one salary family

Mojisola

savier wrote: »

isn't it common in UK for grandmothers to look after their grandchildren?

Not when they're still working.

As the pension age rises, there will be even fewer grandparents available for childcare.

sulphate

Rosie_D wrote: »

I'd just like to add that I'm a SAHM & my hubby is on a good wage, he has worked very hard to climb up the work ladder & taken exams etc to get him where he is today (some exams at a cost to us I might add)

Because he's on a good wage we are not entitled to any tax credits or even child benefit, but the people living nearby are both working and probably on more than him with their joint wage, but the still get tax credits & child benefits!

I was wondering how this is fair financially as we have chosen for me to stay at home with the kids, I had a really good job before we had them, it's as though this government is penalising mothers who want to actually look after their own children rather than other people doing it for them!

I remember my childhood really well & that my mum was there for me & my brother every single day & you can't get that time back, & my husband was the same too, we want our kids knowing that we were always there for them.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that mothers who work are wrong to do so, I'm just saying that too many people use the excuse of money to have to work, & we know that you can get along nicely without mothers having to work.

The post above said that 2 parent working families have twice the expense of a sole earner, but they wouldn't have these extra expenses if the mother stayed at home (or father)!

You can't put a price on being there for your own children no matter what anyone says!

Your husband presumably earns in the region of £50k if you are not entitled to child benefit? You might be able to "get along nicely" without you having to work but that's because your husband earns more than double the average wage!

I disagree with your last statement. When I was young my mum worked 70 hours a week to provide for me, but she was always "there for me" (more than my dad, who was a terrible SAHP and didn't work) and we have always been very close. I don't think I missed out by her not being at home, but I would have missed out on many things if she hadn't worked.

Therese1

I am one of 10 and Mum looked after us and the house while Dad worked (OK, in the 60's and 70's!)

The only new clothes we got were shoes - everything else hand-me-downs or home-made.

I can categorically say that I/we never felt we missed out on anything - we had a holiday in the UK or Ireland every year, many days out to the beach, all the food, toys and bikes we needed.....

OK so this may be slightly rose-tinted look at the past - but there is nothing to say that it can't be repeated now.

(I'm single, no children!!)

Cycrow

FireWyrm wrote: »

Actually, I disagree with this example. You need a car for work - mostly, unless you are living in london where you have integrated public transport. For the rest of the world, there is little public transport that is practical.

Nothing however decrees that you have to have a top of the range car...one that goes from A to B is adequate. You can usually pick up a half way decent second hand run around for under £500.

actually you don't, most people dont actually travel that far to work.
i think i read somewhere, the majority of people commute less than 10 miles, which is easily doable on a bike.
There are some people who do live to far and need a car, but most dont.

in a previous job, almost everyone there drove to work, except me as i cycle in, and i lived the furthest away.

i even knew some people who lived about 400meters from work, and still drive there

sulphate

Cycrow wrote: »

actually you don't, most people dont actually travel that far to work.
i think i read somewhere, the majority of people commute less than 10 miles, which is easily doable on a bike.
There are some people who do live to far and need a car, but most dont.

in a previous job, almost everyone there drove to work, except me as i cycle in, and i lived the furthest away.

i even knew some people who lived about 400meters from work, and still drive there

Where did you read that, because I read that the average commute was about 16 miles which isn't feasible to bike for a lot of people.

Both my OH and I need to drive to work, so for us a car is not a luxury.

Rosie_D

USA1, I would just like to add in my defence that I worked FULLTIME from the age of 17 until the age of 35 when I had my first child so I think I have contributed enough NI contributions for myself thank you very much. Please do not insinuate that I am trying to make working mothers pay for my "lifestyle choice" as you all seem to think I have made, I have paid my own tax & NI contributions to justify me being at home with my kids.

Everyone is different & as I said I am not saying I don't agree with working mothers, it's just that people seem to have a downer on SAHM's, that they're scroungers or something, I am not like that in the slightest! We pay our own way in life & I'd like to know what is wrong with a man earning a high wage so his wife can bring up their children?

Nebulous2

usa1 wrote: »

2 parents working have to pay work related expenses, travel, commuting charges , childcare fees, work clothes, and many other expenses that SAHMS don't pay. So yes, the tax system should support the 2 working parents model.

That's a selfish point of view. The tax system shouldn't be used for social engineering to promote one lifestyle over another.

Heffi1

Rosie_D wrote: »

Because he's on a good wage we are not entitled to any tax credits

Nobody told you when you had children that the state would look after them, your husband is one of the fortunate ones, who earns enough to keep you all.

Why should you get more from the state when you clearly do not need it.

And if you did then you have the option of going to work and earning a wage yourself instead of expecting the public purse to bail you out.

If you feel hard done by, would you swap places with someone on a lower wage so that you could get what you feel you are 'entitled to'

No I don't think so either.

Sometimes we need to be grateful for the good things we have in life and not worry about what other people are 'being given' I am sure they do not have the same choices in their lives as you do.

Sorry if that is a little harsh, but I am so tired of hearing about the one getting it all and I have nothing.

You chose to have children, it is YOUR responsibility to raise them and not ours.

snowcat75

Back to the OP, I draw a very mediocre wage from my business, with that I pay everything including the Mortgage, My wife stopped working completly when our second child was born, Nothing against those who do, but I never wanted to have children bought up by a nurssary/child minder.

I have never given a toss about the trinkets of life, My computer is old, yet I can still design in 3d Cad, My laptop was barterd for an hours work, Iv driven beaten up old pickups that make uncle bucks car look like a peach, had boots before with gaffa taped soles, my overalls normally have more holes in than swiss cheese, but why the hell wold I be happier with a house full of material tat.

Personaly I dont think its that people cannot manage on a single wage, Its more the fact they are not willing to give up the lifestyle and the need for material possessions, that they associate with happiness.

Kids Really don't want or need for much, the main thing they want is time, and although they may "want" for the latest Toys or gadgets, these are soon forgotten about when a walk over the fields to hunt for an old animals skull, light a fire, climb something, beat some metal around in the workshop, look for snakes, bugs, lizards, or blow something up, is in the offing.

Maybe I was born in a the wrong era, but you can keep your smartphones, luxury Cars, Gym membership???!!!..

Rosie_D

You chose to have children, it is YOUR responsibility to raise them and not ours.[/QUOTE]

Yes exactly the point, it is my responsibility to raise them not anyone else's, which is why I'm doing just that!

What I was trying to say is why is it ok for our neighbours to get the benefits when they are both working & earn more than my husband does when their wages are put together? Why is that fair when their annual income is more than ours, what difference should it make as to how that income is brought into the home?

We waited over 10 years to have our children after being told we couldn't have any, lots of failed fertility attempts, so why should anyone judge me for wanting to spend time with our children now we finally have been blessed enough to have them?