Explain to Me Being a Non-WOH No-Kid Wife

[Guest]

there's always takeout LOL

 

I actually dream of having a cook. I'd love love love to have a cook.

That is my deepest household help fantasy as well. I could even do breakfast myself - just lunch and dinner! Edited June 1, 2016 by Arctic Mama

[Tita Gidge]

The turn this thread has taken fascinates my inner sociologist.

 

I have zero emotional attachment to the idea of outsourcing certain tasks, such as housework. I'd feel no guilt, nor any sense of altruism, in hiring a housecleaner.

 

It's interesting to read how people's backgrounds come into play in shaping our adult perceptions. We grew up in an area where it was common to have maids - even people working class by current standards. But we moved to where it was more of a middle- or upper-class thing, so we didn't have one anymore. We lived with extended family and everyone had a role - some were earners, some were caregivers, some took on maintenance (and cleaning).  Maybe that's why it's neutral for me.

 

My mom comes to clean my house every week. She enjoys housework, it relaxes her and she likes having something to show for her efforts. She also collects, washes, and irons the laundry, and returns it to our closets and drawers like some kind of Laundry Fairy. I don't pay her except in LOVE :001_wub: . Fortunately it pays well from her perspective, and the price is right from mine!

[gardenmom5]

And I don't think anything needs fixing.  But I really appreciate your concern.

 

I don't want to wave a red flag, but I think I did understand what you meant. every one needs to be wiling to do the menial chores *if needed*, and not thinking they are beneath us - that doesn't mean we have to do them if we don't have time, or even if we don't like them.  it's also about not  being oblivious to the mess we're  making just because we have the attitude someone else is cleaning it up so we don't have to care.  (re: other's on here do 'get it' do the degree they want to pick up their clutter before a cleaning person comes.  not all are embarrassed by their mess - some don't want to make more work for someone else than  they have to.)

 

I think it's good for kids to do clean  up so they can learn to appreciate it takes.

 

we have friends who were  living overseas - many many years ago - and they had a gardener, and a  maid (may also have had a cook).  they weren't able to make the kids do typical chores - just keep their room clean (which they thought was horrible - none of their friends had to clean their rooms!).  they gave up a lot to move back to the states because they wanted their children to learn to work and appreciate what they had.

 

My former communist country family has far far more help than I do here in the US ;) I also have twice a month help any only wish it were slightly better quality. And I've cleaned other people's houses too. I have zero guilt outsourcing it all. There's no reward in doing the hard way, and I did it the hard way for many years. Now the cooking I can't outsource.

 

I'd be interested in knowing what modern convenience appliances they had access to , or modern supermarkets - what was required just to procure food and put a meal on the table?  how often did they need to go to the market? did they *need* to grow their own food?  could they get everything in one place?  did they need to go to multiple places?  some of those places just the basic daily grind was a lot more involved than it is here.  one person couldn't do it all - even if they wanted to do so.  they either had enough

in the early 20th century - middle  class in the US had regular household help - sometimes live-in servants or a widowed mother (helped both the mother and the wife).  many of those needs have  been replaced by modern appliances.

[gardenmom5]

there's always takeout LOL 

 

I actually dream of having a cook. I'd love love love to have a cook. 

 

there are "personal cooks" who will  come in and cook a weeks worth of meals and freeze them for you.  there are also places where you can order a weeks worth at a time.  I'd looked into a few for my mother, trying to get her to eat regular meals.  (she was very picky, didn't want to cook, etc.)

you don't have to rely upon mass produced processed  frozen  food.

 

eta: I also know people who do that for  themselves.

Edited June 2, 2016 by gardenmom5

[LucyStoner]

For me letting someone else take care of cleaning was probably a mental health breakthrough.  I had OCD tendencies about cleaning and to this day, if I start to get super anxious I can easily fall down the rabbit hole of cleaning and recleaning everything. Learning to let someone else do and not redo it myself was a good lesson.  

[heartlikealion]

It's going to depend on the area and it was just an example. The figures I was spinning that estimate off of are from years of babysitting and using child care in a low income, mostly rural area. Most families have a 10-30 min drive to work. It's normal. It's actually not entirely unusual for some families to have a 45 min drive just because of the location of their rural home and the roads they have to use. The gas costs go up quite a bit in that situation. The laws are different by state but where I lived an in home sitter can keep up to 6 kids (other than her own) so the 4 is a low estimate, day cares would have providers in charge of at least 4 and usually more kids so you'd still get a lower child to provider ratio with in home care. $3/hr for 45 hrs equals $135 week.... in that area a day care would be $75-125/wk depending on the age of the child and a daily rate would usually be $10 or $15 per day per child. The $3/hr comes out to more per hr than either of those calculations. Like I said I know it's going to vary by area but where I lived it was a good rate (and paying that decent rate didn't have to take all of the WOH mom's income). Unless it's a very temporary situation there is no way that someone can pay a sitter the SAME rate they make. 

 

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting paying a daily sitter the same rate the person needing the sitter makes. But I was suggesting that $3 per child sounded like pennies if the rates are literally a per child scale. I wouldn't want to babysit two kids for $6/hr all day. I made around that much in a daycare watching a room of kids and I guess if it was only two it would have been an upgrade, but that was many years ago before the min. wage went to $7.25. I think someone watching kids should make at least min. wage. They shouldn't have to rely on numbers. If they only watch 5 kids and one family has 3 of them and goes on vacation, they shouldn't resort to $6/hr rate for that week. I guess that's more or less where I see a problem.

[SKL]

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting paying a daily sitter the same rate the person needing the sitter makes. But I was suggesting that $3 per child sounded like pennies if the rates are literally a per child scale. I wouldn't want to babysit two kids for $6/hr all day. I made around that much in a daycare watching a room of kids and I guess if it was only two it would have been an upgrade, but that was many years ago before the min. wage went to $7.25. I think someone watching kids should make at least min. wage. They shouldn't have to rely on numbers. If they only watch 5 kids and one family has 3 of them and goes on vacation, they shouldn't resort to $6/hr rate for that week. I guess that's more or less where I see a problem.

 

But if a childcare provider is offering her services to multiple people, it isn't each person's responsibility to make sure she makes a living wage.

 

No other goods or services are priced that way.  It's up to the business owner to figure out whether there is enough market and what is the right price to charge to cover costs/profit over time, given predictable fluctuations.

 

I'm not saying $3 is the right number.  It depends on many factors.

 

[eternalsummer]

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting paying a daily sitter the same rate the person needing the sitter makes. But I was suggesting that $3 per child sounded like pennies if the rates are literally a per child scale. I wouldn't want to babysit two kids for $6/hr all day. I made around that much in a daycare watching a room of kids and I guess if it was only two it would have been an upgrade, but that was many years ago before the min. wage went to $7.25. I think someone watching kids should make at least min. wage. They shouldn't have to rely on numbers. If they only watch 5 kids and one family has 3 of them and goes on vacation, they shouldn't resort to $6/hr rate for that week. I guess that's more or less where I see a problem.

 

Running your own business means accounting for variations in demand.  If you want to average $15/hour, you should probably take in 6 kids at $3/hour, that way if one of them is missing you are still at $15.

 

Or charge $4/hour.

 

childcare is not paid as well as many other things because there are lots of people willing to do it for free, and it also doesn't (generally speaking) require much education or training, so the labor pool is large and doesn't have much bargaining power.

[gypsymama]

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting paying a daily sitter the same rate the person needing the sitter makes. But I was suggesting that $3 per child sounded like pennies if the rates are literally a per child scale. I wouldn't want to babysit two kids for $6/hr all day. I made around that much in a daycare watching a room of kids and I guess if it was only two it would have been an upgrade, but that was many years ago before the min. wage went to $7.25. I think someone watching kids should make at least min. wage. They shouldn't have to rely on numbers. If they only watch 5 kids and one family has 3 of them and goes on vacation, they shouldn't resort to $6/hr rate for that week. I guess that's more or less where I see a problem.

 

 

But if a childcare provider is offering her services to multiple people, it isn't each person's responsibility to make sure she makes a living wage.

 

No other goods or services are priced that way.  It's up to the business owner to figure out whether there is enough market and what is the right price to charge to cover costs/profit over time, given predictable fluctuations.

 

I'm not saying $3 is the right number.  It depends on many factors.

 

 

Yes to both of these posts. I get what you are saying heartlikealion but I agree with SKL that it isn't up to each individual family to ensure the sitter makes a living wage. I think everyone should be able to make a living wage but you make choices with the options you have. As for the vacation and such most families are not going to be able to afford much time off where they wouldn't need the sitter. Yes an in home care provider is running the risk of losing pay for a week or two a year if the family takes vacation but the WOH parents are also running a risk by using a private sitter. If that sitter decides to take off or is sick/has a sick child then the parent is going to miss work while a day care would have a more set schedule. There are always going to be risks and benefits for everyone in each situation. Both parties have to weigh the options to see what works for them.

[madteaparty]

I don't want to wave a red flag, but I think I did understand what you meant. every one needs to be wiling to do the menial chores *if needed*, and not thinking they are beneath us - that doesn't mean we have to do them if we don't have time, or even if we don't like them. it's also about not being oblivious to the mess we're making just because we have the attitude someone else is cleaning it up so we don't have to care. (re: other's on here do 'get it' do the degree they want to pick up their clutter before a cleaning person comes. not all are embarrassed by their mess - some don't want to make more work for someone else than they have to.)

 

I think it's good for kids to do clean up so they can learn to appreciate it takes.

 

we have friends who were living overseas - many many years ago - and they had a gardener, and a maid (may also have had a cook). they weren't able to make the kids do typical chores - just keep their room clean (which they thought was horrible - none of their friends had to clean their rooms!). they gave up a lot to move back to the states because they wanted their children to learn to work and appreciate what they had.

 

 

I'd be interested in knowing what modern convenience appliances they had access to , or modern supermarkets - what was required just to procure food and put a meal on the table? how often did they need to go to the market? did they *need* to grow their own food? could they get everything in one place? did they need to go to multiple places? some of those places just the basic daily grind was a lot more involved than it is here. one person couldn't do it all - even if they wanted to do so. they either had enough

in the early 20th century - middle class in the US had regular household help - sometimes live-in servants or a widowed mother (helped both the mother and the wife). many of those needs have been replaced by modern appliances.

Oh, I mean now! Not during communism, lol.

[ktgrok]

The turn this thread has taken fascinates my inner sociologist.

 

I have zero emotional attachment to the idea of outsourcing certain tasks, such as housework. I'd feel no guilt, nor any sense of altruism, in hiring a housecleaner.

 

It's interesting to read how people's backgrounds come into play in shaping our adult perceptions. We grew up in an area where it was common to have maids - even people working class by current standards. But we moved to where it was more of a middle- or upper-class thing, so we didn't have one anymore. We lived with extended family and everyone had a role - some were earners, some were caregivers, some took on maintenance (and cleaning).  Maybe that's why it's neutral for me.

 

My mom comes to clean my house every week. She enjoys housework, it relaxes her and she likes having something to show for her efforts. She also collects, washes, and irons the laundry, and returns it to our closets and drawers like some kind of Laundry Fairy. I don't pay her except in LOVE :001_wub: . Fortunately it pays well from her perspective, and the price is right from mine!

 

AWw, my mom does this for my sister (she works full time, and is now a single parent, so needs the help. I'm home all day and just a slob, lol). I love that my mom does this for her. 

[Bluegoat]

Re the cost of child care, $3 sounds low by modern standards, but that depends on the age too.  My kids' aftercare program is $1.50/hr/kid, because all the kids are school-age and the facility is available for use without any extra fuss.  They have one or two adults to a roomful of kids who all know how to entertain themselves.

 

There are reasons why a mom would pay child care almost what she earns on a temporary basis.  It could be a short-term investment in holding onto a long-term career, or holding a place for the child long-term.  Prices go down as kids get older.  Career people might have saved up money during their child-free days in order to spend it on good care / education when the time comes.  Believe me, having a reliable safe place for kids to be when I'm elsewhere is very valuable.

 

I get something like $3/hour for childcare.  it's worth it financially because I'd be home with my kids anyway. 

 

But - in general, childcare workers in North America are paid a pittance compared to what they get elsewhere. It's one thing to do in home care in a situation like mine, another to be earning a wage from an employer which is pretty darn low and the hours are long, and it's a high responsibility position. Though in other places they also often have more education.  But even as it stands now, it isn't a great thing, it's a major reason there is such high turnover in childcare which is bad for kids. 

 

I don't think this is something that individuals are necessarily able to do anything about though - childcare, wages, and such are too interdependant.  It's really a collective action problem.

[Bluegoat]

I think that we can without being contradictory say, there is value in not being alienated from your own care, and the common lot of humanity, and also that it is ok to hire help, sometimes even just because you want to.

 

Even if I think of my sister, who is single and has someone come in to do the heavy cleaning, just because she doesn't like it - she is not somene who is living a life where she is really losing sight of self-care or other people. 

 

OTOH, that can happen to people.  Maybe most easily for those who have grown up never doing these kinds of jobs, but even adults can start to feel that, say, cleaning toilets is not something they need to do because "whatever."  They are more sucessful, or something.  Or they can just start to lose touch with what people's lives are like.  (My mom, though she is a demon for housework, can be a bit like this in other ways - she's been well off for long enough that she sometimes says things, that are completely unrealistic for most people, as if they are universal.  And she is actually not someone who grew up that way or lived all her adult life that way, and she is not at all a snob.)

 

A few people manage to isolate themselves from real life to a huge degree.

 

And I would even say, for people who hire someone because they are so busy - sometimes it might be better if instead they worked less, or something - the real need is to take it easier and hiring is really enabling.

 

I think all those things can be true sometimes, and not applicable others.

[Spryte]

The turn this thread has taken fascinates my inner sociologist.

 

I have zero emotional attachment to the idea of outsourcing certain tasks, such as housework. I'd feel no guilt, nor any sense of altruism, in hiring a housecleaner.

 

It's interesting to read how people's backgrounds come into play in shaping our adult perceptions. We grew up in an area where it was common to have maids - even people working class by current standards. But we moved to where it was more of a middle- or upper-class thing, so we didn't have one anymore. We lived with extended family and everyone had a role - some were earners, some were caregivers, some took on maintenance (and cleaning). Maybe that's why it's neutral for me.

 

My mom comes to clean my house every week. She enjoys housework, it relaxes her and she likes having something to show for her efforts. She also collects, washes, and irons the laundry, and returns it to our closets and drawers like some kind of Laundry Fairy. I don't pay her except in LOVE :001_wub: . Fortunately it pays well from her perspective, and the price is right from mine!

I just fell a little bit in love with your mom.

 

Ok. A lot.

[hornblower]

 

I'd be interested in knowing what modern convenience appliances they had access to , or modern supermarkets - what was required just to procure food and put a meal on the table?  how often did they need to go to the market? did they *need* to grow their own food?  could they get everything in one place?  did they need to go to multiple places?  some of those places just the basic daily grind was a lot more involved than it is here.  one person couldn't do it all - even if they wanted to do so.  they either had enough

in the early 20th century - middle  class in the US had regular household help - sometimes live-in servants or a widowed mother (helped both the mother and the wife).  many of those needs have  been replaced by modern appliances.

I can give a small snapshot of life in eastern europe: 

 

When I was growing up in eastern europe during communism there were people who had housekeepers and cleaners. We didn't but several of our friends & acquaintances did. I wouldn't say it was common but it was not UNcommon. One thing people don't realize is that there was still a class structure & definite SE differences among various groups (& it was not just the party officials & everyone else. There were lots of different stratifications and quite a variety in terms of access to resources, being able to buy Western goods etc.) & a significant difference between people living in big cities v. small towns v. the villages. 

 

Due to the social disruptions and corruption and outright poverty in some areas, most people had a disadvantaged relative - perhaps someone older or perhaps disabled or slightly chronically ill who was not really able to work f/t but not able to make ends meet on the pensions....& it was not uncommon to arrange a mutually helpful agreement where they'd get to live with you & run your home/cook/clean in exchange for free room&board. 

I grew up in a city & grocery shopping was a thing done daily for most people.We were just starting to see supermarkets starting in the 70's but mostly  you went to all the separate shops (the baker, the veg shop, the deli etc)  Most people I knew well had a small fridge but still shopped daily. Some people did only have cold pantries rather than a fridge... But the habit was to shop for food daily. Milk was delivered to the door. Laundry was sent out - esp bedding & towels. Bedding came back starched to whatever level you request.  Small laundry you did yourself - we had a small washer  - but some people sent their stuff out & a laundress would do it. 

 

Almost all workplaces provided meal plans. There was a hot midday meal which you could sign up for & there were also meal plans which would include a dinner. Schools also had a hot meal at midday and additional after school programs + dinner for children whose parents were working late.  There were also a fair bit of restaurants, incl a large 'chain' of vegetarian eateries where there was a sort of a buffet of not very inspiring but filling hot food. Kind of like old school cafeterias. Many people had to eat out because they had tiny kitchens or no kitchen at all. After the war, housing shortages were a big problem and people would frequently just rent a room & have no access to a kitchen. 

[SKL]

And I would even say, for people who hire someone because they are so busy - sometimes it might be better if instead they worked less, or something - the real need is to take it easier and hiring is really enabling.

 

I think all those things can be true sometimes, and not applicable others.

 

I think that when this applies, nobody knows it better than the person it applies to, but saying it and doing it are two very different things.  Most of us can't just go up to our boss and say, "I think I need more personal time, so please give this project to someone else."  It is a big and complex and slow adjustment to move from overwork to balance; and it is often only a temporary solution.

 

A person in that situation does not need to be told that life would be better if he would take back the work he was delegating to maid service.  :P  Nope, even in getting life back to balance, maid service should not be the first to go.  Let's start with the late nights, the mindless eating, the 1,000 things chronically on the to-do list because they can never quite compete with work (or whatever other commitment gets too much importance).  Keep the maid service there to support all of this healthy transition vs. working against it.  Assuming, of course, that the person can afford it without working crazy hours.

 

I mean, I could scrub my toilet every day - it doesn't take much time or effort - but no, I really don't think that is going to fix any of my problems.  I'd rather drop in a chlorine tab so I don't have to worry about it.

[frogger]

Thanks for the description Hornblower.

[Bluegoat]

I think that when this applies, nobody knows it better than the person it applies to, but saying it and doing it are two very different things.  Most of us can't just go up to our boss and say, "I think I need more personal time, so please give this project to someone else."  It is a big and complex and slow adjustment to move from overwork to balance; and it is often only a temporary solution.

 

A person in that situation does not need to be told that life would be better if he would take back the work he was delegating to maid service.  :p  Nope, even in getting life back to balance, maid service should not be the first to go.  Let's start with the late nights, the mindless eating, the 1,000 things chronically on the to-do list because they can never quite compete with work (or whatever other commitment gets too much importance).  Keep the maid service there to support all of this healthy transition vs. working against it.  Assuming, of course, that the person can afford it without working crazy hours.

 

I mean, I could scrub my toilet every day - it doesn't take much time or effort - but no, I really don't think that is going to fix any of my problems.  I'd rather drop in a chlorine tab so I don't have to worry about it.

 

I don't think that is always the case.  For some people, they are just doing what they expected to do, what they think is normal - the idea of doing something different isn't there, and if it comes it can be a bit of a revelation.  A lot of people are raised in settings where it is simply expected all adults work FT, except perhaps while they have infants. 

 

Many people also think they might like less work, but they can't picture what the lifestyle change would look like - moving, maybe to another place, a very different way of life.  So they kind of go on the working assumption that there really aren't other options.

[heartlikealion]

But if a childcare provider is offering her services to multiple people, it isn't each person's responsibility to make sure she makes a living wage.

 

No other goods or services are priced that way.  It's up to the business owner to figure out whether there is enough market and what is the right price to charge to cover costs/profit over time, given predictable fluctuations.

 

I'm not saying $3 is the right number.  It depends on many factors.

 

 

No. And I wasn't saying it's their responsibility. I was saying I don't like the business model that relies on numbers to that degree. This is why I never took a commission job! LOL I turned down a job for that very reason after the interview revealed that I could go business to business and if I didn't sell I didn't make money.

 

[StephanieZ]

I always assume this will come up when it's time to do taxes. I don't know if anyone can hide anything like that. Maybe money in a shoe box lol.

 

This has nothing to do with taxes. I'm not talking about HIDING the inheritance. Just the fact that when one spouse inherits money, it is legally NOT community property UNTIL/UNLESS the person who inherits "mingles" the money with joint finances. 

 

I.e., you inherit $100k from your mom. If you put it in your joint checking account, pay down loans, put it into your house, then it instantly becomes "joint" and if you divorce later, that 100k is looked at as part of the community property. In contrast, if you keep those funds in an account (or property) titled just to you, then if you divorce later, that money is NOT considered part of the community pot. You get it, free and clear, then the REST of your community property is divvied up. If you take half of it and pay down your mortgage (on your marital home) and leave half in an investment account titled just to you, then you have "protected" 50k, but the other 50k just became marital property. 

 

In all events, I'm not talking about hiding anything from your spouse or the government. (If you file taxes Married Filing Separated, then maybe you could hide it from your spouse, but I have never filed that way, so I have no idea.) And, for sure, I'd never try to hide money from the government.

[heartlikealion]

You'll have to excuse me. In this household I cannot imagine that any money coming in would stay separated for long lol. And then it might go into a bank, which is why I was thinking it would be mentioned on the tax form. We've had mult. bank accounts in the past (probably from when we first got married) and file jointly so it gets logged if it's over X amount. Thank you for explaining :)

[flyingiguana]

I don't hire a cleaner because I have a hang up about them doing it "right".  And I'm not enthusiastic about someone using the same brushes, rags etc on my bathroom that they just used on someone else's bathroom.  It's not just me.  My husband is even more germ-phobic than I am.  I think we'd rather let our own germs build up than have new ones introduced.  And this is on top of the issue of what one does while the cleaner is working.  I can't concentrate (at home) while a stranger is in the house.  And I know my husband would not want a stranger here while we weren't here.  So there wouldn't be any time savings.

 

In any case, cleaning doesn't actually take all that long unless one has fairly high standards.  It's the decluttering BEFORE cleaning that is so time consuming.  And I can't see having hired help to put away our stuff.  Unless we had a whole lot less stuff.  We'd never know where anything was afterwards.

 

I think we have decided that our house just doesn't need to be picture perfect.  And we can mostly all pitch in to do a bit now and then to keep it up to our low standards.  What I see as an issue, though, is that it's not up to the standards other people have for how clean someone else's house should be.  So it makes it a bit embarassing to have anyone else over -- even people who don't keep their own houses clean.  Because there's always a higher expectation when one is visiting a house.  (And the expectation, unfortunately, is that it's the wife's fault if the house isn't perfect....)

 

 

 

 

Edited June 3, 2016 by flyingiguana

[flyingiguana]

We used to use a diaper service.  The time and frustration involved in making sure we got all the diapers out for the pick up was worse than just washing the diapers myself. 

 

That's kind of how I feel about hiring help for these things.  Hiring people is time consuming.  I'd have to hate cleaning (or leaving in a dirty house) way more than I hate hiring people.  And the hiring would have to take less time than just doing the work.

 

Take out food is a lot easier for me to negotiate.  The business is already set up.  All I have to do is walk in and give my order.  And if I don't like what they're providing, I can go to another place next time.

 

 

[regentrude]

And I'm not enthusiastic about someone using the same brushes, rags etc on my bathroom that they just used on someone else's bathroom.  It's not just me.  My husband is even more germ-phobic than I am.  I think we'd rather let our own germs build up than have new ones introduced. 

 

My mother's cleaner uses the equipment available in my mother's home; the brushes etc don't leave the house.

My friend who cleans houses also does not bring her own equipment.

(It may be different if you hire a larger firm.)

[Laura Corin]

My mother's cleaner uses the equipment available in my mother's home; the brushes etc don't leave the house.

My friend who cleans houses also does not bring her own equipment.

(It may be different if you hire a larger firm.)

 

This is the same with our cleaner: she uses our materials and follows our rules about hygiene (what cloths are used where, etc.).

 

[Arcadia]

My mother's cleaner uses the equipment available in my mother's home; the brushes etc don't leave the house.

My friend who cleans houses also does not bring her own equipment.

(It may be different if you hire a larger firm.)

The cleaning agency that many of my neighbors use would bring their own equipment. Three ladies would clean a home at a time. The customer could always specify that they want their own equipment used instead.

 

My parents use an agency and the cleaners would bring their own equipment.

[SKL]

We let our cleaners use their own rags and stuff, though they could use ours if  they wanted to.  We are not germophobes.  :)

 

As for what to do when the cleaners are here, I work at home, in my bedroom, so I just let them in and then go back upstairs.  I ask them to save my room for last.  Then when they are ready to clean my room (it's only dusting and vacuuming), I take my laptop to an area they already finished.

 

It can be distracting, but it's not as bad as when I had the nanny here every day.  :p  I can hear everything (thin walls) and there is no way to mentally block out your own kid's noises.  Or when we were having our house remodeled last year.  Now that was distracting.  At least the maids don't come that often.

 

It's actually really nice to have a reason to clean (declutter / organize) the whole house all at one time every month.  If I don't need to, I find it hard to justify prioritizing it over other things.  When the maids are coming, I have to do it or they will move everything to who-knows-where.  So that is one of my favorite things about having maids.  :)

Edited June 3, 2016 by SKL

[FaithManor]

With regards to childcare, for those that can no contract with a relative for reduced price or free childcare, the issue is that regardless of the fact that wages should be higher for childcare providers the reality is that the cost of childcare must be low enough to make it profitable for the parent to work. It is a simple economic issue, not a worth issue. So for the mom working as a CNA making in this area $9.00 an hour 20 hours per week - most CNA's in this area can not get full time - the take home on that is $166.00 and change. Take out care insurance at $25.00 per week and gas at another $25.00 per week, and that take home is down to $116.00. If she pays $5.00 an hour for daycare her net pay is $10.00. If she could work full time, her take home is $320.00 minus now $200.00 for daycare she has $120.00 minus gas and car insurance she nets $70.00 a week for working 40 hours and being away from home. Might not be worth it in the long run.

 

It is a huge issue.

 

Most of the jobs in our area simply do not pay more than $10.00 an hour so by the time taxes and the costs of working get taken out, $5.00 an hour per child just isn't sustainable. I would imagine that in areas where incomes are much higher that this is not so much of an issue. There are very, very few people who do daycare in their homes, much less free standing ones. As a general rule, the mother stays home until the youngest is 4 and then attends free preschool at the public school or she takes evening or weekend work when daddy can be home. Given that many retired folks have gone to work bagging groceries and greeting at Walmart and such in order to supplement their retirement incomes, the babysitting grandma is a real rarity.

 

To be honest, more and more young couples in the area are citing childcare costs as a reason not to have children even when they desperately want them. The economy is bad here and it takes two incomes to just have a not falling down on your head apartment or house of extremely modest description, plus pay our very high costs of car insurance and the car (this county is very rural and no public transportation so one drives usually at least 20 minutes one way and due to country roads in bad shape, biking is not a safe option either), and taxes, and low wages, and....there isn't room to pay for daycare, and there isn't room to lose an income so a parent can stay home with an infant. I know one young couple - both in skilled labor jobs but due to the economy here get piddly wages in return - who desperately want to start a family but can't. They'd be homeless in their beat up used cars if they did so. All four grandparents are still working full time, and no aunties in the area willing to do daycare either. Add to that their $5000.00 insurance deductible, and it just isn't going to happen. 

 

 

[LucyStoner]

Faith, low wages and childcare costs are presently a serious drain on the rate of workforce participation for mothers. Often this is framed as more moms choosing to stay home but really what is going on is that it makes no sense to work FT. Most of the 2 income parents I know who have more than one small child and aren't affluent are largely working opposite shifts. Which can be difficult for a couple to manage.

[KungFuPanda]

The turn this thread has taken fascinates my inner sociologist.

 

I have zero emotional attachment to the idea of outsourcing certain tasks, such as housework. I'd feel no guilt, nor any sense of altruism, in hiring a housecleaner.

 

It's interesting to read how people's backgrounds come into play in shaping our adult perceptions. We grew up in an area where it was common to have maids - even people working class by current standards. But we moved to where it was more of a middle- or upper-class thing, so we didn't have one anymore. We lived with extended family and everyone had a role - some were earners, some were caregivers, some took on maintenance (and cleaning). Maybe that's why it's neutral for me.

 

My mom comes to clean my house every week. She enjoys housework, it relaxes her and she likes having something to show for her efforts. She also collects, washes, and irons the laundry, and returns it to our closets and drawers like some kind of Laundry Fairy. I don't pay her except in LOVE :001_wub: . Fortunately it pays well from her perspective, and the price is right from mine!

Will your mom adopt me? My mom will actually start cleaning my house if she's here, but she lives 5 hours away and doesn't come up often. I want a laundry fairy!

[heartlikealion]

Faith, low wages and childcare costs are presently a serious drain on the rate of workforce participation for mothers. Often this is framed as more moms choosing to stay home but really what is going on is that it makes no sense to work FT. Most of the 2 income parents I know who have more than one small child and aren't affluent are largely working opposite shifts. Which can be difficult for a couple to manage.

 

This is what we did and it was like ships passing through the night. It was terrible. I'd come home from work and dh would leave for work. He worked weekends and nights and was also enrolled in online classes so there was very limited family time.

 

Next semester I hope to work a few hours locally with the reasoning being that dh would be home the few hours I work and could watch dd and/or ds (depending on if we homeschool or not). If dh wouldn't be able to watch the kids then I wouldn't have even applied.

 

[Tita Gidge]

Will your mom adopt me? My mom will actually start cleaning my house if she's here, but she lives 5 hours away and doesn't come up often. I want a laundry fairy!

 

She has so many kids, she probably wouldn't even notice one more :lol: you're in!

 

I will say that I did have to move to the Laundry Fairy. I hate where we live, but I suck it up so the kids can grow up near her. And, well, laundry ...!

[SKL]

In terms of daycare policy, I think it will remain difficult because while some people feel it's important so support working moms, others feel policies shouldn't encourage moms to work because they think kids are better off with their moms all day.  I think if there were consensus on that, there would be more serious movement in the affordable childcare direction.

 

It's a tough question.  I am very lucky that I was never in a situation where I had to choose between unemployment and low-cost / low-quality childcare.

 

In the past few years, there have been cases of single moms trying to figure out how to get / keep a job with no child care.  In each case, it ended with the mom being arrested and investigated and who knows what else.  Not sure whether it's a matter of moms not being aware of viable options, or viable options not being available for these moms.  Either way, there's lots of room for improvement.

[LucyStoner]

In terms of daycare policy, I think it will remain difficult because while some people feel it's important so support working moms, others feel policies shouldn't encourage moms to work because they think kids are better off with their moms all day. I think if there were consensus on that, there would be more serious movement in the affordable childcare direction.

 

It's a tough question. I am very lucky that I was never in a situation where I had to choose between unemployment and low-cost / low-quality childcare.

 

In the past few years, there have been cases of single moms trying to figure out how to get / keep a job with no child care. In each case, it ended with the mom being arrested and investigated and who knows what else. Not sure whether it's a matter of moms not being aware of viable options, or viable options not being available for these moms. Either way, there's lots of room for improvement.

As a matter of federal policy, the emphasis now is much more on getting people to work and mothers on TANF are generally only exempt from workfare type programs for a very short time post birth. When cash welfare benefits were started in this country one of the expressly stated purposes was to allow mothers without husbands (or with husbands who could not work) to be home with their young children/attend to family caregiving needs. While there may not be a national consensus on the recent policies, there has certainly been a legislative majority for putting poor mothers to work for 20+ years now.

 

The amount paid in childcare subsidies for many working poor women often exceeds per family the amount of money the mom earns in the workforce. There's value in increase job skills and gaining employment. There's also financial and other costs to expecting women with very limited earning potential to leave their very young children to go bag groceries.

 

And then you have women who aren't poor and do have decent earning potential who for a variety of reasons can't work FT due to their kids. If special education quality wasn't such a crapshoot here, I could be back to work on a more FT basis.

 

It's a complicated mess.

[Bluegoat]

Faith, low wages and childcare costs are presently a serious drain on the rate of workforce participation for mothers. Often this is framed as more moms choosing to stay home but really what is going on is that it makes no sense to work FT. Most of the 2 income parents I know who have more than one small child and aren't affluent are largely working opposite shifts. Which can be difficult for a couple to manage.

 

OTOH, it seems to have somewhat the opposite effect when the childcare makes it renumerative for both parents to work - it becomes difficult to justify a decision to forgo that second income.  And it seems to some extent that other kinds of costs may begin to accomodate two incomes as the norm, so it can increasingly become impossible, rather than just a matter of giving money for extras or to make things more comfortable.

[LucyStoner]

OTOH, it seems to have somewhat the opposite effect when the childcare makes it renumerative for both parents to work - it becomes difficult to justify a decision to forgo that second income. And it seems to some extent that other kinds of costs may begin to accomodate two incomes as the norm, so it can increasingly become impossible, rather than just a matter of giving money for extras or to make things more comfortable.

That's true but mainly only when the "second income" wage earner can make enough to cover childcare and the costs of working, assuming that the family must pay the full cost of childcare OOP. This makes things harder for those who want to chose to live on one income or must live on one income (single parent, 1 adult in the home is disabled or unemployable) because of upward pressure on prices for everything from housing to soccer registration fees.

Edited June 4, 2016 by LucyStoner

[eternalsummer]

That's true but mainly only when the "second income" wage earner can make enough to cover childcare and the costs of working, assuming that the family must pay the full cost of childcare OOP. This makes things harder for those who want to chose to live on one income or must live on one income (single parent, 1 adult in the home is disabled or unemployable) because of upward pressure on prices for everything from housing to soccer registration fees.

 

It also makes it harder because there is downward pressure on wages (from a larger labor market).

[Tsuga]

This thread is weird.

 

I'm never moving to Seattle, the people sound hideous!! I can list a hundred ways my small, poor Midwestern hometown has helped people that you claim society doesn't give a shit about.

Um. I heard those messages mainly here (on WTM) and when I lived in SoCal. :)

 

I live here because I don't have to live with that level of cruelty on a daily basis.

 

Also, I think I have figured it out.

 

SAHWs don't have to work because they are well off. Or at least compared to theorizing (edit: THE WORKING) class.

 

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/4mn4xj/whats_considered_trashy_if_youre_poor_but_classy/

 

Trashy if you're poor, classy if you're rich.

 

Language (it's Reddit) but generally inoffensive, unless you are looking to justify your not working as inherently superior to someone else's not working.

 

That's it. Just: they can do whatever they want because they have power. "Somebody loves the SAHW by nobody loves the single woman. Duh."

 

The whole work for respect thing was a lie all along. Work is what you do when nobody loves you enough to share.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Tsuga

[Arcadia]

Work is what you do when nobody loves you enough to share.

Some people regardless of gender, work for a feeling of perceived power. It is an ego trip for them. I have met quite a few power hungry married female supervisors. Since I am not after their jobs, I was safe from the backstabbing. Some have spouses that prefer them to be SAHM so there are marriage tension there.

[lauraw4321]

Hahahaha, Tsuga. I actually laughed out loud at that. Yes, I think you are actually quite right.

[KungFuPanda]

Did we just take 17 pages to clarify that some people work because they have to and some people work because they want to?

[Carol in Cal.]

 

The whole work for respect thing was a lie all along. Work is what you do when nobody loves you enough to share.

No, hon.

 

Work is multifaceted, just like women are.

There is no one true path for women, any more than there is for men.

There is no 'Role Of Women' in the singular.  That was a briefly held theory, and is a disproven one.

 

Sometimes work is what you do to survive.

Sometimes it is what you do to feel valuable.

Sometimes it is what you do to earn respect.

Sometimes it is what you do because you are driven to do it.

Sometimes it is what you do because that's your spot on the team, even if it is not the spot you want on the team.

Sometimes it is what you do because you don't have a team that minute, so you have to do it all.

 

"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with all thy heart," is always good advice.  

[SKL]

While I don't think we're there yet, I think it would be cool if someone did come up with a math equation that could solve this question.  :)

 

Personally, I work because I'm crazy.  :P

[SKL]

Proverbs has an interesting take on it IMO.

[purplejackmama]

Did we just take 17 pages to clarify that some people work because they have to and some people work because they want to?

And the people in Seattle may or may not be jerks.

 

Good times.

[lauraw4321]

I think Tsuga's tongue is firmly in her cheek.

[gardenmom5]

I think Tsuga's tongue is firmly in her cheek.

have you read all her posts on this thread?

[Meriwether]

 

That's it. Just: they can do whatever they want because they have power. "Somebody loves the SAHW by nobody loves the single woman. Duh."

 

The whole work for respect thing was a lie all along. Work is what you do when nobody loves you enough to share.

:huh: This is what you've gotten from this discussion? Choosing to view life in these terms isn't going to make you happy, but it is your prerogative.

[OneStepAtATime]

I think Tsuga's tongue is firmly in her cheek.

If it is, I would honestly be very surprised.  Her posts, taken collectively, have definitely steered me in another direction.

[KungFuPanda]

I think Tsuga's tongue is firmly in her cheek.

I don't think so. There seems to be some sort of "having to work equals less love/value" equation happening that I can't quite quantify.

 

ETA: The fact that I don't quite understand this point of view has made this conversation very interesting to me. It's not that I agree or disagree. I'm having trouble completely understanding her take on this. I'm fascinated, glad she started the conversation, and not remotely frustrated or annoyed by it.

Edited June 6, 2016 by KungFuPanda