.

[MeanDean]

1. What is the minimum amount of money you could win/inherit/steal that would be life-changing in the sense that it would significantly impact your long-term financial security but not necessarily your day-to-day life.

I don't think that possible. I'm pretty much set with a pension and some decent life savings. 5 years into retirement and everything is quite stable if not better financially.

2. What is the minimum amount which would dramatically affect your day-to-day life?

Probably about $500,000 - then I would probably move out of Clarence and onto a small acreage (10-40 acres) with a small house, a huge garage/shop, and a heated pool. And a gardener/mechanic.

I have heard people say anywhere from $5,000 to $5,000,000 for each of these questions. I don't even have an answer myself so I thought I'd ask you guys where you stand on the question.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

As the comment was directed at me and my situation I didn't take it offensively at all. I never said I wanted to quit my job but did mention my wife wanted to quit hers at one time. I said my wife's insurance is X and we'll need X from income to accommodate that

I realize it was directed at you. However, I've heard that sentiment far too many times over my adult life, usually in judgement of women who work, for whatever reason. I just want men to realize how it sounds...because they are often unaware of the impact of their words.

 

[Cychl82]

115000....the exact amount to pay off my mortgage.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

I don't ever bring up that topic to anyone I know. If they tell me they work, "cool, where do you work." If they tell me they stay home, "cool, that's awesome!". pretty easy to not make waves.

As it should be.

 

[BeachCyclone]

1. $1.5 million, so I can use the after-tax proceeds to completely remodel our house

2. $10 million

 

[mdk2isu]

And yes...your comment is shaming women, AND men, as it assumes that people who work don't love their children.

Its not shaming anyone KC. If you are choosing to be offended by it, well...see my signature.

I never said anything remotely close to people who work don't love their children. I work, my wife works, we both love our daughter more than anything. Given the option, both of us would choose to stay home and raise her. As would the vast majority of people from my experience.

 

[JohnnyFive]

1. What is the minimum amount of money you could win/inherit/steal that would be life-changing in the sense that it would significantly impact your long-term financial security but not necessarily your day-to-day life.

2. What is the minimum amount which would dramatically affect your day-to-day life?

I have heard people say anywhere from $5,000 to $5,000,000 for each of these questions. I don't even have an answer myself so I thought I'd ask you guys where you stand on the question.

I left my wallet at home today, so, honestly like $20 would be dramatically change my lunch/day

 

[ImJustKCClone]

Its not shaming anyone KC. If you are choosing to be offended by it, well...see my signature.

I never said anything remotely close to people who work don't love their children. I work, my wife works, we both love our daughter more than anything. Given the option, both of us would choose to stay home and raise her. As would the vast majority of people from my experience.

I'm sorry; maybe I'm not explaining well. In my experience, many women DO have that option, and choose to not be stay-at home moms. I think mtown got my point - one choice is not "better" than the other, so when someone says their wife chose to work, and you point out how to "fix" it...yes, you're implying that she made the "wrong" choice. And the majority of the time, that judgement is aimed toward women. Even in an election...no one every questions if a male candidate with young children will be able to perform the duties of an office, but it's trotted out damn near every time a woman with young children runs for something.

There is a bias against women with children working, and plenty of judgment against those who work by choice. I'm not offended by your words. Nor am I shy about pointing it out when I see it.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

And thus endeth my derailment of your thread, mtown. Sorry!

 

[wxman1]

1. $10k-$200k Low end to really start taking big chunks out of debt on up to paying off the house and everything.
2. $5 Million. Enough to again pay everything off make sure that we if wanted we never have to work again (I would probably keep working since me being at home that much would probably cause a divorce) and college and everything would be taken care off. Note...I am pulling this number out of my ass but I would think this would be in the ballpark since we are still young.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

something i just thought about based on this post but to play devils advocate: do you think it's okay for the judicial system to generally side with the mother in terms of separated parents?

Nope. I have a husband and a son to prove it...both single dads because they were better options than their ex-wives. And they both had to fight like the dickens to make it happen. I think that's wrong.

 

[Rabbuk]

10k and 100k

 

[jsb]

Lets say you received the $2 million. Subtract out $300k that you said earlier would pay off your debts and you still have $1.7 million. Now add the monthly expenses that you currently have for your mortgage, other debts, and daycare then subtract how much more it would cost you to get insurance through you or an independent plan. Compare the number you calculated to your wife's take home pay a monthly basis.

You would have significantly reduced the outgo, therefore reducing the need for the majority of her income as well. You could live the same lifestyle, with her having considerably less stress and being able to raise her own child instead of paying someone else to do it while still investing $1.7 million and not touching it.

Or maybe he should stay home with the kid instead of the wife.

I was raised by someone who stayed home with us and I am grateful that my parents sacrificed for that. But there certainly would have been a lot of benefits if she had worked as well.

 

[Tailg8er]

Everybody I personally know would stay home with their kids if financially possible, I realize I don't personally know anyone.

And I definitely don't think a mother SHOULD anymore than a father SHOULD. My wife has been told (possibly weekly) that if the opportunity ever arose, that I would be the one fulfilling my dream of being a stay-at-home dad. (I would offer her the chance to stay home first, kind of the same as holding the door open for her. Chivalrous, per se)

Maybe it's just because I haven't gone weeks without a job since early high school, but I am definitely not one that would be 'bored' without a job. (I realize parenting full time is indeed a job, more referencing retirees & parents who say they'd be too bored being home with kids)

 

[Tre4ISU]

And yes...your comment is shaming women, AND men, as it assumes that people who work don't love their children.

No it wasn't. Good grief. It was an analysis of the decision to be made.

 

[isu_oak]

Nobody is shaming anyone KC. From my personal experience, most women continue working after having kids due to financial need, not desire to work. Personally, I haven't met a mother who, if they truly had the option and it wouldn't affect their family negatively financially, wouldn't choose to stay home and raise their kids.

My wife left her job and stayed home with the kids because she thought it would be best. After three years and a near mental breakdown (slight exaggeration), my wife had to go back to work to stay sane. There's only so much diaper-changing, constant cleaning, and Caillou that a person can take before you hit the breaking point. As KC has pointed out, some people are made to be stay-at-home parents and others are not.

 

[mdk2isu]

I'm sorry; maybe I'm not explaining well. In my experience, many women DO have that option, and choose to not be stay-at home moms. I think mtown got my point - one choice is not "better" than the other, so when someone says their wife chose to work, and you point out how to "fix" it...yes, you're implying that she made the "wrong" choice. And the majority of the time, that judgement is aimed toward women. Even in an election...no one every questions if a male candidate with young children will be able to perform the duties of an office, but it's trotted out damn near every time a woman with young children runs for something.

There is a bias against women with children working, and plenty of judgment against those who work by choice. I'm not offended by your words. Nor am I shy about pointing it out when I see it.

I'm not saying one choice is better than the other. That is completely up to the person/couple that is making the decision.

Yes, he said his wife chose to work but he also said she would like to stay home. I merely pointed out using the example this thread is about how that would be an option for them. Nothing sexist. No judgment. No saying the choice was "right" or "wrong." Just an example.

There are plenty of mothers who work. I've told you my wife works. If she had the option to however, she would choose to stay home. Every mother I know that works, does so because they need the income.

I stand by my original statement. I have a hard time believing that a mother who had enough money in the bank to be financially secure the rest of her life, no debt, and a husband whose income was more than enough to cover their monthly living expenses would honestly choose to work. I say that based on my personal experiences with people I know. Obviously you have different experiences than I do and a different perspective. To each their own.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

I

I stand by my original statement. I have a hard time believing that a mother who had enough money in the bank to be financially secure the rest of her life, no debt, and a husband whose income was more than enough to cover their monthly living expenses would honestly choose to work. I say that based on my personal experiences with people I know. Obviously you have different experiences than I do and a different perspective. To each their own.

 

[mdk2isu]

Or maybe he should stay home with the kid instead of the wife.

I was raised by someone who stayed home with us and I am grateful that my parents sacrificed for that. But there certainly would have been a lot of benefits if she had worked as well.

That would also be an option.

 

[isu_oak]

I'm not saying one choice is better than the other. That is completely up to the person/couple that is making the decision.

Yes, he said his wife chose to work but he also said she would like to stay home. I merely pointed out using the example this thread is about how that would be an option for them. Nothing sexist. No judgment. No saying the choice was "right" or "wrong." Just an example.

There are plenty of mothers who work. I've told you my wife works. If she had the option to however, she would choose to stay home. Every mother I know that works, does so because they need the income.

I stand by my original statement. I have a hard time believing that a mother who had enough money in the bank to be financially secure the rest of her life, no debt, and a husband whose income was more than enough to cover their monthly living expenses would honestly choose to work. I say that based on my personal experiences with people I know. Obviously you have different experiences than I do and a different perspective. To each their own.

Being able to acknowledge and understand others opinions goes a long way in conversations like this. Kudos to you.