ForumGarden

It irritates me when I hear someone say "it takes two incomes to live a decent life these days". Bull---t. It takes two incomes if you want to live as well as someone making much more money than yourself. If a wife wants to be a stay home mom and raise the kids, do it. Just adjust your housing, auto and spending costs to the one income. Once you become adjusted to the two income scenario there is no turning back, your debt load by then will not allow it.

I think you're out of touch with the common folk, Lon.

The median household income in the United States is $46,326. Here in California people have a hard time understanding that yes, 50 percent of our population live on $46,000 or less a year. Even today, all the elixirs and remedies being thrown around fail to focus on income and the big brother of income, solid employment. Dual earner households have a higher median income at $67,348. Source

You can't be truly Americanized and get away with that, can you, Lon?

SnoozeAgain;1381248 wrote: I think you're out of touch with the common folk, Lon.


Oh but I am in touch-----Are you telling me that there aren't a lot of couples driving big and expensive SUV's when a smaller SUV would suffice, or that there aren't many that could and should have bought a less expensive house than the $350,000 one they wound up with that DOES take two incomes to pay for. Or that owning a 32 inch flat screen TV instead of the 50 inch flat screen doesn't mean you are sub human, just sensible. It's all about choices and some folks make some really stupid and financially irresponsible ones.

I must say that it can be difficult on one income sometimes. I don't go clubbing, i havn't got any memberships on gyms magazines etc etc, we both do not own a car (no driving licence), no kids (just 4 furbabies :wah:) etc. So really i'm a bit boring! But hubby and I bought a house in oct. 2010 so bills are more expensive. And we make do with our 2 incomes. We don't have loads left at the end of the month but enough to eat a nice dinner every night and do bits and bobs round the house.

When hubby was sitting at home for 9 months not entitled to any benefits, after working very hard for his boss for 8 years and just basically screwed over by his ex-boss.. times where really hard. Even if we cut out TV, Phone, Internet, mobile phones etc etc we could not make ends meet.

Yes some people should look at their spending pattern and adjust, some people cannot make ends meet on 1 income. It depends where you live and how high that one income is.

If you are aiming at the people who want the newest car, PC and iphones Ifarts and whatever these things are called, then yes i agree with you Lon, these people need to look at their spending pattern and blame themselves for being plain old greedy.

Lon;1381273 wrote: Oh but I am in touch-----Are you telling me that there aren't a lot of couples driving big and expensive SUV's when a smaller SUV would suffice, or that there aren't many that could and should have bought a less expensive house than the $350,000 one they wound up with that DOES take two incomes to pay for. Or that owning a 32 inch flat screen TV instead of the 50 inch flat screen doesn't mean you are sub human, just sensible. It's all about choices and some folks make some really stupid and financially irresponsible ones.


Those people presumably have jobs and enough income to make lifestyle choices like downsizing it's a bit different where you don't have the income in the first place to have a choice. Don't tell me their aren't couples driving around in clapped out old bangers they need to get to work so doing without a car is not an option, being an older vehicle it is probably heavy on fuel and maintenance, or couple s living in whatever your equivalent of social housing is because they can't afford anything better.

America is no longer has a capitalist economy you have companies that are getting away operating as monopolies, you've forgotten that paying people a wage so that they can actually afford to buy the things you are making is a fundamental principle as is having a well educated and healthy workforce. One of the functions of government is to provide that since education is too important to leave to the marketplace and also make sure the infrastructure is in place to help commerce. Sadly we have gone the same way and I still hate thatcher if anyone is interested in knowing my opinion of her. are going the same way. We should take all the right wing so called economic pundits and bury then somewhere, regulate the banks properly and remind all the big corporations that they do not run the country or own it unless the people decide they have a good case for being allowed to exploit it's resources.

Two points:

1) The key to maintain good credit and high score is high gross income, even if the expenditures are also high and the net difference is zero.

2) Many people today are working strictly for retirement (401k) savings since social security may not be there for them.

https://www.xkcd.com/980/ is relevant to this discussion, particularly the area under US Household Income, what's taken from the bottom 50% of households who earn 20% of the national income and the proportion of their income above poverty level which goes out in state and federal taxes. Lon, I don't think many of your examples live in that bottom 50% of households. I wonder what proportion of them even have health insurance.

Depends on your definition of "decent," doesn't it, Lon?

My definition does NOT include:

Driving an unsafe car with bald tires and bad brakes.

Living in a trailer or apartment complex.

Having one TV channel.

Wearing threadbare clothes to work.

Eating unhealthy food.

Not having health insurance, car insurance, or home insurance.

That said, I and my wife survive on one income...but not by choice, she's too ill to work and so often we go without things that would make life nicer...like a flat screen TV.

BTW Lon...I don't now, nor will I ever consider working four jobs so that I can afford to hang on to my home and provide for my wife as a "stupid and financially irresponsible."

Walk a mile in other's shoes before you judge, Lon. or to put it another way:

`Man,' said the Ghost, `if man you be in heart, not adamant, forbear that wicked cant until you have discovered What the surplus is, and Where it is. Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die? It may be, that in the sight of Heaven, you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions like this poor man's child. Oh God. To hear the Insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust.'

Oh...good news...my wife's has recovered from her most recent heart attack at Christmas and is doing much better now. She started the year by flatlining for 34 minutes and ended it on a heart attack. In the middle we went to Seattle and had a blast. it was the Best of Times, it was the Worst of Times, eh?;)

My initial post is not talking about the poor, unemployed, marginally employed, sick & disabled. I am referring to those that bitch about needing two incomes to maintain their excessive (decent in their opinion) life style, and there are many that fit in this category.

I should have been more clear with my post.

I think my post is relevant.

In my opinion, Lon, you are missing the low earners. The invisible ones. The bulk of your population. Try living on LESS than your average $46,000 and support a family. You will seriously consider revolution.

Lon;1381298 wrote: My initial post is not talking about the poor, unemployed, marginally employed, sick & disabled. I am referring to those that bitch about needing two incomes to maintain their excessive (decent in their opinion) life style, and there are many that fit in this category.

I should have been more clear with my post.Maybe the majority bitching are those who bitch about others bitching.

Ahso!;1381310 wrote: Maybe the majority bitching are those who bitch about others bitching.


Whatcha smokin Ahso?

Ok, yes, correction accepted.

We are all poorer. I'm still glad to be alive.

(Oh and Ahso, I'm just not able to listen to Bruce Springsteen, but ZZ top still has me booogieing off the walls. (:))

"it takes two incomes to live a decent life these days".

What is the their definition of "decent"?

A safe comfortable and loving home?

Healthy food on the table for every meal?

Clothing and shoes adaptable to the current weather?

Reliable transportation?

Just asking.

Ahso!;1381310 wrote: Maybe the majority bitching are those who bitch about others bitching.


along-for-the-ride;1381322 wrote: "it takes two incomes to live a decent life these days".

What is the their definition of "decent"?

A safe comfortable and loving home?



Healthy food on the table for every meal?

Clothing and shoes adaptable to the current weather?

Reliable transportation?

Just asking.


The definition of what constitutes living a decent life style varies from one person to the next. Some feel that if you don't have air conditioning you are really disadvantaged. Some feel that cable is an absolute necessity. What constitutes reliable transportation varies. You know what I mean.

Saint_;1381292 wrote: Depends on your definition of "decent," doesn't it, Lon?

My definition does NOT include:

Driving an unsafe car with bald tires and bad brakes.

Living in a trailer or apartment complex.

Having one TV channel.

Wearing threadbare clothes to work.

Eating unhealthy food.

Not having health insurance, car insurance, or home insurance.

That said, I and my wife survive on one income...but not by choice, she's too ill to work and so often we go without things that would make life nicer...like a flat screen TV.


I live in an apartment and I don't even have one TV channel... I haven't had cable in years. Yet I still think I have a comfortable life.

Lon;1381313 wrote: Whatcha smokin Ahso?I advocate for legalization only these days.

Lon;1381298 wrote: My initial post is not talking about the poor, unemployed, marginally employed, sick & disabled. I am referring to those that bitch about needing two incomes to maintain their excessive (decent in their opinion) life style, and there are many that fit in this category.

I should have been more clear with my post.
Yes, you should have been.

What you originally wrote sounded like an arrogant load of shite.

Glad I didn't respond until later



eta: let them eat cake

Forgive me Lon but, given your parameters, to what percentage of our lovely population do you think you are actually speaking?

koan;1381331 wrote: Forgive me Lon but, given your parameters, to what percentage of our lovely population do you think you are actually speaking?


I have no idea what the percentage is. Does it matter? My post was generated by personal observation of acquaintances who have said "you know, it takes two incomes these days to get by". I see how they live, know what they spend and feel no sympathy for the fact that the female would prefer not to work but likes the goodies they enjoy. This couple is in a cyclical spending rut that will always require two incomes to maintain and I suspect that there are many just like them.

Lon;1381332 wrote: I have no idea what the percentage is. Does it matter? My post was generated by personal observation of acquaintances who have said "you know, it takes two incomes these days to get by". I see how they live, know what they spend and feel no sympathy for the fact that the female would prefer not to work but likes the goodies they enjoy. This couple is in a cyclical spending rut that will always require two incomes to maintain and I suspect that there are many just like them.


I think that puts us back with Snooze's "I think you're out of touch with the common folk" then, surely. Common folk honestly don't have this problem you've identified. You're describing a defect among the wealthier half of society.

It's mostly just important to yourself. You seem to be quite sheltered. I'm extremely happy that you are secure and feel like you can provide for yourself and your loved ones until the time, may it be long from now, of your death. If you believe in karma, you must have suffered greatly in your past and you well deserve the current luxury. If you don't, you might want to switch which news channel you watch. Or go for a walk in a different area of town.

Common folks??? Interesting term. Look folks---I am 77 and spent many of my early years as one of the common folks as you call them and I was born unto very very common folk. Yes---I guess you could say that by virtue of my age, economics, where I live and who I associate with, that I am isolated, but hardly uniformed or unaware of what is going on in my own country as well as others. It's interesting to me as to how there are so many on this forum that consider themselves as champions of the poor and oppressed and seem to resent any post that might refer to them in a negative light. The one thing about being and old fart like me is the perspective that has been gained, yea earned in many respects. I also find it interesting as to how we perceive one another from our postings and threads. I, like you, have a mental picture of what many of you look like and what your lifestyle and personality would be. And in some cases, like you, I would be spot on, and in other cases dead wrong.

This is the thing. I don't look at the world in perspective of what I should have done, I look at it in view of what my child could do if I had died.

A starter house where I live costs half a million dollars. Food has quadrupled in price... for just the basics. I cut my own hair. I don't eat at restaurants. I have a scholastic savings account for my daughter that my ex-husband graciously maintained and which had been transferred back to me most luckily because he is now bankrupt and Canada does not exempt chidren's educational savings from bankruptcy. I have had a back injury and still work my ****ing ass off. I've lifted ten times my weight in the last week. I'm collecting EI to supplement what I can earn because companies are only hiring part-time workers who they don't have to pay health benefits to but, because I'm low income, I qualified to have a child benefit pay for part of my kid's oral surgery expenses this year. I am struggling to pay for a $2000 car so that I don't have to ride a bicycle to work in the snow... given that I have back problems. My kid is an honour student so I'm thankful that she can still go to university even if the government decides that the transfer of her schooling fund was illegal. I'm mindful of the fact that, if she requires a student loan, she'll end up paying interest on it because adults with children to feed are currently competing for all the minimum wage jobs. I'm mindful of the fact that every dollar lent is a dollar not printed and every person who pays back a loan creates poverty elsewhere in the world. I tried to convince her tonight that she need not be depressed because people are finally uniting and insisting the world change.

So. What are you trying to tell me? I did something wrong? I used to make over a hundred grand a year.

I'd probably marry the first bloke who gave me an orgasm and had a good job.

koan;1381348 wrote: This is the thing. I don't look at the world in perspective of what I should have done, I look at it in view of what my child could do if I had died.

A starter house where I live costs half a million dollars. Food has quadrupled in price... for just the basics. I cut my own hair. I don't eat at restaurants. I have a scholastic savings account for my daughter that my ex-husband graciously maintained and which had been transferred back to me most luckily because he is now bankrupt and Canada does not exempt chidren's educational savings from bankruptcy. I have had a back injury and still work my ****ing ass off. I've lifted ten times my weight in the last week. I'm collecting EI to supplement what I can earn because companies are only hiring part-time workers who they don't have to pay health benefits to but, because I'm low income, I qualified to have a child benefit pay for part of my kid's oral surgery expenses this year. I am struggling to pay for a $2000 car so that I don't have to ride a bicycle to work in the snow... given that I have back problems. My kid is an honour student so I'm thankful that she can still go to university even if the government decides that the transfer of her schooling fund was illegal. I'm mindful of the fact that, if she requires a student loan, she'll end up paying interest on it because adults with children to feed are currently competing for all the minimum wage jobs. I'm mindful of the fact that every dollar lent is a dollar not printed and every person who pays back a loan creates poverty elsewhere in the world. I tried to convince her tonight that she need not be depressed because people are finally uniting and insisting the world change.

So. What are you trying to tell me? I did something wrong? I used to make over a hundred grand a year.


It's not my business to tell you anything or say that you did anything wrong. Your above posting does however explain the person you are behind all your previous postings.

No. I don't think it does. I think it just asks a lot of questions as to what's wrong with society. Why can't we just do what we enjoy and be secure that we can meet basic survival needs? That's the ultimate question that you so blithely throw back on people as a problem of their own insufficiencies.

Let me assure you that I have ****ed people out of desperation. I'm not proud. I've just watched a lot of Russell Brand tonight and I'm feeling fearless. "To my shame..." I have had sex with partners I did not respect because I hoped they would save me from a world of which I feared.

Any words of comfort, Lon?

Any explanation as to why it's me and not the world I live in?

You know what, I'm on a roll. I'm not feeling like stopping.

You say people don't need two incomes and that a woman can stay home to care for children if you make a few budgetary concessions. And you say that as a man who seemingly has the means to provide for said wife. That sounds kind of like the 1950s when women could be nice little housewives who had dinner ready for their man when they got home from their gruelling day at work. Oh, weren't those days grand. Let's forget about the women who were scandalously divorced from cheating or abusive men. I didn't notice, in your scenario, the woman who provides for her husband. That's also part of my history. I used to make twice as much as my husband and, though he paid into the educational fund, he never gave me a dime towards the mortgage or the the food bills. Or bought a single piece of furniture, or thought about how electricity happened when you flicked a switch.

Oh, poor me. I married an *******. You know what? I didn't. He's a wonderful man. He suffers from clinical depression. But I still love the hell out of him. Guess that's where I went wrong. I just love people... even if they aren't efficient and serving the system of capitalism. Sure, he's my ex now so how much did I really love him? I loved my daughter more.

In your world, you are concerned with people you value. You are concerned with people who you think deserve to live in decency. In my world, I'm concerned with all people whether they are genius or moron, wealthy or poor... judge us as you may, history needs a new narrative and you aren't it.

koan;1381352 wrote: Let me assure you that I have ****ed people out of desperation. I'm not proud. I've just watched a lot of Russell Brand tonight and I'm feeling fearless. "To my shame..." I have had sex with partners I did not respect because I hoped they would save me from a world of which I feared.

Any words of comfort, Lon?

Any explanation as to why it's me and not the world I live in?


Do you really need words of comfort? No shame it what you have done. I have been on the other end where I was expected to be the possible savior and I feel no shame.

So let's revisit the question. Does it take two incomes?

No. Not if one of you is part of the current system and guaranteed that a sudden injury won't eject you from said system.

Yes. If you have a small percentage of insecurity in being that your parentage can't bail you out if you become ill.

Aside from that. Two incomes usually isn't enough. Even with that people are still starving or eating McDonalds because it's cheaper than buying soup.

koan: Sometimes life sucks. I fell deeply in love with a beautiful, charming and intelligent woman. After university, when I had a good job, we married. Some years later she left me for a woman and £10,000 and I discovered she'd been cheating on me throughout the marriage. She was looking for what she really wanted. It transpired she had ONLY married me for the security and a deposit on her own house when needed. By the time she left I was a total physical and emotional wreck. It's taken me over a decade to recover to the point I am at now and trust is still a major issue. I have not gone out with anyone since my divorce. For the first time since then I have developed feelings for someone recently and she is in a relationship with a cheating, lying ****. Soon I'm going to have to tell her to go away because it hurts so much to see her and know she goes home to be fondled by that ****.

But I'm reasonably healthy, pay my own way and my time is my own. It could be a lot worse.

koan;1381349 wrote: I'd probably marry the first bloke who gave me an orgasm and had a good job.


I have a good job. 50 percent aint bad. Oops, my wife might frown on this..

Like he said, Lon wasn't talking about people such as I. He was talking to the 10% or so who have disposable income but spend beyond their means. It would be useful financial advice in those cases. I don't think that 10% is really the problem though.