Poll--Did previous generations live on one income?

[KungFuPanda]

On paper it looks like a lot of families for a few generations back lived on one income, but they raised and preserved so much food that it would be hard to claim they got by on that income alone. I'm probably the first that lives in the suburbs and doesn't have a garden . . .so no serious canning or chicken wrangling for me. Also, now that I'm teaching 5 classes a week in my home studio I'm not sure whether or not I've retained my stay-at-home status :glare:

[AHASRADA]

We're doing okay on a single income.

 

My parents always survived on a single income.

 

Both sets of my grandparents survived on single incomes.

 

The great-grandparents were farmers, so I guess that counts as single income. (???)

 

I have no idea if my family is the norm or not.

 

Same experience here, exactly!

 

My mother worked off and on once I was in school, but for her own discretionary spending and self-fulfillment, not to pay the bills, so I didn't count that.

[Sevilla]

Both sets of grandparents lived on one income - one was a white collar job and had a more comfortable life, the other was an unskilled blue collar factory job but they were able to budget enough to afford private Catholic school for their three girls - they went without vacations and new clothes to do it, but they still had that as an option. My grandpa was unionized which likely helped his wages, and he did work long hours, but his family was provided for.

 

I shudder to think of what my grandparents' life would be like today were they trying to get by on just the husband's factory wages.

 

My parents also did just one income until I was in high school (at that point my mom went back to school/work but it wasn't to support the family, it was more for personal enrichment). My dad was a small business owner and was very successful, and they also bought an old house that had an apartment to rent upstairs which helped supplement income when times were leaner.

[Onceuponatime]

I don't buy this argument. My parents had a *BETTER* lifestyle when I was my oldest DD's age than we do now, and it was on a lower income in constant dollars. They had 2 cars. We only have 1. They used to take vacations to places like Disney World. We only visit relatives' homes. Our town didn't get wired for cable until I was a freshman in high school, but once it was available, my parents had it. We don't. They bought our clothes at the mall. We get ours at consignment shops or on clearance at places like TJ Maxx, Walmart, and Old Navy. Yes, we have cell phones, but we don't have a landline and the monthly cost in constant dollars is similar to what they paid for their two landlines & long distance.

 

The difference? Their first home (which was in the Bay Area) cost twice my dad's salary. Our first home cost triple my DH's salary. My dad graduated from business school with a debt representing 10% of his first-year salary. My DH graduated from business school with a total debt that nearly equaled his first-year salary. My dad had health insurance through his employer with no premiums, cost-shares, deductibles, or co-pays. We are paying hundreds per month just in premiums, and thousands more per year in deductibles, cost-shares, and co-pays.

 

It's not about having a more lavish lifestyle- it's the fact that housing, healthcare, and higher education has shot through the roof in the last 30 years. :mad:

 

It is a matter of perspective. We have a bigger house, a lot more stuff , and nicer cars than my family did growing up. However, my parent's first house cost the same as the average new car does now. We went to Disney World quite often because it wasn't any more than a restaurant meal costs now, for the entire family. We also carry a lot more debt than my parents ever did, and back then when you put money in the bank it actually used to compound nicely.

 

I think if we were to totally eliminate all the debt that we now carry so that we were in the position my parents once were, we would be living in an apartment and driving only one car.

[amyable]

My answers are more complicated than the poll responses I actually checked (that all but one set of grandparents lived on one income) -

 

I believe my parents *could* have lived on one income if my dad wasn't an unstable job hopper (he's still at it...70 years old and he just quit a job they really need - sorry, vent over). They also bought lots of wants when they should have been saving for needs. Anyway...my mom was able to stay home until I was about 13.

 

My maternal grandmother left her husband when he refused to work after "recovering" from TB. She was able to raise my mom and uncle on one income I believe - she managed a bowling alley and even won a few of those Saturday afternoon bowling tournaments you'd see on TV in the 70's. :D

 

My paternal grandparents lived on one income but I know for a time they lived with my great grandparents...not sure how many years that was.

 

Great grandparents owned an ice skating rink and other things such as Italian Ice stands, etc. Family business, but I mostly heard of the men working at it and the women working at home (all the stories are of my Italian great grandmother cooking her wonderful homemade ravioli, etc :D)

 

I'm not sure what the other set of great grandparents did but I know they were immigrants from Germany and didn't speak much English. I don't remember hearing of the mother working ... and knowing how my mom felt about it all I think I would have.

[Ecclecticmum]

I'm counted in the "young" area of the boards *blush*

 

So my mother was a real-life career first woman. She KNEW how to bake, make a bed, etc, put out a kitchen fire (LONG STORY that one).....and she learnt all this off her mother (my great-grandmother) then, as such, never taught me ANYTHING. Just expected me to know it. Her career came first, she's never been a housewife. And as such, I make a poorly housewife, and have had to learn even to do the most simplest things myself, and at my age, asking anybody how to do "housewife-ly" things leads them to say them same as my mother did to me at 10 "you should know how to do this!" ummmm....how? When I haven't been taught? As such, I am guilty of getting Home Economics from Pearables, so my daughter will not end up having the same problem. And I have ended up having a great affinity for collection homekeeping books.

 

So yes, my mother always worked. I believe their was one time (when she was still with my biological father) she was "forced" into being the housewife. Cooking, cleaning, not allowed to work, she separated from him when I was in Year 1, so I don't remember much of her being an actual housewife. She rebelled against it, I suppose you could say.

 

My Grandmother has always been the stereotypical housewife. You could bounced a coin off her sheets :lol: Thats the first time I actually knew that saying to actually be true! She's never worked as far as I am aware, has always been the kitchen wife (and seems to enjoy doing so :) ) She's always busy.

 

As for my dads parents, I don't know. I can't really remember them.

 

My step fathers parents are strict catholics. The Mother stays at home with the kids whilst the father works. I never met them, thats about all I know. I think his sister (since she's held onto the catholic beliefs) seems to be the same way, I don't remember her working at all either.

[redsquirrel]

my parents both worked for money. Both sets of grandparents worked for money. My maternal grandmother pretty much supported the family as a nurse, although my grandfather did work. He didn't have much/any education and always had a job, but it never paid well.

 

My maternal great-grandmother worked as a cleaning girl in Ireland and in this country as well. Her mother worked at something in an Irish city. All my mother's aunts and great aunts worked. I grew up mostly knowing my mother's side of the family and all the women had paying jobs and so had their mothers. It was something they were proud of and something they talked about. They could support themselves.

 

On my husband's side, both his parents worked for money. His mom worked part time when the kids were young and full time as they got older. His paternal grandparents had a dairy farm, and my FIL is very clear that his mother ran the business as much as his father did. DH's maternal grandparents were both employed for money. His maternal grandfather was a musician by night and an elevator operator by day. His maternal grandmother ran an insurance office and supported the family.

[LisaKinVA]

My mom's parent's did...my grandfather worked a union job. My parents have for about half of their married life. But, beyond that, no. Long line of farmers (everyone works at a farm), and shop owners (everyone works at the store, or they are home tending to little ones, so parents can be at the store).

 

My husband and I have never been "comfortable" living on his salary, we lived comfortably in AR because of my income (I made nearly 3x what he did). When we moved back here, he started his career over for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th times. His income is now at a level that it is possible to make it -- but what puts us over is my income. At some point in the next 3 years, we will again swap highest income earner status. He'll keep working for the insurance. I'll be working to pay off the mortgage, replace cars, and improve our savings (and pay for kids' college).

 

In my dh's family, one set of grandparents both worked all the time. The other set, his grandmother was a SAHM. His mother has worked off & on throughout their married life. She now manages their business.

 

I'm trying to prepare my girls to do both -- be prepared to work if it's necessary, and know how to stay home. I hope my daughters aren't in a position where they *have* to work, but honestly, I have gotten so far from the mom's place is in the home position I was raised with, it would make my mother's hair stand up on end :p

 

Fortunately, my job(s) have been ones where I could very easily work from home, so it has never been a choice of keep the kids at home OR my going to work.

[Shellydon]

All of my family have always lived on one income. They lived very modest lifestyles that most people are not willing to do these days.

[Dmmetler]

My parents did-my mother didn't work outside the house once I was born, and, in fact, still doesn't. She was and is the perennial volunteer who was active in the schools and church, always had a houseful of kids in the afternoons because she was there, and who was listed as the "in case of emergency, call" for half the neighborhood. By the time I was in my teens, I suspect we would have seen her more if she'd had a job :). Dh's family also was single income, but with a lower income.

 

Both my grandparents farmed, and that's basically a full-time job for two people, plus whatever kids are at home, with a single income. It seemed very idyllic when I'd visit as a kid, like stepping into a Little House book or something, but in retrospect, I well understand why both my parents were more than willing to take college scholarships when they were offered and move on.

Edited April 6, 2012 by dmmetler

[hsmamainva]

My mother worked as a preschool teacher, but she didn't begin working until I was in high school. Before that, she was a stay-at-home mom. My dad had retired about the same time and she said that he was driving her nuts being home all day, so she went to work. :D

 

My maternal grandparents lived on one income. My grandfather owned a car dealership.

 

My paternal grandparents -- both worked. My grandfather ran the family farm and my grandmother was the teacher in the county's one room schoolhouse. :)

 

Not sure about my maternal great-grandparents. I don't know much about them, but I know that my paternal great-grandfather was the county sheriff. Don't know about my paternal great-grandmother or if she worked.

[garddwr]

I think if you go back more than a generation or two what you find is that in many family providing a living was the business of all family members--father, mother, and children. One difference is that many families worked together, running a family farm or family business. Homemaking was itself a full-time job and had a big financial impact on the family as well--a woman who did all her own cooking, sewing, preserving, laundry, etc. worked from sun-up to sun-down, and while this may not have brought in money it contributed to the sustenance of the family just as surely--the only other option would be to pay money to have all these things done.

[mommaduck]

My folks were single income until I was eight. Then they became double income, bought a house (prior, they had lived on military bases), etc. We weren't wealthy, but we weren't poor. One set of grandparents was always one income. One set was double income, but they were separated. One set was single income until that spouse could no longer work, then remained single income as the other went to work. Great grandparents were all single income, though times were tough. One difference between all of them and us is that we homeschool. I've tried going to work, going back to school, etc. It doesn't work. My husband has gotten jobs because there is a SAHM, so employers don't have to worry about him being out due to kids being sick and they can shift his schedule around as needed. So my job is here. Anything I do has to be out of the home.

[Tarreymere]

I have to laugh, because in reading the original post I can see that expectations are very different. The Op seemed to feel that her one set of grandparents lived less than comfortably because they shared one car, had no dishwasher and no dryer. What was the perception of those grandparents?

 

I imagine they didn't have a microwave, because they probably weren't invented yet, and had no mobile phone, ipod, central ac, computer, or color tv. They had no internet. I could go on, but really even just this very short list of the kind of 'stuff' our culture has come to consider so necessary for a 'comfortable life' is an explanation in itself of WHY so many people feel they fall short and live with hardship.

 

What happened to being 'comfortable' with a roof over your head, one indoor bathroom, hot water, electricity, refrigerator, washing machine, enough ingredients to cook three meals a day from scratch, and a set of nice clothes for Sunday? When the list of 'must-have' things gets longer why are we surprised that more and more people have to struggle to afford all of them?

[Rhonda in TX]

My mother always worked. Her mother never held a job, but they lived in the country and were very poor. My dad's mother never worked and even with 5 kids during the depression, they lived a comfortable life. Sure, they didn't have many material possessions (who did back then?), but they were fine and sent all 5 of their children to college.

 

I don't think you can compare a comfortable life today to a comfortable life back then. Very few people went out to eat, on vacations, had a clothes dryer, etc.

[SailorMom]

All of my family have always lived on one income. They lived very modest lifestyles that most people are not willing to do these days.

 

This.

Houses were only about 1000 sq feet - but very comfortable and cozy. Eating out was a special occasion, and even McDonald's was a once-in-a-long-time treat (like - once every 4 or 5 months). Vacations were usually camping, with a 3 day trip to Disneyland every three years (we drove, and stayed in a camper at a campground nearby). Used cars all the way- never new.

[Rhonda in TX]

I have to laugh, because in reading the original post I can see that expectations are very different. The Op seemed to feel that her one set of grandparents lived less than comfortably because they shared one car, had no dishwasher and no dryer. What was the perception of those grandparents?

 

I imagine they didn't have a microwave, because they probably weren't invented yet, and had no mobile phone, ipod, central ac, computer, or color tv. They had no internet. I could go on, but really even just this very short list of the kind of 'stuff' our culture has come to consider so necessary for a 'comfortable life' is an explanation in itself of WHY so many people feel they fall short and live with hardship.

 

What happened to being 'comfortable' with a roof over your head, one indoor bathroom, hot water, electricity, refrigerator, washing machine, enough ingredients to cook three meals a day from scratch, and a set of nice clothes for Sunday? When the list of 'must-have' things gets longer why are we surprised that more and more people have to struggle to afford all of them?

 

:iagree:

[SailorMom]

I think if you go back more than a generation or two what you find is that in many family providing a living was the business of all family members--father, mother, and children. One difference is that many families worked together, running a family farm or family business. Homemaking was itself a full-time job and had a big financial impact on the family as well--a woman who did all her own cooking, sewing, preserving, laundry, etc. worked from sun-up to sun-down, and while this may not have brought in money it contributed to the sustenance of the family just as surely--the only other option would be to pay money to have all these things done.

 

:iagree:

 

I think that is part of the problem here, as a society, we've forgotten how to "make-do", fix things, re-use, etc. Home-making was a full time job because it took all day to do laundry, or cook, or make butter, etc.

Also, for example, used to be you'd have a pair of socks with a hole, and you could fix the hole. Now - socks made in mass quantities in foreign countries are so poorly made that you can't fix them. They just fall apart.

[MrsBear]

Living standards have changed.

I grew up in a household where my mother didn't drive, she got her licence when I was 14. We ate mostly stews and soup for the main meal of the day, we had very few changes of clothes, and our house was very run down. This was the norm where I grew up.

 

Today people expect to have 2 cars, new clothes and furniture, flash houses, heaps of electronics etc etc etc. this takes 2 incomes.

 

While lifestyles have changed somewhat, I don't think it's that everyone expects the fancy house, car or heaps of electronics that necessitates two incomes for many a family - but that wages are not what they used to be in terms of real dollars.

 

Growing up my mother didn't work, my dad was a mechanic (very blue collar) for a large city fleet of buses and yet we didn't want for anything.

 

My parents rented and saved to buy their first home and paid cash when they did (the first house cost the equivalent of 50% of my dad's salary and it took my parents seven years to save that up). Since we lived in a rural area, we had two cars and my dad commuted an hour each way to work since that was less than living closer to the city he worked.

 

Like another poster, we didn't get cable wiring laid until I was in high school, but once it was available, we had it; we also had a VCR earlier than many and a host of other electronics. Interestingly, my parents did not have any credit cards other than my mom having a Macy's card she got before she married my dad.....they got their first credit card when they traveled for their 25th anniversary to Europe and needed it to rent a car!

 

We took vacations each year - nothing fancy or outrageously expensive, but definitely memorable and usually other family tagged along too (cousins, aunts, uncles) wherever we were all going - Jersey shore, Cape Cod, etc. Everyone pitched in to rent a house since that was more cost effective than going to hotels.

Paternal Grandparents

 

My dad's parents had 12 kids, so my grandmother didn't work. My grandfather was a master baker and while they often struggled, they did manage with one income. Only after all their kids were out of the house did my grandmother go to work part-time, to relieve boredom! She called her earnings her "pin money" - my grandfather's income still paid all the bills, hers was hers to with what she wished and he would not tolerate her money being used for household expenses.

 

Maternal Grandparents

 

My grandfather was a postal carrier and my grandparents lived on his salary. My grandmother didn't work and never wanted to; heck, she didn't want to be a mom either and they abandon my mother when she was six weeks old, leaving her to be raised by my grandmother's mother (my great-grandmother).

 

Paternal Great-Grandparents

 

They never came to the US, but from what my grandparents told me, both sets were well off in Germany and it was coming to the US where they, my grandparents, found it more difficult to get established and make it - but they did. I don't know for sure, but it did not sound like my great-grandmothers on my dad's side worked, but I don't know for sure since they may have, it wasn't' explicit in conversations I had with my grandparents growing up.

 

Maternal Great-Grandparents

 

My mother's dad's parents both died before he was 10, his dad right after his younger brother was born. His mother lived on money they saved before he died and then she died and my grandfather went to live with his aunt (his mother's sister) with his brother. She didn't work, only her husband did.

 

My mother's mother's parents raised her after my grandparents abandon her six weeks after she was born. My great-grandfather had recently "retired" due to illness and was on a small pension of some sort, but my great-grandmother went back to work and she worked full-time as a corseteer (sic?) and was the breadwinner with my great-grandfather staying home with my mother (imagine that in the 40's!). They lived basically on her salary since, as my great-grandmother recounted when she was older, my great-grandfather pissed his away in the bars (me thinks he was an alcoholic, but no one would come out and just say that).

 

-----------------

 

I don't think today it absolutely takes two salaries to manage, but I do acknowledge that things are different. Often it really doesn't make sense for a spouse to work since their income takes the family into a higher tax bracket and the cost of working adds even more of a financial burden than it resolves. I consider myself very lucky that DH is an MD and we can manage nicely on just his salary - but we also managed when he made significantly less money (like 75% less) in a very high cost of living area. In that situation it took a lot of planning and juggling, but we managed because it was important for us that I stay home, so I did it and managed. Now we're in a different financial situation, but I still plan and budget and don't waste money - neither of us do because neither of us grew up in homes where money wasn't an issue at times and we saw our parents scrimp and save and budget, so we learned to do that too.

Edited April 6, 2012 by MrsBear

[GailV]

My parents and both sets of grandparents lived comfortably (not lavishly) on one income.

My dh's parents and both sets of grandparents lived comfortably (not lavishly) one one income too.

 

I was going to "ditto" this one, until I remembered that my maternal grandparents didn't have indoor plumbing when Mom was young, and I grew up on creamed chipped beef (a PP mentioned that one). So, I guess we were poor. Who knew?

 

Also, dh's grandmother got a tip before the banks closed their doors, withdrew all of her money the day before, and purchased a Velvet Freeze, the income of which helped sustain them through the Depression. So, 2 incomes in that family for a while.

[scrappyhappymama]

My parents lived on one income. My maternal grandparents did also, but my paternal grandmother worked off and on.

 

The family dynamic was so much different during the great depression era, so my great grandparents all worked in some fashion and as soon as the kids were old enough, they did too. Most of my grandparents were working themselves, several as crop pickers, by the time they were teens. My grandfather and his siblings all left home and made their way to CA to find work for themselves by the time they were 15 or 16. I think this level of poverty and focus on daily survival inspired my grandfather and others of his generation to want to be the sole provider for his family during the 50's.

 

I do think that the man as primary provider and woman as caretaker of the home and children was the prevalent dynamic in the past. But I do believe most of these women worked hard and often took in work or found ways to contribute to the family income from home, out of sheer necessity.

[redsquirrel]

:iagree:

Also, for example, used to be you'd have a pair of socks with a hole, and you could fix the hole. Now - socks made in mass quantities in foreign countries are so poorly made that you can't fix them. They just fall apart.

 

But as a knitter, any sock I knit will be more expensive than those socks I buy in the store. I make socks,hats, sweaters, mittens but they are a small luxury. Some of the sweaters are a big luxury. And FWIW, I knit with craft store yarn, not yarn store.

 

And, before you tell me to raise my own sheep and spin my own wool, a friend does and has done all the math for me. Those are some VERY expensive socks! Just like her very expensive homegrown eggs and goat cheese.

[swellmomma]

My maternal gramma stayed home fulltime until she left her abusive husband and then she worked at woolworth's department store until she remarried my step grampa then she stayed home fulltime again.

 

My paternal nana, she stayed home fulltime through 2 marriages and divorces. She then worked parttime after her 2nd marriage ended. My step gramma worked as far as I know all the time though I only say her once a year and had/have no relationship with her.

 

My mom worked crap jobs until I was 9 then went back to high school where she got a job as a parttime receptionist. After 4 years of nightschool and hard work, she now runs that office 25 years later. So she has always worked. And my dad ran his own businesses for years before going back to college and getting into what he does now.

[LaxMom]

Before I was in school, my parents did, then my mother went back to work part, then full time. Then, they divorced when I was 10, so each household was single-income (until my mother remarried, then she & my stepfather both worked FT).

 

My MGM worked outside the home, I think most of my mother's life (5 children), and my PGM stayed at home (5 kids).

 

We've done both, and have lived with a single income (less than half of our income when I was working when we first lost my income, now, just about half) and 3-4 kids for 7 years. Our lifestyle has changed but, quite honestly, no one wants for anything much, and never for anything they need. I did take a part time job about 2 years ago, but it's for self-fulfillment, not for the (very small) income.

 

It makes me a little ill to think of what we could have done with my FT income, and didn't. :ack2:

[Mom-ninja.]

My parents did. My mother has always been a stay at home mom.

 

My dad's parents did. Except during WWII and my grandfather was away at war. My grandmother worked then.

 

My mom's parents did not. They were in Germany post WWII and struggled to get by.

[freesia]

My parents did. (live on one income)

 

Both sets of grandparents did.

 

The great-grandparents I know about (maternal side) did.

 

We do.

[SKL]

Some things are more expensive now, but many, many things are far more accessible now to the average joe. I think it varies by region, but for many of us, it evens out.

 

Personally, I have lots more than my parents did. This is a combination of life choices, economic realities, and fate. For one thing, I was 40 when I became a mom, while my parents were 21 and 19 when their first (of 6) was born. Those extra 20ish years to pay off bills and save up money kind of make a difference. But, my mom did teach me to be very frugal, and I got my low risk tolerance from my dad. I doubt that I would be one to live beyond my means if at all avoidable. (When I was childless, my siblings called me "Mother Teresa" because she had only 2 saris - one to wash and one to wear. I wasn't quite that frugal, but . . . .)

[GailV]

But as a knitter, any sock I knit will be more expensive than those socks I buy in the store. I make socks,hats, sweaters, mittens but they are a small luxury. Some of the sweaters are a big luxury. And FWIW, I knit with craft store yarn, not yarn store.

 

And, before you tell me to raise my own sheep and spin my own wool, a friend does and has done all the math for me. Those are some VERY expensive socks! Just like her very expensive homegrown eggs and goat cheese.

 

I'm asking this honestly -- was yarn really that much cheaper on a relative basis several decades ago? Or was it always a luxury, which is why people carefully repaired their socks and sweaters? or "harvested" the re-usable yarn (or re-usable fabric of wovens, plus buttons, hooks-and-eyes, and later zippers) to make other items when the first was too small or worn or unfashionable.

[Hannah C.]

My dad was the only wage-earner from the get-go, if I remember correctly - and we usually lived at a comfortable level, but I know some times were EXTREMELY hard due to unemployment. My maternal grandmother worked before having her first child, and was a housewife for the rest of her life. My paternal grandmother was a single mother who received no child support as far as I know. I'm pretty sure all great-grandparents lived off the wages of one person, if they weren't farmers. So yes, all one income in my family.

[VeteranMom]

My parents lived on just my Dad's income until around the time of the Carter administration. After that, we moved to a cheaper rental home and had to get rid of 1 of 2 of our cars. In 1977, my Mom decided to work a full time night shift job. She always had to have a job after that and we rarely had money for extra things. Nothing had changed with my Dad's employment. It just seemed that the cost of living went up and his wages (a white collar job) didn't keep up with that jump.

[myfunnybunch]

I'm asking this honestly -- was yarn really that much cheaper on a relative basis several decades ago? Or was it always a luxury, which is why people carefully repaired their socks and sweaters? or "harvested" the re-usable yarn (or re-usable fabric of wovens, plus buttons, hooks-and-eyes, and later zippers) to make other items when the first was too small or worn or unfashionable.

 

Just musing, since my mother and sister are both sock knitters, and I've had to sit through many a discussion of sock yarn and mending and spinning and....yawn. :tongue_smilie:

 

I think it's both. I can only go by what I saw when I was growing up (small rural blue-collar community with many immigrants), and I think that people were more careful because they had to be and because they had time to mend. And we are dealing with the influx of cheap goods made elsewhere. Now it is more cost-effective to buy a Costco pack of socks and throw them away than it is to mend nicer socks or make your own. Good yarn is expensive. My mother learned to knit from her grandmother, who knitted family socks because they were expensive to buy from the store.

 

Same with clothing: My mother used to make dresses for my sister and I because it was cheaper than buying them. Same when she was growing up; she made many of her own clothes because it was less expensive. Now it is more expensive for me to buy fabric and notions at the fabric store than it is to buy a dress at Wal-mart or Target or even mall stores like Gymboree or Gap Kids. Clothing quality makes it less feasible to mend, too. You don't want to put an expensive zipper in a dress that's going to wear out, or spend $5 for a zipper if the dress only costs $15 to replace altogether.

 

To be fair, my mother does tell about asking my father's mother to teach her to darn socks. (They were store socks, not handmade.) Grandma said, "Sure! Give me the sock," dropped it in the trash can, and said, "Darn sock!" :lol:

 

Cat

[Tap]

My mother worked from the time I was in elementary school. Before that, she helped to remodel homes that my parents bought/sold over the years. She cooked, canned, sewed and worked around the house.

 

I don't know anything about my father's family.

 

My mother's family: My grandmother worked for many years, but I don't know when she started. They were dirt poor, so I think she always worked at some type of job. She was a wet nurse, picked cotton, was a medical nurse in a doctors office and for a private family, and worked at a lumber yard.

 

I have worked continuously since I was 17yo or so.

[Krista in LA]

We are living comfortably on one income.

My parents got by on one income, but I wouldn't call it comfortable for any of us.

One set of grandparents did, the alcoholic grandfather did not.

The great grandparents did.

[edelweiss]

My maternal grandparents lived on one income at times. My grandfather worked a factory job. Grandmother was at home raising her kids at times. I'm not sure if she ever worked any jobs while they were young. Once they were teens, she opened a yarn store.

 

My paternal grandparents might have lived on one income when the kids were young. I'm not sure. However, I do know that my grandmother spent years and years working at a factory. My grandfather was enlisted navy. Once he retired from that, he became a police officer.

 

My mother was a SAHM until my parents divorced when I was 10. She worked at that point and has worked ever since.

 

My family lives on DH's income alone. Our standard of living is much higher than my parents and my grandparents.

[butterflymommy]

Both of my parents worked but we could have lived off one of their incomes. On my mother's side, both of her parents worked (this is going back early 1900s-- my maternal grandmother was in her 40s when she got married and had children).

 

On my father's side, he was raised by a single mum (going back to 1940s). She worked in a factory and later died from a rare cancer most likely caused by chemical exposure in the factory.

[TranquilMind]

The discussion of whether an individual's income should be enough for a family of four to live on, made me start thinking about if this were easily done in the past.

 

My paternal grandmother did not work for wages, but she worked hard on the family farm, raising much of the food that the family ate. Therefore, I wouldn't consider that getting by on my grandfather's salary alone. The family of eight (4 sons and 2 daughters) lived in a two bedroom house without electricity for many years. She never had a car. They never ate out. I know of her going on one short vacation in her life (paid for by her kids).

 

My maternal grandmother worked at a paying job during the early years of her marriage and did not become a mother until her mid-30s. One of the reasons that she and my grandfather got by on one income once they were parents is that there expenses were low. They lived in a two bedroom house, never had a dishwasher, never owned a clothes dryer, and shared one car.

 

My mother did not work when I was younger, but did once I was older. So, my family history is not one of a stay-at-home Leave-it-to-Beaver mom with dad making enough money to support a family at a comfortable lifestyle. Was that really the norm in the past?

My Mom worked only before having children, though she was offered better jobs (a natural salesperson). My Dad managed to support 4 kids and a wife on a mail carrier's salary. I don't think you can do that today. He made about $2500 a YEAR and we had a modest house built in the 50's in a nice small town.

[redsquirrel]

Just musing, since my mother and sister are both sock knitters, and I've had to sit through many a discussion of sock yarn and mending and spinning and....yawn. :tongue_smilie:

 

I think it's both. I can only go by what I saw when I was growing up (small rural blue-collar community with many immigrants), and I think that people were more careful because they had to be and because they had time to mend. And we are dealing with the influx of cheap goods made elsewhere. Now it is more cost-effective to buy a Costco pack of socks and throw them away than it is to mend nicer socks or make your own. Good yarn is expensive. My mother learned to knit from her grandmother, who knitted family socks because they were expensive to buy from the store.

 

Same with clothing: My mother used to make dresses for my sister and I because it was cheaper than buying them. Same when she was growing up; she made many of her own clothes because it was less expensive. Now it is more expensive for me to buy fabric and notions at the fabric store than it is to buy a dress at Wal-mart or Target or even mall stores like Gymboree or Gap Kids. Clothing quality makes it less feasible to mend, too. You don't want to put an expensive zipper in a dress that's going to wear out, or spend $5 for a zipper if the dress only costs $15 to replace altogether.

 

To be fair, my mother does tell about asking my father's mother to teach her to darn socks. (They were store socks, not handmade.) Grandma said, "Sure! Give me the sock," dropped it in the trash can, and said, "Darn sock!" :lol:

 

Cat

 

That is pretty much what I was going to say....including that old knitting chestnut. And as a knitter, I apologize for all the yarn talk :lol: we do go on, don't we?

 

My SIL is quite the seamstress, a lawyer by day, fashion designer by night. She bemoans the cost of fabric these days. This is a woman who doesn't blink at spending several hundred dollars for an evening dress. But, she used to be able to spend one hundred dollars and make the equivalent of a 500$ dress. Now, she says she can't save any $$ by making her own. The sad part is that she says a 500$ store dress has the same quality as a 50$ store dress. She says the days of beautiful linings and quality notions in expensive clothing is gone.

 

 

And FWIW, my grandparents were blue collar workers and the children of immigrants. They were often working more than one job and didn't have time to sew. My grandmother never sewed a thing, even though she had been taught as a child. She worked the night shift to support her family. She was sleeping when the kids were at school. She did not sew or even cook very much. She didn't have time.

[joannqn]

While they were married my parents lived off my dad's income. He worked in computer repair since they were huge (before PCs were invented).

 

My dad's parents lived off of one income. My grandfather was career Navy.

 

My mom's mom lived off disability and my uncle's SSI (he is mentally handicapped and will never live alone) for as long as I can remember. She was pretty handicapped by rheumatoid arthritis.

[6packofun]

All of our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents lived for extended periods of time on one income and, when a wife went to work, it was because she wanted to and not because it was necessary. (Dh's grandmothers both worked after their kids were much older.)

[mommaduck]

Just musing, since my mother and sister are both sock knitters, and I've had to sit through many a discussion of sock yarn and mending and spinning and....yawn. :tongue_smilie:

 

I think it's both. I can only go by what I saw when I was growing up (small rural blue-collar community with many immigrants), and I think that people were more careful because they had to be and because they had time to mend. And we are dealing with the influx of cheap goods made elsewhere. Now it is more cost-effective to buy a Costco pack of socks and throw them away than it is to mend nicer socks or make your own. Good yarn is expensive. My mother learned to knit from her grandmother, who knitted family socks because they were expensive to buy from the store.

 

Same with clothing: My mother used to make dresses for my sister and I because it was cheaper than buying them. Same when she was growing up; she made many of her own clothes because it was less expensive. Now it is more expensive for me to buy fabric and notions at the fabric store than it is to buy a dress at Wal-mart or Target or even mall stores like Gymboree or Gap Kids. Clothing quality makes it less feasible to mend, too. You don't want to put an expensive zipper in a dress that's going to wear out, or spend $5 for a zipper if the dress only costs $15 to replace altogether.

 

To be fair, my mother does tell about asking my father's mother to teach her to darn socks. (They were store socks, not handmade.) Grandma said, "Sure! Give me the sock," dropped it in the trash can, and said, "Darn sock!" :lol:

 

Cat

:iagree: People had fewer clothes, but better quality. Nowadays, quality is rare, fashion changes too quickly (for those that care), and ready-made is cheaper because it's made elsewhere for next to nothing (not exactly a good thing).

 

Interestingly enough, speaking of things that used to be made in the US, I was reading a book from the late 19th century by a dressmaker that taught in Paris. She had some interesting comments about/towards us American seamstresses :D

 

WHEN it comes to making, the actual sewing and finishing, the American dressmaker has nothing to learn from any one. First class American dressmakers turn out the best work, so far as the mechanics of dressmaking go, of any dressmakers in the world. In point of fact, they make dresses too well. They might with advantage to themselves, and with no disadvantage to their patrons, unlearn something about sewing, and let some of the fussy details, over which they now bother their heads to very little purpose, go by default.

 

Doubtless, a riding habit cannot be too well made. There is not a superfluous inch of material about it and, probably, it cannot be too well sewed, or too carefully finished. But the American dressmaker puts too much fine sewing into her dresses. They look well; they look about as well on the wrong side as upon the right side; perhaps if they were not such marvels of patience in the inside finishing, they might be more artistic to look at on the outside. Look at even the highest priced foreign made dresses; by comparison, they seem almost slovenly in workmanship, compared with American dresses, but after all to what end put such an infinite amount of pains into the finishing off of a dress that, nowadays, is worn but a few times. The riding habit that lasts its last thread out, may be made as well as possible, and even the heavy cloth street dress demands considerable detail of finishing to make it pass muster and stand its hard usage, but house dresses and evening dresses might be slighted in finishing just as the Parisian dressmakers slight them without suffering an iota in looks or wearing possibilities, and with a notable saving in time and trouble. A good many American dressmakers are martyrs to fine stitches out of a mistaken regard for the unimportant part of their work. Nobody desires to return to the pretty ugly sewing of our great grandmothers' days, when their hand-made gorgeous brocades were not only not very carefully finished on the inside, but were not particularly well sewed on the outside. Oh, I know their sewing was held up as a fetish to our childish understandings, but look over a collection of their most splendid clothes preserved in any museum, and take courage.

 

The Parisian dressmaker is clever. She knows every trick in putting her work where it will make the most show. So long as she gets the effect she wants, and it stays as long as long as it is required, which is not long, for instance, in a tulle party frock, she doesn't try to make the sewing in every part of the sort that would win a prize at a school exhibition. The Parisian Milliner long, long ago found that she could get effects by pinning on her hat and bonnet trimmings that absolutely defied sewing, and the Parisian dressmaker will catch a flounce of lace here and a ribbon there with fascinating grace, and never bother her head about how it looks on the wrong side. Why should she?

 

There is a chance for American dressmakers who have spoiled American customers by over precision of finish upon the wrong side of dresses...

Honestly, I take her criticisms as a compliment :D

 

*Suggestions for Dressmakers by Catherine Broughton*

[T'smom]

You would think that this would be an easy question to answer.....but I'm stumped. My mom stayed home most of my childhood and we were comfortable- but my parents do talk about not being very comfortable before I came along. My mom also worked full-time to put my dad through grad school. One grandmother was a teacher, the other a journalist. The teacher worked through most of my mom's childhood, the journalist not until my dad was mostly grown. They would describe themselves as being poor "back then" but I don't think they were worse off than the majority of the population. My grandparents are very well-off now- they have plenty of money to lend to family and occasionally do things like buy cars for people. My grandmother started her teaching career in a one-room schoolhouse and her mom taught in one too! (There are actually 4 generations of women that got teaching degrees at the same university!)

[dragons in the flower bed]

My paternal grandfather was a boxer. When he retired he became a police officer. His wife was a stay-at-home mom. They raised seven children on a single income with a middle class lifestyle. It wasn't until the kids were grown and Grandma wanted something to do out in the world that she started her own little business, and it wasn't because she needed the money.

 

My mother was raised by an uncle and aunt. The uncle was a contractor who built homes. His wife was a stay-at-home mom. They had five dependents on a single income and did very well, retiring early and sending kids on to get doctorates.

 

My mother's grandfather owned a plantation in Puerto Rico. He was a businessman, not a hands-on kind of farmer. His wife never worked. They raised six children on a single income. They were very well off on a single income.

 

My father's grandfather was a miner in Pennsylvania. His wife kept a garden and chickens but didn't otherwise work. They had three children. When he became sick, they moved to Manhattan and became property managers in a tenement building. Technically the job was his, but he was sick so she did all the work. I think I would count that as a single income. They were poor on a single income, but better off than most of the other families in the tenements.

 

So, YES, I have always been under the impression that a family wage was the norm back then.

 

My parents, though, who came of age in the late seventies, have always both worked full-time jobs.

Edited April 6, 2012 by dragons in the flower bed

[Audrey]

All for of my grandparents worked at various times. The Way We Weren't, y'all.

 

:iagree:

 

Even my great-grandmother worked -- not a traditional job, but she took in laundry and did house-cleaning to supplement the household income. One of my grandmothers was a nurse, but only on a casual basis once she had children. Her husband was an engineer. My other grandmother sold eggs, baking, and fruit preserves, as well as did sewing and tailoring to supplement her husband's farming income.

 

So, while they weren't in a fixed job, they still worked to support the family with additional income.

 

The Way We Weren't... indeed!

[Lady Florida.]

 

 

The Way We Weren't... indeed!

 

The Way We Weren't in my family too.

 

My maternal great-grandparents owned a gas station, which my great-grandmother helped to run. She also sold eggs and milk from her chickens and goats.

 

My maternal grandmother had a variety jobs throughout her lifetime. Among other things she took in ironing, worked in a factory, and babysat neighborhood kids.

 

I don't know much about my other grandparents. By the time I was born, only my grandmother was still alive, and she was retired by then. No one ever really talked about what she did when my grandfather was alive. However, based on the fact that we were "poor Irish", I'm pretty sure my grandmother worked at something, even if it was taking in laundry/mending, or cleaning houses.

 

My mom was a single mother, so of course she had to work.

 

I am the first woman on my mother's side of the family to have the luxury of staying home. My 23 year old niece is carrying on the tradition. So in my family at least, our lot is improving.

Edited April 6, 2012 by floridamom

[ocelotmom]

All my grandparents were teachers. While I know that they all taught before and after kids, I'm not sure what they did when the kids were kids. Especially my maternal grandmother. My paternal grandmother had only two kids very close in age, so her time with young kids was relatively short. But my maternal grandmother had 5, with the youngest being born 13 years after the next youngest.

 

My mother got a part time job when I was around 5. When I was 8 (and my brother started K), she became a substitute teacher, and by the time I was about 12 that had turned into full-time.

[AdventureMoms]

My family is doing pretty well on one income.

 

My parents both worked. DW's parents both worked.

 

My maternal grandma did not work, and they were fairly poor, but not destitute as far as I know.

 

My paternal grandma mostly did not work, and they did pretty well.

 

My maternal great-grandparents were all farmers, I'd make a pretty good bet that both parents were working on those farms, whether it was for wages or not.

 

My paternal grandpa's mom did not work, but they were destitute beyond words. Kids getting sick because there was no food destitute. Also, the boys were expected to go to work and contribute to the family by the time they were 12 or 13, so they were not actually one income, just one PARENTAL income. Grandpa did not complete 8th grade.

 

I don't have a clue what my maternal grandma's family was like. I have a vague notion that they were fairly well off.

[SweetMissMagnolia]

my mother's parents did-when they married it was around the time of the great depression but women worked until they got married (USUALLY) and then their job was the children/home (she taught school before they got married)......my parents both had issues and by the time I was born both were on some sort of disability so that's kind of like 2 incomes....they took care of my mom's parents and the other brothers/sisters supposedly gave them an income for that too....I have no idea about the other side of the family.

[4everHis]

We're doing okay on a single income.

 

My parents always survived on a single income.

 

Both sets of my grandparents survived on single incomes.

 

The great-grandparents were farmers, so I guess that counts as single income. (???)

 

I have no idea if my family is the norm or not.

 

Same here.

[4everHis]

All of my family have always lived on one income. They lived very modest lifestyles that most people are not willing to do these days.

 

:iagree:

[LibraryLover]

Interestingly enough, speaking of things that used to be made in the US, I was reading a book from the late 19th century by a dressmaker that taught in Paris. She had some interesting comments about/towards us American seamstresses :D

 

 

Quote:

WHEN it comes to making, the actual sewing and finishing, the American dressmaker has nothing to learn from any one. First class American dressmakers turn out the best work, so far as the mechanics of dressmaking go, of any dressmakers in the world. In point of fact, they make dresses too well. They might with advantage to themselves, and with no disadvantage to their patrons, unlearn something about sewing, and let some of the fussy details, over which they now bother their heads to very little purpose, go by default.

 

Doubtless, a riding habit cannot be too well made. There is not a superfluous inch of material about it and, probably, it cannot be too well sewed, or too carefully finished. But the American dressmaker puts too much fine sewing into her dresses. They look well; they look about as well on the wrong side as upon the right side; perhaps if they were not such marvels of patience in the inside finishing, they might be more artistic to look at on the outside. Look at even the highest priced foreign made dresses; by comparison, they seem almost slovenly in workmanship, compared with American dresses, but after all to what end put such an infinite amount of pains into the finishing off of a dress that, nowadays, is worn but a few times. The riding habit that lasts its last thread out, may be made as well as possible, and even the heavy cloth street dress demands considerable detail of finishing to make it pass muster and stand its hard usage, but house dresses and evening dresses might be slighted in finishing just as the Parisian dressmakers slight them without suffering an iota in looks or wearing possibilities, and with a notable saving in time and trouble. A good many American dressmakers are martyrs to fine stitches out of a mistaken regard for the unimportant part of their work. Nobody desires to return to the pretty ugly sewing of our great grandmothers' days, when their hand-made gorgeous brocades were not only not very carefully finished on the inside, but were not particularly well sewed on the outside. Oh, I know their sewing was held up as a fetish to our childish understandings, but look over a collection of their most splendid clothes preserved in any museum, and take courage.

 

The Parisian dressmaker is clever. She knows every trick in putting her work where it will make the most show. So long as she gets the effect she wants, and it stays as long as long as it is required, which is not long, for instance, in a tulle party frock, she doesn't try to make the sewing in every part of the sort that would win a prize at a school exhibition. The Parisian Milliner long, long ago found that she could get effects by pinning on her hat and bonnet trimmings that absolutely defied sewing, and the Parisian dressmaker will catch a flounce of lace here and a ribbon there with fascinating grace, and never bother her head about how it looks on the wrong side. Why should she?

 

There is a chance for American dressmakers who have spoiled American customers by over precision of finish upon the wrong side of dresses...

Honestly, I take her criticisms as a compliment :D

 

*Suggestions for Dressmakers by Catherine Broughton*

 

 

Wonderful. Thank you! One of my great great aunts was a very popular seamstress. She was incredibly talented. Whenever anyone in our family makes something lovely, we recall her gifts. :)