Friday, December 11, 2009, 4:39PM ET - U.S. Markets Closed.

Laura Rowley Money & Happiness

Laura Rowley, Money & Happiness

Can You Live On One Income? It’s Worth a Try

by Laura Rowley

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story
Very Good (529 Ratings)
3.91116/5
Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2008, 12:00AM

Is it possible for families to go from two incomes to one?

It's something most households with two working parents and young children at home have contemplated at some point. More than 60 percent of families with children under age 18 had both parents employed outside the home in 2005-2006, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That compares to less than a third of mothers in 1975.

Driven to the Edge

You see lots of articles discussing ways to eliminate the second income -- things like clipping coupons, buying second-hand clothes, and cutting out vacations and cable television.

But ultimately, paring those expenses isn't going to cover the gap for most middle-class families, because those aren't the costs that drive them to the economic edge. The real problems are what Harvard Law professor Elizabeth Warren calls "the big five" -- housing, health insurance, child care, a second automobile, and taxes.

Warren, author of "The Two-Income Trap," is an expert on family bankruptcy. She has found that married couples with children are more than twice as likely to file for bankruptcy as childless couples. (More children live in homes that will file for bankruptcy this year than live in homes that will file for divorce.)

Moreover, income volatility has increased sharply among families with children. According to Jacob Hacker, author of "The Great Risk Shift," the volatility in family incomes doubled between 1969 and 2004. Moreover, Americans with at least four years of college experienced a larger increase in family income instability than those with only a high school education over the past generation, with most of the rise occurring in the last 15 years. 

More Is Less

The single-income family with two children in the early 1970s earned about $32,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars, compared to $73,000 for the dual-income family in the early 2000s.

Despite the higher income, today's families save less and carry more debt: In 1970, the one-income family saved 11 percent of its take-home pay and allocated 1.4 percent of its annual income to pay revolving debt, such as credit cards. In 2005, the two-income family saved nothing, and allocated 15 percent of its annual income to revolving debt, according to Warren.

In other words, the two-income family spends everything -- the second income, all of its annual savings -- and has piled on debt. Where does the money go? Despite the sticker-shock that goes with buying a gallon of milk these days, they didn't spend it on food, clothing, appliances, electronics, or automobiles -- on an inflation-adjusted basis, those costs actually went down.

The Big Five

Warren found two-earner families today spend three-quarters of their household incomes on five categories (which consumed only half the income of single-earner families a generation ago):

Housing: The cost for families with children has risen 100 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars since 1970.

Health Insurance: For a healthy family that has an employer-sponsored insurance plan, costs have risen 74 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars since 1970. In that year, the demographic group most likely to lack health insurance was a 23-year-old unmarried man with no children; today it's a person age 35 who is married with children.

Cars: Families today spend 52 percent more on automobiles than in 1970, on an inflation-adjusted basis, Warren found. While the inflation-adjusted price of automobiles has dropped since 1970, families are still spending more on this category because they typically need two cars to get to work.

Taxes: The first dollar that the second earner earns is taxed after the last dollar of the first earner, Warren notes. This means that the tax rate for the family unit has risen by about 25 percent between 1970 and today.

Child Care: In 2007, fees in licensed centers ranged from $10,920 a year for 4-year-old children to $14,647 a year for infants, according to a study by the National Association of Child Care Resources and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA). In every region of the United States, annual costs of child care surpass the cost of food.

Reading, Writing, and Retirement

A sixth major expense is education -- both preschool and college -- which most families in 1970 didn't view as necessary to launch their child into the middle class.

The number of children who attend preschool has risen to 45 percent of all 3- and 4-year-olds from about 20 percent in 1970, according to the Census Bureau. On average, parents pay $7,000 a year, according to NACCRRA.

Finally, there's the challenge of saving for retirement. In the late 1970s, 62 percent of workers were covered solely by defined benefit plans, paid for by their employers; in 2005, the number was 10 percent, according to data from the Employee Benefits Research Institute.

Making It on One Income

So is it possible to downscale to one income? It may be, for couples who are willing to make bold changes with their money and in their attitudes, says Judy Lawrence, a financial coach and author of "The Budget Kit."

"You have to be willing to do some soul-searching about the things you're going to change and let go of," Lawrence says, adding that the stay-at-home parent takes on the additional job of planning ahead and investing the time to get the best deal. It's going back to your true priorities, values and goals and saying 'it's the best choice for me, my family, and our future' -- not 'we'll be locked into a life of drudgery and we can't do what we want to do.'"

Jonni McCoy, a Colorado writer and founder of Miserly Moms, agrees. When she left her job as a buyer for Apple Computer in 1992 to stay home with her two children, she was earning more than half the family income. "Make sure you're really clear why you are doing it, because there will be days when this is the last thing on the planet you want to do," she says, drawing an analogy to nutrition: "The average diet lasts 72 hours, but if you have a medical reason, it will stick."

The Single Life

Find a community of like-minded savers, says McCoy. "You have to have people who share your values, who say 'no, I can't afford that,' " she says. "The beginning is so tough, because when you're leaving the working world you may not have that community established."

Bankrate.com offers a calculator to help figure out what a second income is really worth on an after-tax basis, without all the work-related expenses. You need to track your monthly expenses for child care, commuting, work clothes, lunches and coffee breaks, dry cleaning, cash for coworkers' birthdays and other celebrations, and money spent on take-out meals and restaurants because you don't have time to shop and cook. Also consider savings on cleaning and other services the stay-at-home partner could take on, and the possibility of eliminating or downsizing a second car.

Start to tackle grocery expenses before you quit. "Food is the largest unfixed expense in most household budgets, so there's a tremendous amount of money in there," says McCoy. "We tweaked our budget in every way, but the majority of extra money came out of groceries." Basing weekly menus specifically on sale items can cut 30 percent off a grocery bill, McCoy says.

Getting to No

Lawrence, whose budgeting guide was first published in the 1980s, says it's harder to live on one income today because a number of innovations -- such as Internet access and certain prescription drugs -- have become necessities. But just as important, there's so much more choice in luxuries than there used to be -- that is, so much more stuff to say "no" to.

"Children and adults are bombarded unconsciously with media showing them how life is supposed to be; you're unconsciously saying 'no, no, no' all the time -- and that takes energy," Lawrence says. "It's much more of an emotional challenge than it used to be."

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story

Rate This story

Very Good (529 Ratings)
4/5
Sign-in to rate!

201 Comments

Showing comments 6-35 of 201<< PreviousNext >>
Sort: first to last

  • TaraM - Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 4:17PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Myself, my husband and a baby are living quite well and nearly debt free at under $40k a year. With that, we're still putting money in savings and keeping everyone insured. It takes a bit fiscal responsibility, but also a willngness to live a more simple and efficient life--a smaller house, eating at home, keeping bills down, etc. We save our splurges for things that will enhance our lives, not just provide a momentary pleasure.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, June 26, 2008, 11:11AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    As a frugal stay-at-home-mom I fail to see how a family can live off of 55k can not be in debt. None of these estimates are including recent inflation. For a year: Tithing/Charitable: 5,500 savings: 5,500 (minimum) Rent/mortgage: 12,000 (if you are lucky enough) Food: 3000 (250/month if you buy off brand and eat lots of vegtables..also including diapers) electricity: 2400 (200/month) water: 840 (70/ month) phone: 480 (40/month) car insurance: 1800 (150/month 2 cars) health insurance: 4800 (400/month if that lucky) out of pocket healthcare: 1200 (100/month kids need shots and checkups) dental: not even going there car gas: 4800 (conservative 400/month) car maintenance: 1000 (oil, brakes, tune ups, washing, tires..an avg cost over life of car) Utoh what about taxes? Vacations? Entertainment (eating out, couple time, movies)? Clothes (thrift, garage sale, or new)? Or even student loans or car payments? Even if you don't pay tithing or build your savings (shame on you!), you won't make enough to cover these expenses for a family without going into debt. My kids are almost in school, so I will be returning to the workforce. As a SAHM I have always been busy at home with the children and having intelligent children, they are ready to go to school and socilize in a setting without mom and be challenged by educators in different ways than I can come up with everyday. I have done my part to show my children that they are loved and I'm thankful for my time at home, but I applaud those who cannot stay at home those first few years. Different strength is needed for each role. To you SAHMs, does your husband spend time with your children? Does he not teach them values or morals? We have family time everyday when my husband gets home. Weekends we have special activities...movie night or park or swimming or visiting extended relatives and church. My kids are learning values that I know they will continue to learn even when I start working full-time this fall. I chose not to let my children fail or go through the same financial trials I went through to completely pay for college. My children will be responsible for working to build a savings for tutition or gaining a talent that will give them scholarships to a university, but I as a parent will offset the costs my children are left with. A graduate without any debt can immediately start building savings for life's misfortunes, oppertunities, and retirement.

  • 1qtkitty - Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 11:59AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I have to say, as a SAHM, that you will never make it if you are not willing to make some sacrafices. A smaller house, a car that you can pay cash for, cheaper vacations, and maybe a few more trips to the thrift store instead of the mall, and you can do it. Its not impossible or a mystery; its choices. Everyone has them. Living from emergency to emergency or living deliberately and content. Your choice.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, May 29, 2008, 9:57PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    I have never posted to an article before, but I am very curious as to where those people who have an income of under 100K, especially the people who have an income of 60K, live and own a home. I live on Long Island and that is just not possible here. My husband and I have 2 kids, we are in our early 30's, we both have good jobs and I am working on my Master's Degree and my husband is finishing up his BA. My husband also has a 2nd, part time, job bartending 3 nights a week. We have 2 boys who go to a babysitter everyday (they are almost 5 and almost 3). We live in a modest home, have 2 cars that are about 3 or 4 years old, and we barely make ends meet. Yet, the public schools are award winning, crime is very low and Long Island is a beautiful place to live. Where can we have these same things and not have to pull in over 200K to live a decent lifestyle?? I would really like to know.

  • george n - Thursday, May 22, 2008, 4:10PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    First of all, success should be measured by your own level of happiness and contentment, regardless of how much money is made or what one has. I personally, am 39 yrs old, never made more than $12/hr in my life, have a 2 yr college degree in computers, have bi-polar disability, own a 1 bdrm condo with $28k left to pay on the mortgage that i share with my girlfriend who is also disabled. we have 2 cats, 2 tv's, 2 computers and everything we need. we have virtually no credit card debt, just owe $8k on a year old car loan and $2300 student loan. i am perfectly content and satisfied with my life. the only thing i would wish for is that my live-in girlfriend would lose weight, but thats it. we are both on social security disability and work at non-stressed part-time jobs and we are free to come and go as we please most of the time. THAT is my definition of Success!!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, May 17, 2008, 10:12PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    I am a stay at home mom and am appauled by the comment posted on 6:44 pm. How much time do you have on your hands at your job? Would you like me to call your working mom lazy? Well, I could do just the same. She worried more about herself and money and was too LAZY to raise you and just went to work because that was easier! I have a Masters Degree and left a very lucrative job to raise my children.I was very driven and had a wonderful career and made a lot of money.Does that make you feel better? That I am a stay at home mom with a good degree, instead of one who stays home because she is lazy and uneducated? I made an educated decision to stay home because I felt that would get my children ahead.Just because someone has a graduate degree and a high powered job doesn't mean they are not lazy! Why don't you wake up and use the skills that your working mom gave you to realize that! I hope your mother reads your comments and sees what a fantastic job she did giving you any kind of morals or values, or respect for other peoples lifestyles. No one should have to justify their reasons for staying home to raise their children. I know in your comments you are trying to impress upon people how much children need financial support but it goes beyond that. Instill in them a little drive in a different way instead of handing them money and thinking that is going to work. They will end up being spoiled and having a sense of entitlement for the rest of their lives.Or they will just always assume that their parents will be there to bail them out. I really think that some of the problems we have in this world are the fact that some parents think that financially providing for their children is better than staying home and making some sacrifices. Let your children see how budget finances and make life decisions, instead of just handing them money to make everything ok or get them ahead. Teach them how to make decisions and enjoy what they have and not want for everything under the sun. Teach them that they need some type of job to work for what they want instead of giving them the funds they need all the time. I really believe that there are parents who are selfish and want eveything our society says you "need" to have to make it in this world.I just wish parents would realize that your children are your most important, if not, most rewarding job! Why did you have them in the first place? I understand that to make it most families have to work. It just saddens me that those that don't need 2 incomes (and there are more than we think) aren't even willing to give it a try because they say they couldn't be a stay at home mom. Why? Wouldn't your children love to hear that you just can't stay home with them all day? What kind of message does that send to them? You made a comment that these children with stay at home parents are spoiled and pampered and I will tell you that is not the case in a large number of one income households. My children are young and they know what their responsibilities in our home are and know how to earn what they want. It is just terrible that an educated person, with a fantastic job like yourself could make a comment that we are not contributing to the world. Are you kidding me? Do you think we are home eating bon bons and watching soap operas all day. Children need 24 hr. a day care. Where have you been, get out from under your high profile, money making job rock and wake up. We are raising the future Americans who will run all aspects of your country and you should be thankful for us not critical! I am sure all the leaders(in whatever line of work) would be so happy to have you make such NASTY comments about their mothers because I am sure you would be surprised how many had a stay at home mom.I hope that you will one day have a wife and children of your own and learn how to be proud of her for being a stay at home, LAZY person.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Friday, May 16, 2008, 3:18AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    From the get-go and the title itself, the article is tilted/biased towards the one-income lifestyle and thus giving an impression that the one-income is better or should be preferred over the dual-income household. Everyone has their own views on this but I think one of the root questions is "Is there even any evidence proving that a one-income household is a better household or will provide better kids with greater values and more successful lives when they grow up than a dual-income household?" I've known people who have good values and are successful that came from dual-incomes and some people that are the opposite that came from single-income households. Even if there were a research study that shows otherwise, statistics doesn't really prove anything much because every household has different situations and is different from each other. It all comes down to how responsible and accountable the parents are with their own kids even if both parents have careers outside of home. Dual-incomes are not only present here in the U.S. Even in other countries, developed or third-worlds, there are lots of dual-income households. Some maybe due to survival or a lifestyle choice, but their reasons behind their choices to have single or dual-incomes are not much different from the households here in the U.S. It's not always because of material luxury as the last two paragraphs with a sub-heading of "Getting to No" in the article imply. Sorry Laura, but this article indeed has not a lot of meaningful meat in it and is making inaccurate assumptions without addressing the real reasons and life situations behind the single and dual-income household issue.

  • joseph - Thursday, May 15, 2008, 2:23AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    You can live on on income if it is high enough. If it is high enough, that is the point. One or two or three, who cares? As long as you have enough money to buy the things that make live worth living. If I could not buy the things I want (and I did have that period in my life) I would feel worthless. Just seeing other people enjoying things I want but can't have is VERY PAINFUL. So, make enough money to get what you want and you will be happy. What could be simpler? Yet so many can't understand, and try to reduce their "wants" instead of just getting more money and buying stuff.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 9:57PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I am a stay at home mom and my husband makes under $60,000. We are making it just fine. My children went to and one still goes to a private school from K-8 and one is now in high school. They are both straight A students. We eat very healthy meals and snacks that I prepare everyday. They both have the clothes they need and have a very comfortable life. They are strong and active in sports, and very hard workers in all that they do. My husband and kids like having a stay-at-home mom and wife. We are all very fit and active. Lazy is not a word that would fit in our household. Remember, just because you work outside the home doesn't make you exempt from the word LAZY! We have two new cars and a house that is almost paid for. We are in our early 40's. We were given nothing by anyone. When they are 18, if I want to pursue an education or get a job I will do so then. Most importantly, I will do so with a very clear conscience. My goal is too be here for them now. NO REGRETS. We spend time together after school and have a lot of deep discussions on social issues that come up in their daily lives. They are very respected by their teachers. I have no doubt in my mind that they will succeed in all that they do and pursue in life. Some parents are so busy working that they don't have a clue what their materialistic spoiled kids are doing behind their backs. Most kids seem to be lacking parental attention and guidance and then look for it in other ways. NOT GOOD! Open your eyes parents. Remember your degree didn't make you street smart or parent smart. I hope you really are thinking about your kids and not your BMW's and flat screen televisions. Good luck to all out there.

  • Lucas - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 8:18PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    I often enjoy reading the comments of others, but never post one myself. I read a post down from here, that refers to a post made at 6:44pm. Out of curiosity I went to that post made at 6:44pm to read it, and was appalled. I work while my wife stays at home with our 3 kids, one of which has special needs. My wife works hard. To make a statement that stay at home moms are lazy, is ignorant. I didn't go to college, I make a decent income by most peoples standards, and we still live quite comfortably in a nice suburb of Seattle. We prefer to instill our values into our children, not the values of a babysitter, or daycare. We also find that our children are much more behaved then those of two working parents. I don't teach my children that they have to make a lot of money and go to college to be successful. I teach them to love GOD, and live by his Word. Our treasure lies in Heaven, not here on earth. That poster is sure entitled to their opinion, but one day they'll learn how misguided it is.

  • bruce - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 4:43PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    As for the article, I was hoping for a bit more meat. A bit generic and things already talked about for the last 20 years. Perhaps an idea would be to add in percentages of what income could make it and what wouldnt to current expenses. That would be interesting. As for the wierdo's out there that think two incomes are better than being there for your child in the first few years (and your actual parents), were in for trouble. Sorry, one more thing. The millionaires I know didnt go to Harvard, but the ones I know that went to Harvard are the brown nosers trying to work up the ladder of dulldrum.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 12:53PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I thought it was interesting the user that posed at 6:44 PM ET. They made some interesting points, some of which I agree with - but I will say this: my mom stayed home and dad was didn't earn a lot, and I am not lazy. I worked through college and paid for multiple graduate degrees. I think anyone who deals so self-assuradly with absolutes (and such a generous use of CAPS) might not be the most intellectually honest of people.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 12:50PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Education is crucial to get ahead in today's world, that much is true, but parents don't have to provide every penny. I started working part-time as a teenager to save money for college. I learned the value of work, how to save money, and how to invest - lessons that have served me very well. Some of my college friends from wealthy families whose parents paid the whole bill (and grad school, too) are still trying to "find themselves".

  • Senior Froggy - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 12:48PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Wow! That guy who commented at 6:44pm on Tuesday has a little too much time on his hands. I'd say it's pretty hypocritical of him to call stay-at-home mom's lazy and unmotivated workers when it probably took him two hours to come up with that rambling comment. Does this guy even have a job?! People need to stop getting so worked up about stuff like this. Just do whatever the hell you want!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 12:13PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I think you must've really hit a nerve with those who have left negative comments. Perhaps they are feeling guilty, especially after reading the response from the Yahoo finance user who asked us all to consider HOW POOR INDIA IS. He is right on. Everyone in the US should consider just how darned good they have it, and stop whining. Even the poorest in the US are wealthy compared to the truly poor living in many other countries. I remember reading a passage in a book not long ago that stated: "only in America does poverty come with obesity and a car." It comes also with welfare checks, food stamps, WIC, medical assistance, clean water and child labor laws. Get over yourself, America.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 9:13PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I agree that any family can do it...I live on Long Island, in NY one of the highest taxed places to live in the US. I make north of 150K, and my wife stays home to raise our two kids. However, with all the taxes I pay, the cost of living here is rediculous. I do however have no credit card debt (pay balances in full each month), have two car payments, and all the other goodies of expenses most families have. I also max out my 401K, participate in other company retirement plans... After all is said and done, I do have little money left for anything else. It is possible, but you have to reduce those $4 starbucks, eating out, and extravagant purchases... Good luck

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 6:44PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    It really depends on your priorities in life. If you want your children to have more options, you need two incomes, even if the father earns a six-figure salary. Prestigious Ivy League Universities are expensive these days. So is Medical School, Law School and Business School. If you don't want to burden your children with debt, then as a mother you must work. There really isn't any other excuse. There used to be a day where having a high school diploma was enough. Those days are over. Today, you need a GRADUATE DEGREE in order to reach the upper echelons of business. What your children do with their graduate degrees will vary considerably, but you need to give them a foundation. You can't do with that with one income. A father would have to earn 250k in order to make this work. Mothers who make the excuse of staying home often talk about the welfare of their children. Well, let's talk about that. Today's globalized world is not going away. Children need good education in order to compete. They need to understand math and finance in order to compete. Good education comes in the form of expensive universities and graduate schools. It also comes from building wealth. YOU NEED TO HAVE WEALTH IN ORDER TO CREATE MORE. If you stay home, you're making it that much harder on your children to build their future wealth. There is no sensible reason for a mother with mature children to stay home. I can understand scaling back or working part-time when your children are young (0-7 years old), but after that, hire a sitter for 3 hours. Seriously, stop making excuses for your laziness and get out and actually contribute something to the world. Rearing children is a COMBINED endeavor. I don't understand why the father has zero responsibility in child-rearing. I was raised by BOTH by mother and father. They both worked, and I'm better for it. I've been around those with lazy stay at home mothers. One person I know had a mother who was so insecure that she forced him to eat fruit for lunch just so she could prepare him a sandwich when he came back from school. At least from my experience, these people are ill-equipped to compete in the world. They have a myopic and often overly idealistic view of the world. Well, that's not going to result in higher profits for the firm. You'd be surprise what happens when people realize you're useless. Having spoiled, pampered children is the last thing this country needs. Go out and get a career. I will make one concession. There does seem to be a need for one parent to scale back while the other vigorously pursues his/her's career. Perhaps the person who scales back is always the mother. That's fine, but just because you scale back does not mean you should not care about your career. Don't just go to work and be a gopher. Work hard while you're there, improve yourself, maybe get a Masters or MBA and be assertive. I would much rather have those type of women around than people who just go through the motions and get a paycheck. I would be far more flexible with mothers who are proactive with their careers because they're benefiting the firm more. I'll give you time to pick up the kids from practice if you give me your best effort. Not all bosses are austere. One of the benefits of globalization is that it has eliminated inefficiencies in the old system. Aside from sexism, globalization has led to the shocking conclusion that women are productive and that child-rearing is a shared endeavor conducted by both a mother and father. Funny how some people even think about turning back the clock on such desirable progress.

  • billi - Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 2:05AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    This article is good at getting people to examine a topic that many people need to investigate further. Some of the negative comments are sad (and probably from people who don't have or should not have had children). Despite many comments to the contrary, you can rasie a family on less than $100K year and still provide them with good food, decent cloths and a good education. We do it and we live well, are paying a mortgage on a nice house, saving for college, and getting to enjoy watching our children grow. I feel for those people who don't even see re-examining their priorities as an option.

  • DelCarajo - Monday, May 12, 2008, 10:53PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I think this article hits some very good points as wellas some of the comments posted by some folks. The reality is that if we really think hard you can easily see that we in the U.S. have simply been pushed over into thinking that we need all these gadjets and expensive toys, and we have just gotten used to it. The other day mt wife's cousin takes out camera to take our picture at a family event and he makes this comment 'is this camera waterproof?' LOL we all laughed bc my camera is digital but its an older version (3 years or so) mind you it works perfectly and takes great pictures but we are being made fun of. My front door neighbors think that me and my wife are going through a tough time right now bc she's staying at home taking care of our 1 year old and four month old. We get comments like 'its tough to stay at home and be on only one income huh?, you guys don't go out that much anymore do you?' Wit til they see that I am turning in my Volvo (which was leased) fro a 2003 Expedition my father is selling me bc he needs to downsize bc my granmother who is 91 can't climb in it anymore. Me and my wife actually feel sorry for them since both of the parents work and take their one childe to a day care and have huge mortgage and credit card debts. I instead always had my eye in the future by the age of 33 had paid off my mortgage and have never had credit card debt bc I retrains myself from just going out and buying anything I want. I literally met my wife who is 9 years younger than me and put her through college (local public college of course) and had no school debt at the end. The point I am trying to make is that I was taught by my father to be a saver and to only commit to the major categories mentioned above what I could actually afford and not what someone else told me I could afford (banks with the amounts they would approve me for or friend's who would tell me what they thought I should be driving bc I was a college graduate and professional). I have made over $100k only three years in my life, the rest has been under $100k, but in those three years I managed to not change a single thing in my life. While I had co-workers and friends who when they made good money they immediately upgraded their cars and whatever other parts of their life they could upgrade. These same friends now are amazed and wonder , how in the hell did you pay off your mortgage? Some don't even believe me. All I know is that in my entire life since the age of 8 I always had money (normally more money than any other friend I had) but I never made any more money than they did. It is truly a change in lifestyle and to prioritize how you spend your money, and keeping your major expenses down to something you can actually afford. Don't get the mcmansion get the regular single family home. If you can do something yourself, do it, why pay someone else if you are abled bodied. The rewards of having my wofe at home makes me go to work with a clear mind and no worries about who will pick up the kids, whether or not they are being taken care of properly, etc. Its a peace that money or material goods can't buy! Work hard, be the best you can be at work and plan ahead, and enjoy the 'real' things that life has to offer, such as your wife at home and your kids, who run to you when get home! I wouldn't have it any other way!

  • commenting - Monday, May 12, 2008, 2:53PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    I've stayed at home w/kids & I've worked w/kids, I know both worlds & sympathize w/both. Our income was cut in half when I had to stay home when my twins were born, daycare was too expensive for 3 kids. For the kids, better to stay at home, they have less stress & are more secure in themselves. But worse for the mom's career, she takes the financial hit if divorced & also gets less social security. Best to work part time when kids go to school, keep career up. I bought 15 cost cutting books, cut our household expenses very drastically & was able to afford staying home. It can be done if people aren't too overextended in housing costs, and make a middle class income. My kids are now great w/money as well. Before I did cost cutting, we were always in the red. After, we had a surplus of money, my kids always ate real food, no expensive processed stuff. Now that I'm older and single, learning to live way beneath my means is helping me to save for retirement.

  • Brian - Monday, May 12, 2008, 1:43PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Speaking as a man who is raising three kids with mostly a single income, I know this can be done, and I definitely recommend it. I do not make six figures, but I do make a decent salary. My wife works while my older two are in school, and she is able to take our youngest with her to work at the local YMCA. this provides a supplemental income to do some of the non-necessary things in life. We have a nice house, we own two cars, and are able to save 10% per year for retirement (and increasing every year). You'd be surprised how much stuff you can do without, and how much happier and safer your kids are with one parent always there to look after them. If you think daycares are safe, then maybe you didn't hear about the 40 daycares in California that had convicted child molesters working there. There is no substitute for a parent caring for and nurturing the kids at home. It keeps the kids out of trouble, keeps them involved in school, and helps control the influences them. Our school systems are a wreck with out of control kids who don't have someone at home who is involved in their lives. God help the parents that forsake their kids for a bigger house and nicer stuff. All they really need is someone who loves them and is there for them.

  • Da Big Guy - Monday, May 12, 2008, 10:18AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Another well written piece. Unfortunately it's wishful thinking!

  • James - Monday, May 12, 2008, 10:12AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Just want folks to know this can be done. I am now a grandfather with (3) great kids who didn't attend day care. We went the one income route three decades ago when it was an extremely unpopular decision,m requiring significant sacrifice. But when people take the long view of life, the two income situation becomes shortsighted. This can be done... my kids will tell you they never knew what material goods they missed as little children, but they knew someone would be home when they needed them. It can be done!

  • Brett D - Monday, May 12, 2008, 9:43AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Unless one of the parents makes 6 figures, I won't recommend Laura's advice. If one parent sits out 10 or more years in their career, to be a stay at home parent, what kind of job will they be able to get once the kids get older? Job security now a days, isn't that great. I think families would be safer to have 2 forms of income instead of 1. I would recommend 1 parent getting a job that pays really well, but is somewhat demanding or requires a lot of hours. The other parent should get a job that has a flexible schedule and/or possibly offers working from home.

  • John - Monday, May 12, 2008, 12:21AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    It all starts with getting real about where you are now and where you can be, when your values and priorities are strong enough to drive you to change.

  • David - Sunday, May 11, 2008, 11:26PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Laura Rowley provides good information, despite her penchant for cliche. For example, why would the opporutnity to live on one income be "worth a try"? Is it, for example, "worth a try" to live without any income at all? Or, is it "worth a try" to force every member of the household, no matter how young, to produce an income for the family? Despite all this, I find reading Laura Rowly's column is "worth a try". It's just not that worth it all the time.

  • Peter - Sunday, May 11, 2008, 9:50PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Great advice, you should take it yourself.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, May 11, 2008, 8:22PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    I don't understand why so many parents wouldn't want to stay home and raise their children. Sure, it's tough, it's tedious and there's no money in it, but there's nothing more rewarding than being there for family. Most people when they're old and gray don't wish they made more money.

  • taopraxis - Sunday, May 11, 2008, 8:14PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    By all means, folks, if you do not need money, don't work. Great advice. Not.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, May 11, 2008, 8:10PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Not that money isn't important. Actual happiness can't be bought. It also helps if you haven't sold your soul, and have a clump of coal for a heart.

Showing comments 6-35 of 201<< PreviousNext >>
The columns, articles, message board posts and any other features provided on Yahoo! Finance are provided for personal finance and investment information and are not to be construed as investment advice. Under no circumstances does the information in this content represent a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. The views and opinions expressed in an article or column are the author's own and not necessarily those of Yahoo! and there is no implied endorsement by Yahoo! of any advice or trading strategy.

More From Laura Rowley

Money & Happiness

Discover the secrets to financial happiness. Laura's book offers practical tools and positive strategies to create "the good life" in a meaningful way.

More about Money & Happiness

Learn to identify your values, banish debt, start saving, and investing; plus Laura's favorite online resources.

Order your copy of Money & Happiness today and boost your financial well-being!

More from Yahoo! Sources

  • CNN Money
  • Consumer Reports
  • Kiplinger
  • The Motley Fool
  • Business Week
  • Wall Street Journal

Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Yahoo! Answers is provided for informational purposes only, and no Q&A is intended for trading or investing purposes. Yahoo! shall not be responsible or liable for the accuracy, usefulness or availability of any Q&A information, and shall not be responsible or liable for any trading or investment decisions based on such information. View Complete Answers Disclaimer.