To think that families who construct their lifestyle around two incomes are living very precariously?

[Circumlocutious]

I’m talking situations where the two incomes are absolutely essential to paying the mortgage and bills. A situation where there is no ‘give’, no flexibility: what if there is a chronic illness in the family, one person can no longer work, school closures (well, you’re seeing it now)? Isn’t this a precarious way to live?

I get that sometimes there may be no other choice, especially when saving up for mortgage. But often it seems like people’s lifestyle - the house they choose to buy, the size of their mortgage, the area they live in, their cars, the schools they pay to send their children to - have adapted to fit around two full incomes, even when they could have made different choices. Many people live fancy lifestyles with no room for error. They can’t scale back their spending without making major changes, eg moving house, which are harder to do once you’re used to your current lifestyle.

AIBU to say that more couples should aim to contain family spending to the level of one earning partner? Is this unrealistic?

Every adult makes their own choices

Meh, you do you.

Depends on saving too perhaps- and equity.

An often one salary isn't enough to raise a family.

Being reliant on one salary isn't great. Lots of risk of the earner losing all the household income. The ideal is 2 salaries but could live on one. But who does that?

So many families have no choice but to rely on 2 incomes just to live day to day. Literally no idea why anyone would spend much time pondering on whether rich people should rely on one income or two

Wtf. No. Most people couldn't buy/rent a house big enough for a family on one average income.

@Circumlocutious So is that what you have done?

Hmm well personally I prefer to leave a bit of wiggle room, but only spending at the level of one partner working is taking it a little to far imo. Yes, anything could happen but you have to live your life. There's no reason to think that if one person lost their job, they couldn't get another.

Unrealistic. What about single parent households. What are they meant to do.

Let me guess, you're a SAHM with a high earning husband trying to justify your choices, right?

I guess.

But not necessarily less precariously than those relying on one income continously provided by the same person (for an extended amount of time)?

That's what insurance is for to protect your income if you cannot work. So therefore, YABU

Problem is people don't take to out as they think they're bulletproof

We have life insurance of course so if either of us died the house would be paid off and the remaining parent earns enough to keep going. We keep a years mortgage payments in reserve so we can cover that with no second income. A significant cost is childcare which isn’t needed the same way if only one person is working and doesn’t last forever. But we both want our jobs and there are large chunks of many big cities where housing costs expect 2 incomes or earning a lot. We love where we live and it is near grandparents. Stop judging!

If you lived alone then you would surely reply on one income. I don't understand how that's any more precarious than relying on two?

I think it sounds a bit smug to be honest.

It's often the case that the income goes up first, before you come up with more exotic ways to spend it.

When it comes to financial imprudent decisions, the very worst that could happen is repossession and blacklist credit - some people are prepared and comfortable with those risks, versus the rewards, of their lifestyle.

I say that as a very prudent person who dislikes the idea of a millstone property.

I imagine in lots of cases that’s just not possible. Many families need 2 incomes just to get by.

I know what you are talking about but I don’t think it’s the norm,

It feels a lot less precarious than one income! If that’s gone, you’re in the shit. If we lost one and couldn’t get it back, we would have a year to adapt at least.

Well I suppose it depends a bit on the jobs and any fail-safes they may have from them like long term sick pay or flexible hours, and if they have family help to assist with potential issues.

Personally, we have managed on one salary during two 10 month maternity leaves, and could probably do so for a while again especially as we are a bit more sensible and older now with actual small amounts of savings to cover a few months. We also have plenty of family nearby so worst case scenario, we could sack everything off and just keep up our mortgage payments on an empty house. We also previously both had lower paid jobs for so long that we live happily on modest (to most) incomes now.

Surely you realise that many areas of the country have such high living costs that a single income is insufficient? SE for instance, and no doubt cities and other property hotspots.

Maybe those families that rely on 2 incomes count income insurance as one of their essential bills.

And yes, there are probably many families who live up to their means with little wriggle room.

All families manage their finances differently, and shouldn't feel judged.

Two incomes are less precarious than one! If you lose one of the jobs you have the other. Just don’t overspend.

Wtf so both people should earn but lifestyle should be scaled down to one income? Wtf would you make your life so meagre? Wtf would you have a bank account with a full person’s salary in it? By all means save up and have a bolster that makes you feel secure, but your proposal is miserable and unnecessary. I would rather have to move house than live my whole working life as if I am unpaid.

What a load of patronising bollocks . Have you no conception of how people live in the real world

Ridiculous thread. People have savings, imvestments, insurances, pensions etc. House itself may be bought with a view to downsize later and release funds. Do you sit in everyone's pockets? I don't think so. Look after your own money.

I think if two adults are working hard for their money then why shouldn’t they enjoy the fruits of it eg by living in a nicer area, access to good schools, a reliable car? Seems more weird to work your arse off 45 hours a week for a second salary that’s purely a safety net.

It’s a privileged position to be in and not risk free - but people decide for themselves what level of risk they’re comfortable with.