mate on similar things (her debt, ability to cook, etc), why do you think women do not?

1 hour ago, jeff0011 said:

This the point. I have a nice home... So if I say I am paying for all the bills, food etc, how much is that single woman really earning on her own? her work goes to tax, clothes, rent, food, etc. How far ahead is she on her own?

I'm not sure exactly what your question is, but I'm going to guess at what I think you mean. Obviously you have the right to pick your partner based on any criteria you want. But there are benefits to a dual income.

For instance, H earns enough that we could live quite comfortably on his salary alone, but I still choose to work full time and we BOTH prefer that. Besides the fact that he finds it attractive,  my income is also a failsafe in case he ever gets laid off work or anything happens to him, and it pads our savings and allows us to enjoy life more. I'm happier being able to engage intellectually and contribute to progress with my work. Win-win-win.