What are your earning potential requirements?

[Eternal Sunshine]

I couldn't care less about the money. I just need a guy who doesn't have a "loserly" vibe about him. That's entirely subjective.

 

I guess all else being equal, I would prefer someone to make more than less. But that's as far as it goes....

[Janesays]

I make between 80K - 100K now. I wouldn't care if my hubby made half that as long as he was happy with what he was doing. I freaking love my job and I want that for my SO too. I guess what it boils down to for me is quality of life and life is too short to work a job that you hate.

[Emilia]

 

My advice to guys planing on getting married & raising a family is to marry a woman who is in your tax bracket & never let her become a stay at home mom because if it goes south you are responsible for keeping her in her current standard of living because she is unemployed & considered having given up her career to raise your kids.

 

Except, their only YOUR kids when it comes to finances. Their HER kids where everything else is concerned according to the state.

 

If any woman here looking to be a stay at home mom doesn't think a well to do guy hasn't already considered this, their wrong.

 

This is why I'm not married. I own a couple of properties in London and have a reasonable income, don't want to end up like soserious and support some bloke I don't want to talk to anymore. No thanks.

[zengirl]

I really don't understand the hostile vibe I'm picking up on here. I suspect that people are taking offense to her 120k figure, at which point I have to wonder about chips on shoulders. So that's what she has identified -- deal with it? It should be self-evident in a thread about preferences that they will differ among people. Also self-evident: everyone has a story about being raised while living in X on Y dollars, because people find ways to make it work -- that's not the question here. The question is about the lines to draw when finding a partner to start a family with, and whether money is/should be one of them, and how.

 

Anyone can want anything they want -- agreed.

 

Planning a family shouldn't be all about how much the guy makes. If more women and men would save more money prior to having children, perhaps it might make life easier on both of them. This is a couple decision and unified effort, not just a bunch of purportedly independent women gold digging for high net worth men. Pull your weight ladies.

 

For me, it was always about that a bit (moot since hubby and I won't have kids and were on exactly the same page) because I was never crazy about kids. I think I'd be a great Mom and part of me sort of wanted to have them, but I never really wanted to -- the farther away I am from thinking I might have them, the more I realize I probably feel closer to "didn't want to have them" than I thought. If I'd wanted to have kids, you're right -- I would've started saving and moved mountains to do what I could, even if I had to be a single Mom.

 

Sometimes I wonder when women talk about needing a partner who supports a family if there's more ambivalence (I'm not talking about NOT WANTING kids -- I'm just talking about not sureness) than stats show. Stats suggest women feel very sure, most of the time, re: Kids or no kids. Most women I know will admit that they weren't sure -- a few were, on either side -- so perhaps when we get stats we're asking them the questions all wrong or social pressure is interfering.

 

Anyway, that's what this convo made me think about. I don't agree that anything is "offensive" about what people want -- let them want what they want. When I was single, I dated a few teachers and social workers and would've married one, though I pretty much figured for years I'd marry an engineer or programmer (they were 80% of the guys I dated and knew) of some sort, as I did. The biggest problem with wanting a guy who makes big money on top of everything else is it may be harder to find, especially since as a slightly trollish poster said upthread plenty of higher-earning men get snatched up by women who truly don't care about money.

 

I will also say earnings show you little. My hubby makes more than me, by a LOT, but after bills, I have a little more. I have no debt, and he has major student loans and still has a car loan. I do think before deciding to have a family that both people should know how they're going to do that, financially, and that in this day and age of layoffs, it's probably safer if either of you could support a family -- at least for a time -- on one salary. Not easy to do, though.

 

I agree that $120K isn't very much in any large metropolis that isn't highly depressed.

 

This is not true. In many SE metropolises that I've lived in, including where I live currently (a very major city -- someone else mentioned a much smaller sum was plenty here and is totally right), 120K is plenty. It's true many places up North and in Cali, but not everywhere by any means. My parents make about 150K together and live in Florida, and they are very securely upper-middle class, bordering on rich. The area they live in is not "severely depressed." It's fallen on harder times, like everywhere, but COL has actually gone up as it has, like many places. Real estate has gone down a bit, but been rising again lately.

[xxoo]

Also, seeing as you love your job and it is that lucrative, are you certain you would even want to be a SAHM when the time comes? Not many people have that (a job they love that pays very well), and if you do have it, it seems rather silly to give it all up and also narrow your options because you need those men to provide what you already can, just because of traditional gender roles.

 

That's what I don't understand.

 

I am supportive of having a SAHP. Heck, I've been one! But I don't understand putting all of that work into building a career, and establishing a standard of living, and then expecting to stop earning and have a partner provide the same while you SAH with babies. Most of us drop our standard of living a bit to afford to SAH with our babies. We make sacrifices.

 

And regarding the COL in metro areas--your location is tied to your job. If you decide to stop working the big job and stay home with babies, you don't need to live in the metro area. 50k is enough to raise a couple kids in most parts of the country.

 

Now, if what you truly want is: the city life, the Yankee candles and fine wine, one bedroom per kid, 2 cars, AND to SAH while your kids are young--yes, hold out for a man who makes 120K plus.

Edited March 22, 2012 by xxoo

[make me believe]

I will also say earnings show you little. My hubby makes more than me, by a LOT, but after bills, I have a little more. I have no debt, and he has major student loans and still has a car loan.

 

Great point. My husband doesn't make enough to "qualify" as an acceptable date for many of the ladies on here, but he has absolutely zero debt. No credit cards (well sometimes he puts groceries or whatever on a cc & pays it off immediately, just to keep his credit line going), no student loans, nothing. So while he doesn't make $100k, he comfortably pays our bills and is supporting me through school. I do have leftovers from grants that cover my car payment, but that's about it. Meanwhile, I'm sure there are plenty of people in the $100k+ category that have massive student loans, huge car/house payments, etc.

 

And I completely agree with threebyfate that if a woman wants to be a SAHM she should be preparing for that IMMEDIATELY by securing herself a high paying job and saving, saving, saving. But to expect a guy to go from living well by himself on 100k to basically cutting his income in half by having to now support not only his child but his wife as well, seems like some pretty entitled thinking. To PREFER it is fine. To EXPECT it? I'm not sure. And to DEMAND it.... well, like I said before, you're cutting your dating pool pretty drastically with those kinds of demands.

 

Also, I really wish some of these girls would answer the question many of us have asked, which is what they would do if they met an amazing guy and then discovered that he doesn't mean their "earnings requirements." Drop him right away, no consideration given? Grill him immediately upon meeting him to see if he's worth your time?? How exactly does this work?

Edited March 22, 2012 by make me believe

[Jeremy87]

Great point. My husband doesn't make enough to "qualify" as an acceptable date for many of the ladies on here, but he has absolutely zero debt. No credit cards (well sometimes he puts groceries or whatever on a cc & pays it off immediately, just to keep his credit line going), no student loans, nothing. So while he doesn't make $100k, he comfortably pays our bills and is supporting me through school. I do have leftovers from grants that cover my car payment, but that's about it. Meanwhile, I'm sure there are plenty of people in the $100k+ category that have massive student loans, huge car/house payments, etc.

 

And I completely agree with threebyfate that if a woman wants to be a SAHM she should be preparing for that IMMEDIATELY by securing herself a high paying job and saving, saving, saving. But to expect a guy to go from living well by himself on 100k to basically cutting his income in half by having to now support not only his child but his wife as well, seems like some pretty entitled thinking. To PREFER it is fine. To EXPECT it? I'm not sure. And to DEMAND it.... well, like I said before, you're cutting your dating pool pretty drastically with those kinds of demands.

 

Also, I really wish some of these girls would answer the question many of us have asked, which is what they would do if they met an amazing guy and then discovered that he doesn't mean their "earnings requirements." Drop him right away, no consideration given? Grill him immediately upon meeting him to see if he's worth your time?? How exactly does this work?

 

You're on the money. you're going to make spookie and star gazer angry. LOL LOL LOL

[spookie]

I have lost faith in the womenfolk.

 

I wish the qualification I need to earn love would be judged by my heart and my physical attributes. I want someone who loves me because Im good to her and she finds me good looking. But no, all they care about is money. Something external that isn't even part of my body.

 

Before I had a good job in sales. But I hated everything about it. Now Im working in the service industry. Im very happy with my job but I dont make very good money.

 

I guess its a choice I have to make in life and Im resigned that I dont have what it counts the most in the eyes of women.

 

 

Who says I only care about mOney? I also require my dates to be fit and extremely good looking.

[spookie]

I really don't understand the hostile vibe I'm picking up on here. I suspect that people are taking offense to her 120k figure, at which point I have to wonder about chips on shoulders. So that's what she has identified -- deal with it? It should be self-evident in a thread about preferences that they will differ among people. Also self-evident: everyone has a story about being raised while living in X on Y dollars, because people find ways to make it work -- that's not the question here. The question is about the lines to draw when finding a partner to start a family with, and whether money is/should be one of them, and how.

 

 

Yup, thanks! That was my answer to my question. Rather than tearing it apart for 20 pages, how bout yall discuss how much you'd need to be comfortable getting married and having kids.

[Jeremy87]

Who says I only care about mOney? I also require my dates to be fit and extremely good looking.

 

Must make 120k and be fit and extremely good looking. You're gonna be single for a long time lady. And you ladies wonder why I use you for sex.

[fortyninethousand322]

Who says I only care about mOney? I also require my dates to be fit and extremely good looking.

 

Professional athletes are probably your best bet then. Most people who work 80 hours a week to make that good money don't have a lot of extra time to spend in the gym to look good.

 

Athletes would though, since it's part of their job. Unless you marry someone like the late Robert "Tractor" Traylor.

[spookie]

My condo was in a suburb, not the main city. Had I bought an identical unit in the more exclusive parts of Vancouver, it would have been twice to four times the price.

 

Cruising through some real estate in Chicago, 2 bedroom condos appeared to go anywhere from $150 - $400K. A three bedroom would be quite a bit more which is what you'd need if you have two children.

 

Can someone provide me with a couple of decent suburban neighborhoods in Chicago for pricing? Not expensive but decent.

 

 

Northbrook, lake bluff.

 

Also keep in mind Chicago and some I it's burbs are extremely violent. For example 46 people were shot , 10 to death last weekend.

[spookie]

My condo was in a suburb, not the main city. Had I bought an identical unit in the more exclusive parts of Vancouver, it would have been twice to four times the price.

 

Cruising through some real estate in Chicago, 2 bedroom condos appeared to go anywhere from $150 - $400K. A three bedroom would be quite a bit more which is what you'd need if you have two children.

 

Can someone provide me with a couple of decent suburban neighborhoods in Chicago for pricing? Not expensive but decent.

 

 

Northbrook, lake bluff.

 

Also keep in mind Chicago and some I it's burbs are extremely violent. For example 46 people were shot , 10 to death last weekend. The ghetto pets drive down real estate averages.

[Chocolat]

When I married my H, I made well over the $120K you mention. He made about half that. We decided that I would stay home with our kids. This was very important to my H -- he wanted to be the provider -- even though it was not (at the time) the mot logical financial choice. Fortunately, I was able to find work from home which, while not as lucrative as what I had been doing, helped out our finances. Nonetheless, we made many sacrifices during the early years.

 

Fast forward to today, and my H is making well above what I was making when I left the FT work force. I am still working from home. Our sacrifices are fewer and life is generally very good.

 

All of which to say... it's not always so easy to predict the future and, sometimes, risks born out of love are worth taking.

[xxoo]

Yup, thanks! That was my answer to my question. Rather than tearing it apart for 20 pages, how bout yall discuss how much you'd need to be comfortable getting married and having kids.

 

For us, there was a big financial difference between feeling comfortable getting married and feeling comfortable having kids. A lot of the younger posters here are probably not looking to have kids in the next few years, and that makes a big difference in what a partner needs now.

 

Still, why do you need a partner who makes 120k if you make that kind of money? Does the family need 240k?

[spookie]

Just curious. If the bolded is your concern, and you can genuinely make 120k/year by the age of, what, 30? Why not sign up to be only the breadwinner, and seek a family-minded man who is good with household chores and wouldn't mind being a SAHD if you have kids? That would broaden your options a lot, especially in the modern times.

 

Also, seeing as you love your job and it is that lucrative, are you certain you would even want to be a SAHM when the time comes? Not many people have that (a job they love that pays very well), and if you do have it, it seems rather silly to give it all up and also narrow your options because you need those men to provide what you already can, just because of traditional gender roles.

 

 

This would be a good option, if I was more emotionally progressive. Maybe I will get there one day, but Im not there yet. In my mind I don't subscribe to gender roles, and I believe the task of delegating work is up to up to individual family, but what i am attrcted to is a man who could be a good provider.

[fortyninethousand322]

Yup, thanks! That was my answer to my question. Rather than tearing it apart for 20 pages, how bout yall discuss how much you'd need to be comfortable getting married and having kids.

 

My answer is still 3 dollars an hour.

[kiss_andmakeup]

Professional athletes are probably your best bet then. Most people who work 80 hours a week to make that good money don't have a lot of extra time to spend in the gym to look good.

 

Athletes would though, since it's part of their job. Unless you marry someone like the late Robert "Tractor" Traylor.

 

There are plenty of people who make 120k+ and don't work 80 hours a week. My bf is rarely at work more than 50ish hours a week. He stays fit, healthy, and attractive. If she wanted a body builder that would be one thing, but simply being fit doesn't take much more than a helthy diet and ~45 min of exercise a day.

Edited March 22, 2012 by kiss_andmakeup

[xxoo]

This would be a good option, if I was more emotionally progressive. Maybe I will get there one day, but Im not there yet. In my mind I don't subscribe to gender roles, and I believe the task of delegating work is up to up to individual family, but what i am attrcted to is a man who could be a good provider.

 

Then this really isn't about how much money a man needs to earn for you to provide for a family as a couple. It is more about how much money a man needs to earn to be attractive in your eyes.

[fortyninethousand322]

There are plenty of people who make 120k+ and don't work 80 hours a week. My bf is never at work more than 50ish hours a week. He stays fit, healthy, and attractive. If she wanted a body builder that would be one thing, but simply being fit doesn't take much more than a helthy diet and ~45 min of exercise a day.

 

The tone of the OP's answers in this thread made it sound like it wasn't "fit" she was looking for. More like big muscles and six pack abs. Those things aren't terrible to have, but they do require a bit of dedication to get there.

[kiss_andmakeup]

The tone of the OP's answers in this thread made it sound like it wasn't "fit" she was looking for. More like big muscles and six pack abs. Those things aren't terrible to have, but they do require a bit of dedication to get there.

 

What "tone"? She said fit and good-looking. Not ripped and good looking. That was the only time I've seen her mention preferences looks-wise.

[fortyninethousand322]

What "tone"? She said fit and good-looking. Not ripped and good looking. That was the only time I've seen her mention preferences looks-wise.

 

The whole 120 thousand is "living modestly". I live in the richest county in America, my parents barely crack 40 thousand a year. I'd say we live slightly above modestly. Combined with the good looks and fitness it's a bit excessive. To me, her tone sounds entitled. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's how it sounds to me.

[kiss_andmakeup]

The whole 120 thousand is "living modestly". I live in the richest county in America, my parents barely crack 40 thousand a year. I'd say we live slightly above modestly. Combined with the good looks and fitness it's a bit excessive. To me, her tone sounds entitled. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's how it sounds to me.

 

Ok, that's fine, but it's still no indication that she wants a guy with a bodybuilder physique. All I'm saying is that what she's looking for is out there, and it's not as unrealistic as you're making it seem, especially if she herself has a lot to offer.

 

And I was merely pointing out the misconception that anyone who makes 6 figures is an 80 hour a week workaholic with no time to care for their health and fitness. It's simply not the case.

[spookie]

Im surprised that so many feel 120k earning potential is extraordinary. To me it is upper-middle-class, not hard to achieve with intelligence, a bit of good luck, and an education. Most people I know make somewhere in that range or will in a couple of years. And, it's not 40k on top of 80k, since taxes will be higher.

 

If I was a true gold digger, I'd be asking for at least 300k, so i could have a boat, vacation home, and travel overaeas Not just enough to send my kids to soccer league.

 

Also, for the record, I don't have any debt, but decent savings.

[johan]

The whole 120 thousand is "living modestly". I live in the richest county in America, my parents barely crack 40 thousand a year. I'd say we live slightly above modestly. Combined with the good looks and fitness it's a bit excessive. To me, her tone sounds entitled. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's how it sounds to me.

 

Ditto. Except we lived in the richest county on the entire planet. And my parents paid to work. And they paid high tax rates on top of that. We lived in an abandoned, unheated rabbit hole in the bottom of a gully in a rainy climate. And we were happy. We got by just fine.