So.....even though 3/4 of her take home pay was going to daycare, it still made sense to have her work? Did they factor in the other costs associate with her working such as travel, second vehicle (if needed), gas, the cost of buying meals because you don't have time to make them, tax savings from being in a (possibly) lower tax bracket? Not to mention the things that you can't put a value on such as additional time with your kids.
It seems to me that there are a lot of people who are in financial difficulty because of their "need" to drive a new car, have a new cell phone, a new tv, a big house etc, and then they blame their financial difficulties on their kids...
Wonder what Dave Ramsey would say about this.
Bet he’d suggest the Mom stay home with the kids.
I always noticed how many nurses who went into administrative jobs had kids with serious problems.
Financially, it made more sense for me to create a home business while taking care of the kids than to keep my job. It paid a lot but daycare, clothing, transportation, taxes, etc. made working the long hours of job nonsensical. My husband panicked a bit, but got serious and doubled his income to make up for the loss of my job’s income.
Yep. Sure seems to make sense for Mom to stay home.
Of course, if she does and Dad eventually moves on, lots of Freepers will see his earnings from those years as belonging to him, and while he will have moved toward peak earning capacity, Mom will likely have to claw her way up from a minimum wage job as she re-enters the workforce—with kids in tow.