<p>sac,
This is off topic, but in the state where I live, I believe that there are different salary scales for public school (K-12) teachers, depending on whether they have a bachelors, masters, or masters plus a certain number of additional credits. So an advanced degree does increase their earnings automatically.</p>
<p>interesting especially when you consider strenght of unions which historically have enabled working men and women to provide for thier families.
My husband is currently on strike in his company. He has a highly skilled job which he did not have a college degree for, but in which field he has steadily progressed for 30 + years, although because of shifting manufactuaring jobs to less expensive countries he has been employed in his current job for 20 years.
Because his job does not require a college degree it is not valued by society- even though his work is highly technical and requires an unbelievable amount of accuracy.
He will be paid when he retires after 30 years, less than half of what he would be paid if he was a school teacher or other state employess- who are paid at min 60% of their salary.
While I understand the reasoning about “womens” jobs historically getting less salary than “mens” jobs, there is also a huge segment of our population that do not have advanced degrees or indeed any degrees at all, but still deserve respect and a living wage for the work they do.</p>
<p>I have always earned more than my husband–from employers and clients. That’s part of my high conflict personality. I can talk about money, he is more reluctant. Guess what? When you talk about what money you wnat, you get it. You don’t get what you don’t ask for.</p>
<p>sjmom2329–I am not sure of the particulars of my cousin’s job but I know IBM bent over backwards to keep her–setting up a home office for her when her daughter was younger. Same thing for my friend who is a partner at a white glove law firm (three kids). The firm bent over backwards to keep her during the decade when the kids needed her most. That firm articulated the value to staying flexible through those years so they wouldn’t lose the talent.</p>
<p>However, I do know a couple of superstar earners ($1 M +++ in fortune 500 companies). They don’t have kids.</p>
<p>It is possible for a woman to earn that kind of money in their own business–but not likely in a business owned by older men.</p>
<p>Female MBA grads would be smart to skip the investment bank scene and go to work for entreprenuers with the idea of setting up their own businesses before they had kids.</p>
<p>I opened my practice three months after S1 was born–after I tried to continue work in a firm, rotfl. </p>
<p>With continuing blessings over the next decade, I should be able to leave my boys a trust that provides college funds and a house deposit. </p>
<p>None of our parents needs financial assistance though. Far from it. Both sets of parents are astute financial planners.</p>
<p>Garland:</p>
<p>This is not about you or me. The point I am trying to make is that, if the article had been about young men deciding to go to Ivy League schools and B-schools or Law schools then choosing to become stay at home dads, the majority of readers would have a very different reaction to their life plans. It would most likely not be about having great choices or wanting to take their kids to the park. </p>
<p>I am not in the least bothered by women who, once they have children, decide to cut on their working hours drastically, or stay at home altogether; but it bothers me that this is the a priori scenario of young wmen as they prepare themselves for law school or B-school. It assumes that the only possible life partners are going to be wealthy since the young women in question want “the best;” it also basically forces the male partner to continue in a career that may be lucrative enough to support their chosen life style, but also high stress.
I actually know some female B-school and Law school graduates from Harvard and Yale. They have made compromises in order to have children and a career. And that’s what I would like young men and young women to think about. Not to go for being either the best lawyer or the best mother, but look for ways to be a good enough mother and a good enough lawyer. And if that is not possible, then think of some other plan.</p>
<p>I guess I read it differently–I didn’t see the references to best lawyer, best mom, or “the best lifestyle”. I didn’t see, either, any sense of entitlement or lack of thinking things through. It’s very young adults describing, pretty generally, how they see an ideal life plan.</p>
<p>I think that the only thing we disagree about is what I think you are reading into what they were saying–I just didn’t see any basis for thinking that no thinking, planning, or willingness to compromise is communicated in what they were quoted as saying. I actually more saw the opposite.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Garland, this is the quote I really reacted to. My Ss would have been scared if I had decided to be “the best mother,” as I probably would have given even fuller rein to my micromanaging tendencies!</p>
<p>cheers: brilliant post!! I agree this is exactly the advice young women need. I hope you are writing a book, or at least an article.</p>
<p>Reading through this thread as a male, I am struck most by two facts. First, that so many women are comfortable with the idea of a man earning more than a woman. Second, that many assume that men don’t have the same needs as women to have a “wholesome” life (e.g., to not just be a workhorse).</p>
<p>As a man, I have noticed that most women don’t respect me if I don’t earn more than them and that they would not respect me if I was not working (choosing instead to stay at home). I think we are skirting some really big issues here about how despite the feminist movement most people’s core views are not changed very much. Just look at how relatively few women marry men who earn less than them. That certainly fits the student interviewed in the article that started the thread. What message does this send to our children?</p>
<p>bbl. SBMom, Beururah - just taking a moment out to drink a toast to the baby obsession. It does seem to be genetic, so all of us better watch out for our daughters. </p>
<p>To me the issue in terms of raising our kids, all of us, is just to be intelligent parents and let the kids know that right now in society there are no rules, but that if you have a strong desire - as a man not to be the breadwinner, as a woman to have career that means you will not be home with toddlers, as a man who wants traditionally defined career success, as a woman who wants 5 kids and to stay home - you had best understand it early and communicate it early to any presumptive partners.</p>
<p>I think this is changing quite a bit with our childrens generation.
While several of my friends are stay at home dads- even when their youngest is in high school, I still have many women friends who would not be comfortable with that- as that is very different from how they were raised.
I have one group of friends who are on their 2nd or even third marriages, and they are likely to have more “progressive” relationships, I think this may be due in part to the marriage begining in their 30’s or so, after they have a better idea of what they want out of a partner and life.
Marriages begun in someones early 20s may be much more traditonal, it is an easy pattern to fall back into and familar.
I think it is very important for men to have a “life” and for women to be valued outside tradtional areas.
However, it is also true that women often end up working two jobs. One outside the home, and another which picks up as soon as the first leaves off. If you decide that you can’t handle working 24/7 you either have to hire someone for the work you can’t get to, or you get divorced and end up doing it all yourself, but at least you aren’t waiting around expecting your husband to help</p>
<p>Another woman who earns substantially more than spouse here. Pure luck rather than talent or negotiating ability.</p>
<p>Oh baloney, marite. Baloney baloney baloney.</p>
<p>Not saying your H ain’t talented, but you must be something of a superstar. Be the role model you are…</p>
<p>Cheers:</p>
<p>There was a long stretch when H and I earned the same amount of money; then he had the bad luck of working for companies that got bought out; I did not. That’s what accounts for the discrepancy, not my superior talent (not being modest here 
)</p>
<p>This thread’s going many directions now, but one that interests me is the idea that the person with the primary breadwinner (usually, but not always male) is the workhorse, yoked involuntarily to the plow. Isn’t that a case of find the work you love? I went part-time not just because my husband was in a higher paying field but because I realized he would never work less even if he supposedly cut back. Both of us couldn’t work 60-70 hour weeks and raise kids in the way we wanted. I actually thought the baby caring part was easy compared to the teenage caring part. I wanted someone to be around enough to capture those unpredictable five fleeting moments, usually in the car or over the kitchen counter, when a kid would actually give you a glimpse into what was going on in his or her life. </p>
<p>I do think our parents determine much of our patterns, one way or other. Two women I know who went back to full-time work six weeks after each kid and never looked back both had brilliant mothers who didn’t work outside the home and had breakdowns when the nest emptied. Their mothers resented not having the choice to have careers, and the daughters learned that lesson.</p>
<p>I earned more than H working 75% of the hours. I have always been a “if-you-can’t-do-it-in-40-hours-you-can’t-do-it” kind of gal, taking a minimum of six weeks vacation every year, home by 5:30 pm etc etc. I have put in some weekends and nights but very few in the scheme of things, very few relative to the supposed mystique of the profession.</p>
<p>I might ratchet up the intensity for the decade between Empty Nest and Grandkids. See if I can hit one out of the proverbial park. My FIL hit one to the top 1/2% (profession and income) between the ages of 50 and 60. I bet I can do that too… </p>
<p>Not for the gipper–for the female architects behind me…and that trust fund…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Boy is this the exception. I don’t know any large law firms this enlightened - most are entirely focussed on serving the client, whatever hour of the day or day of the week.</p>
<p>cheers - we are rooting for you. I will fight to catch the one you hit out of the park and get your autograph and sell it on eBay for my own trust fund…</p>
<p>Sac:</p>
<p>“Find the work you love” is, for most working people, a luxury. I happen to love my work; my H likes his work. My brother would love to change jobs but can’t afford to take time to look. Wife and two Ds depend on his salary.</p>
<p>Marite, the secret to changing that is to always live way below your means. That’s what we’ve done, so now that my H has figured out what he really wants to do (HS teacher) my itty bitty salary plus savings is making it possible. Actually, the main importance of my job is providing benefits while he’s not being paid.</p>
<p>I like the idea of shifting responsibilities, emphasizing one career, than the other. And I love coming home to dinner having been made! :)</p>
<p>Garland, I agree. That’s why we bought a house for less than we could afford. I just don’t know whether that will be possible for our kids.</p>
<p>Marite – Yes, it is a luxury. But we started out talking about young women at Yale. Education is one of the things that buys you the chance at that luxury, though life has to cooperate some as well.</p>