Baby Costs - !!!!!
Discussion
My partner and I earn around £55k between us, living in London. We have put off kids for 3 years now. The clock is ticking as we are both mid thirties. I think this year might be a kid in the plans. I don't think its the spending that's ruinous. It's the debt before the kids! We are trying our best to totally eradicate debt before the kids arrive. Then we can live the same lifestyle if not better!
Pretty stressful as I've just took out £30k on a new van and loan to start my business which thankfully, is doing really well
My salary doesn't go up much as I need to pay off the business debts first to keep me under the next tax bracket.
It's just careful planning that's needed.
OP, I can't imagine how hard it must be with twins. All the planning in the world can't help with that one 😳
Pretty stressful as I've just took out £30k on a new van and loan to start my business which thankfully, is doing really well
My salary doesn't go up much as I need to pay off the business debts first to keep me under the next tax bracket.
It's just careful planning that's needed.
OP, I can't imagine how hard it must be with twins. All the planning in the world can't help with that one 😳
tighnamara said:
PugwasHDJ80 said:
Why is it unbelievable?
I'll either not have any more children because they are unaffordable, or my wife will move into a better paying job- why is that not sensible?
Would you rather I just bought children into the world with no thought as to how to support or pay for them? Maybe this is why we have such a persistently strong benefits culture!
Just thought maternity pay is a bit different than being in a better paid job.I'll either not have any more children because they are unaffordable, or my wife will move into a better paying job- why is that not sensible?
Would you rather I just bought children into the world with no thought as to how to support or pay for them? Maybe this is why we have such a persistently strong benefits culture!
If you can't afford to have another kid unless your wife is paid while she is not working and not getting any maternity pay maybe you are not in a position to support another child.
You specifically said your wife was looking for a position with better maternity pay, nothing mentioned about looking for a better paid job.
Maybe crossed wires but personally I still think it is unvelieveable / bizarre that having another child would be based on the level of maternity pay.
Just saying and everyone is entitled to an opinion...........
Is maternity pay not a benefit ?
Edited by tighnamara on Thursday 2nd April 21:10
Let's say my wife earns 40k in her current job, with no maternity pay. We have a child and she doesn't work for six months (which for us Is the minimum period that I think a mother should be off) in her current role she loses 16k ish by being off for maternity.
She could move jobs for a ten percent pay rise and it would take her four years to earn back that loss of cash.
Good maternity pay is effectively a massive pay rise!
One of those things that the public sector don't recognise as a benefit and which annoys us tax payers so much!
walm said:
Short term perhaps not but you have to consider lifetime earnings not just until the little buggers hit school age.
Relevant: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/...
It really does depend on the career path though. Relevant: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/...
Taking a couple of years out to raise your own children until they are able to attend a proper nursery isn't going to impact most back or middle office roles which have defined ceilings anyway.
Obviously, if you look at the more aggressive end of key professions then taking a couple of years out at the exact time that your competitors are starting their campaign for partner is going to screw you.
I generally think that if you view your co workers as competitors then paying someone else to raise your children is the answer. And if you see your co workers as colleages then I'd say hands down it's better for the family and children for one of the parents to do the parenting.
Re the OP's original question, the answer lies in looking at your lifestyle and establishing the large chunks of expenditure that can easily be cut back. The trouble is that in places like London many people have over bought on property which results in people who earn good incomes living in lifestyle poverty(relative etc).
Personally, my view is that if the lower earner's income is marginal for covering professional nanny costs, not some unqualified immigrant (why parents entrust their child's early education to unqualified people has always astounded me) and their career is not on a defined trajectory to far higher income then it is a no brainer that the children are better off being raised by a parent than a rented stranger.
Horses for courses though.
We've done the sums for us with 2 little ones.
Wife used to earn c£45k but for her to go back to work with the need to pick up /drop off and go part time for quality time with kids it worked out to be barely any more than the total Childcare costs.... (Yes it was a bit more but work out the effective hourly rate for that and the loss of time with your children we realised it simply wander worth it for us. ).
I pull in a tad more than OPs joint - and have to agree I've noticed a change in our lifestyle. Eating out is drastically reduced - partly as the kids need to eat and go to bed early and can be a nightmare. Conversely we don't go out for night out drinks anymore so save a chunk there.
Holidays it does multiply up once over 2 as its full fare. We've not cut down on overseas holidays though - 4 a year 2 really pricy ones (one for each of our birthdays always done it) and the other two basic family beach style/skiing.
Clothing bill is now much higher - they grow out of shoes ever 8-10 weeks then its 3 sets of shoes each time. Plus actual clothes.
Then its the things they break/accidents. We have Molton Brown - wife likes it as a nice touch - so twice in the last month 4 bottles have been emptied on the floor yep great.
Or say you've just had your suit dry cleaned put it on then grubby hands or a hug but they have slobber marks the suit you try to dry clean it again and then need a new suit for the 5th time that year instead of 2 new every year.
But clearly we could easily survive on £20k a year if needed.
Wife used to earn c£45k but for her to go back to work with the need to pick up /drop off and go part time for quality time with kids it worked out to be barely any more than the total Childcare costs.... (Yes it was a bit more but work out the effective hourly rate for that and the loss of time with your children we realised it simply wander worth it for us. ).
I pull in a tad more than OPs joint - and have to agree I've noticed a change in our lifestyle. Eating out is drastically reduced - partly as the kids need to eat and go to bed early and can be a nightmare. Conversely we don't go out for night out drinks anymore so save a chunk there.
Holidays it does multiply up once over 2 as its full fare. We've not cut down on overseas holidays though - 4 a year 2 really pricy ones (one for each of our birthdays always done it) and the other two basic family beach style/skiing.
Clothing bill is now much higher - they grow out of shoes ever 8-10 weeks then its 3 sets of shoes each time. Plus actual clothes.
Then its the things they break/accidents. We have Molton Brown - wife likes it as a nice touch - so twice in the last month 4 bottles have been emptied on the floor yep great.
Or say you've just had your suit dry cleaned put it on then grubby hands or a hug but they have slobber marks the suit you try to dry clean it again and then need a new suit for the 5th time that year instead of 2 new every year.
But clearly we could easily survive on £20k a year if needed.
Firstly I think it's really shameful of your employers to not run a childcare voucher scheme, it would cost them nothing thanks to the NI savings for salary sacrifice, and surely it is in their interest to help employees return to work? When I saw how low the take-up rates were amongst employers I was shocked.
But anyway just wanted to say to the OP: try not to worry. I was in a similar bracket, looked at childcare costs (~£1,200/month) and didn't understand how that was doable. In the end it was a walk in the park, but I suspect our attitude to spending is not normal (we can spend quite a lot but it's largely discretionary and we tend not to "want" the best most expensive options for things). Some tips:
- You aren't going out for dinner or drinks in the evenings. That right there is a fair amount that I never really counted the cost of.
- Kids stuff is absolutely perfect for buying used. If you buy used and re-sell, it basically costs you only the eBay fee.
- This autumn there will be a new childcare system that's going to give you a big discount, and fees go down significantly when they get older too. At some time when they are three (depending on their birth month) you will get early years funding and then you will be paying next to nothing (OK still loads to people who don't have kids, but a massive drop compared to the under 2's costs).
- You might earn more next year than this year.
Most of all I'd encourage you to remember that the really expensive bit is at the beginning and it is not going to last forever. Kids will always cost you money, sure, but those nursery costs dwarf everything else and they drop significantly each year. So you only have the really tough bit for a year, year and a half (depending when your wife goes back to work). That is a manageable amount of time where it doesn't really matter if you overspend by, say, £100 each and every month. I'm sure you have some savings - hell, you have a mortgage overpayment fund - what do you think it is for? What is the point in making cuts now so you can retire a couple of months earlier 20 years from now? You seem like you have the sense to rebalance your budget when the worst is over.
But anyway just wanted to say to the OP: try not to worry. I was in a similar bracket, looked at childcare costs (~£1,200/month) and didn't understand how that was doable. In the end it was a walk in the park, but I suspect our attitude to spending is not normal (we can spend quite a lot but it's largely discretionary and we tend not to "want" the best most expensive options for things). Some tips:
- You aren't going out for dinner or drinks in the evenings. That right there is a fair amount that I never really counted the cost of.
- Kids stuff is absolutely perfect for buying used. If you buy used and re-sell, it basically costs you only the eBay fee.
- This autumn there will be a new childcare system that's going to give you a big discount, and fees go down significantly when they get older too. At some time when they are three (depending on their birth month) you will get early years funding and then you will be paying next to nothing (OK still loads to people who don't have kids, but a massive drop compared to the under 2's costs).
- You might earn more next year than this year.
Most of all I'd encourage you to remember that the really expensive bit is at the beginning and it is not going to last forever. Kids will always cost you money, sure, but those nursery costs dwarf everything else and they drop significantly each year. So you only have the really tough bit for a year, year and a half (depending when your wife goes back to work). That is a manageable amount of time where it doesn't really matter if you overspend by, say, £100 each and every month. I'm sure you have some savings - hell, you have a mortgage overpayment fund - what do you think it is for? What is the point in making cuts now so you can retire a couple of months earlier 20 years from now? You seem like you have the sense to rebalance your budget when the worst is over.
bogwoppit said:
Firstly I think it's really shameful of your employers to not run a childcare voucher scheme, it would cost them nothing thanks to the NI savings for salary sacrifice, and surely it is in their interest to help employees return to work? When I saw how low the take-up rates were amongst employers I was shocked.
But anyway just wanted to say to the OP: try not to worry. I was in a similar bracket, looked at childcare costs (~£1,200/month) and didn't understand how that was doable. In the end it was a walk in the park, but I suspect our attitude to spending is not normal (we can spend quite a lot but it's largely discretionary and we tend not to "want" the best most expensive options for things). Some tips:
- You aren't going out for dinner or drinks in the evenings. That right there is a fair amount that I never really counted the cost of.
- Kids stuff is absolutely perfect for buying used. If you buy used and re-sell, it basically costs you only the eBay fee.
- This autumn there will be a new childcare system that's going to give you a big discount, and fees go down significantly when they get older too. At some time when they are three (depending on their birth month) you will get early years funding and then you will be paying next to nothing (OK still loads to people who don't have kids, but a massive drop compared to the under 2's costs).
- You might earn more next year than this year.
Most of all I'd encourage you to remember that the really expensive bit is at the beginning and it is not going to last forever. Kids will always cost you money, sure, but those nursery costs dwarf everything else and they drop significantly each year. So you only have the really tough bit for a year, year and a half (depending when your wife goes back to work). That is a manageable amount of time where it doesn't really matter if you overspend by, say, £100 each and every month. I'm sure you have some savings - hell, you have a mortgage overpayment fund - what do you think it is for? What is the point in making cuts now so you can retire a couple of months earlier 20 years from now? You seem like you have the sense to rebalance your budget when the worst is over.
Yes, but then there's the school fees once they get to 4 and, of course, paying for the Nanny. But anyway just wanted to say to the OP: try not to worry. I was in a similar bracket, looked at childcare costs (~£1,200/month) and didn't understand how that was doable. In the end it was a walk in the park, but I suspect our attitude to spending is not normal (we can spend quite a lot but it's largely discretionary and we tend not to "want" the best most expensive options for things). Some tips:
- You aren't going out for dinner or drinks in the evenings. That right there is a fair amount that I never really counted the cost of.
- Kids stuff is absolutely perfect for buying used. If you buy used and re-sell, it basically costs you only the eBay fee.
- This autumn there will be a new childcare system that's going to give you a big discount, and fees go down significantly when they get older too. At some time when they are three (depending on their birth month) you will get early years funding and then you will be paying next to nothing (OK still loads to people who don't have kids, but a massive drop compared to the under 2's costs).
- You might earn more next year than this year.
Most of all I'd encourage you to remember that the really expensive bit is at the beginning and it is not going to last forever. Kids will always cost you money, sure, but those nursery costs dwarf everything else and they drop significantly each year. So you only have the really tough bit for a year, year and a half (depending when your wife goes back to work). That is a manageable amount of time where it doesn't really matter if you overspend by, say, £100 each and every month. I'm sure you have some savings - hell, you have a mortgage overpayment fund - what do you think it is for? What is the point in making cuts now so you can retire a couple of months earlier 20 years from now? You seem like you have the sense to rebalance your budget when the worst is over.
As I said £45k with 2 kids it simply makes barely any sense working sure she'd make some pocket money but that would be all and really the stress of it simply isn't worth it.
Your the man of the family now you need to provide or if she is the big salary stop working yourself and be a stay at home Dad. Invaluable benefit to the kids and you'll never get the chance again.
Your the man of the family now you need to provide or if she is the big salary stop working yourself and be a stay at home Dad. Invaluable benefit to the kids and you'll never get the chance again.
DoubleSix said:
Wide of the mark as usual Welshbeef.
We've done the sums and for us the difference simply isn't worth the effort. Depends on your careers but quality of life first and spending that time with your kids is the most important thing (not Gym after work or those long golf games at the weekend or football with the lads etc. you make the choice and deal with the commitment or some may oddly elect not to see much of their children which is bewildering. Reminds me of the "dad" who lays on the sun lounger all day drinking cocktails while his wife is playing with his kids in the pool and the beach.... Speaks volumes). Let him make his own parenting choices of whether it's better to be in work or at home; suffice to say there are arguments on both sides and all sorts of reasons to want to "keep your hand in". I know several people who work for a net negative income, they have their reasons. It's not really relevant to this thread anyway: if the earnings just about cover the nursery fees, it makes no difference financially which you go for.
I love the assumption that somehow mothers (or fathers) know best or are by default the best person to bring up their DS or DD.
I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
bogwoppit said:
Let him make his own parenting choices of whether it's better to be in work or at home; suffice to say there are arguments on both sides and all sorts of reasons to want to "keep your hand in". I know several people who work for a net negative income, they have their reasons. It's not really relevant to this thread anyway: if the earnings just about cover the nursery fees, it makes no difference financially which you go for.
If its net neutral but you go to work for 40hrs plus commuting v being with your children all the time ... Isn't it an utter lead balloon idea to go back to work?Welshbeef said:
DoubleSix said:
Wide of the mark as usual Welshbeef.
We've done the sums and for us the difference simply isn't worth the effort. Depends on your careers but quality of life first and spending that time with your kids is the most important thing (not Gym after work or those long golf games at the weekend or football with the lads etc. you make the choice and deal with the commitment or some may oddly elect not to see much of their children which is bewildering. Reminds me of the "dad" who lays on the sun lounger all day drinking cocktails while his wife is playing with his kids in the pool and the beach.... Speaks volumes). For some just stopping work outright results in them becoming deskilled and having to retrain. Other people actually enjoy their careers. For others is a case of maintaining client relationships so a couple of days a week is better than just disappearing off the face of the earth while someone else builds a relationship with your clients.
Furthermore you might look at the benefits to the mother of keeping her career 'ticking over', both psychological and fiscal in the longer term. Some might argue similar benefits to the child of a wider range of experiences and more independence.
Basically, what I'm saying is you can't just look at it from a financial point of view, "doing the sums" as you say is only one part of the picture.
walm said:
Welshbeef said:
We've done the sums and for us the difference simply isn't worth the effort.
How did you adjust her earning potential once the children are at school?Or did you assume she could walk back into a job on the same salary?
And given how often her old head calls up requesting please come back (looks after a number of local schools) fair to say zero issue.
Appreciate that wouldn't be the case for all or any role but it is what it is for us.
Controversial perhaps, but the full time Mums I know are rather boring individuals with little beyond their immediate sphere to talk about - I fear for them when the kids fly the nest!
The children in turn appear to be ill-prepared for the realities of life beyond the living room and tend to have an 'interesting' transition to school.
The children in turn appear to be ill-prepared for the realities of life beyond the living room and tend to have an 'interesting' transition to school.
Welshbeef said:
Appreciate that wouldn't be the case for all or any role but it is what it is for us.
Makes more sense now.Not sure the numbers for someone who can easily re-start their career and actually knows something about bringing up and educating children is 100% applicable to everyone!
walm said:
I love the assumption that somehow mothers (or fathers) know best or are by default the best person to bring up their DS or DD.
I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
Sorry, that just reads as a poor attempt to assuage your guilt for abandoning your children to strangers. I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
Parents are the best people to raise their children, and why have them at all if 'not ruining the other half's career' is so important?
Cake and eat it springs to mind.
I guess many of the posts on this thread are a clue as to why so many kids these days grow into spoilt brats. Parents who put material benefit before actually caring for their own children.
You are not handing your kids over to some highly skilled childcare proffesional, they are often just some young, minimum wage worker who can pass a CRB check. I'm sure there is at least one qualified person at any given nursery, but how many others just have an NVQ level 2 or what ever from the local college.
I understand that for many families the female must work just so they can survive, but these are families where the joint income is under £25k, not over £100k.
One of our best friends is a primary school teacher with over 25 years experience, she now has kids turning up in reception year still wearing nappies, unable to hold a pencil or even a spoon, with no idea how to clean their teeth. All because the feckless parents can't be bothered to spend time with their own kids.
My eldest daughter is a subject head at an all girls grammer school, they have a huge problem with girls self harming. When this is investigated the cause is often parents too busy to give them any attention because their careers/social lives are more important. But of course it's never their fault, it's all down to the school!
But never mind the parents careers are going well, they'll be able to move to a bigger house soon or have an extra holiday, probably leaving the kids with the grandparents so they can have some "me" time.
If you can't be bothered to look after your kids don't have any.
You are not handing your kids over to some highly skilled childcare proffesional, they are often just some young, minimum wage worker who can pass a CRB check. I'm sure there is at least one qualified person at any given nursery, but how many others just have an NVQ level 2 or what ever from the local college.
I understand that for many families the female must work just so they can survive, but these are families where the joint income is under £25k, not over £100k.
One of our best friends is a primary school teacher with over 25 years experience, she now has kids turning up in reception year still wearing nappies, unable to hold a pencil or even a spoon, with no idea how to clean their teeth. All because the feckless parents can't be bothered to spend time with their own kids.
My eldest daughter is a subject head at an all girls grammer school, they have a huge problem with girls self harming. When this is investigated the cause is often parents too busy to give them any attention because their careers/social lives are more important. But of course it's never their fault, it's all down to the school!
But never mind the parents careers are going well, they'll be able to move to a bigger house soon or have an extra holiday, probably leaving the kids with the grandparents so they can have some "me" time.
If you can't be bothered to look after your kids don't have any.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff