Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Might be time to change professions/companies/bubbles if you're unhappy.
The fact that I'm the sole breadwinner is why I can't change professions, since I would not be able to go back to school and/or afford to go back to an entry level salary in a new profession. Switching companies won't help.
The fact that I'm the sole breadwinner is why I can't change professions, since I would not be able to go back to school and/or afford to go back to an entry level salary in a new profession. Switching companies won't help.
Could you not switch to a different company in the same profession or perhaps your wife work for awhile to give you the option to refresh your training in a similar field.
People do this all the time.
Or you can just ignore your employers attitude towards your personal family life.
Do you get vacation time or no? If you do how can they not allow you to take it.
Could you not switch to a different company in the same profession or perhaps your wife work for awhile to give you the option to refresh your training in a similar field.
People do this all the time.
I'd rather not post more specifics here, but neither of those are currently options for me, but thank you for the suggestions.
Quote:
Or you can just ignore your employers attitude towards your personal family life.
That's all that I can do, and just hope that I don't get fired.
Quote:
Do you get vacation time or no? If you do how can they not allow you to take it.
I do get vacation time, but in an at will job, they can fire you for any reason or no reason, including using too much vacation time. Plus, taking vacation time does not make your work disappear. So far I have been lucky, but people are often asked to cancel vacations at the last minute, or take so much work with them on vacation that they spend the entire vacation working.
This is true that a company can get rid of someone whenever. However you can also sue them back.
You can't sue them if they didn't do anything illegal. I guess technically you can sue anybody for anything, but you won't win, and you likely won't get a lawyer to take the case.
Well there is stop payment, separate accounts and finding the locks changed when she returns.
Honestly how does the sole breadwinner let another person control their earnings, spending and life. I dont get it. In a healthy relationship, finances, purchases, vacations and such are discussed and mutually agreed upon regardless of who works or what the incomes are.
My point is that I can't understand why so many affluent men seem ok with the lifestyle that I described. Obviously they won't do any of what you suggested above if they are ok with their wives and children going on vacation without them.
My point is that I can't understand why so many affluent men seem ok with the lifestyle that I described. Obviously they won't do any of what you suggested above if they are ok with their wives and children going on vacation without them.
If they're okay with it, then what's the problem? I don't see one.
I think many of these affluent guys you speak of aren’t necessarily stressed out or worried about losing a job. Many of them are the boss and have it made. My aunt and uncle have this lifestyle. Uncle is a partner at a law firm and even though she got an mba in the 80s she quit work as soon as they got engaged. He works long hours but he enjoys it, goes golfing and drinking a lot with his friends. she deals with their two kids and runs the home and deals with the finances. No nannies (kids are older now anyways but she would never be the type to spend money on a nanny) and she is not a spa kind of girl. She does work out a lot in her free time and plays tennis/golf. But he doesn’t seem worried or stressed at all to me.
Last edited by Bridge781; 01-17-2020 at 06:53 PM..
Reason: /
I can’t help but wonder why a stay at home mom would have a nanny or au pair even if they had the money. I really have to ask and wonder if they really wanted to be a parent in the first place. I’m not saying this because I’m envious but it doesn’t seem like the best thing for the kids to me. The kids at some point must look back and think wow i had a lazy mom. Because that’s how it seems. Lazy. Don’t have kids if you don’t want to participate in their lives.
Depends in part on how many kids there are. But way back in the old days, like in the Victorian era, it was considered an upper-class mom's job to supervise her staff. She may have had a nanny (usually called a "governess"), a housekeeper, and a gardener, possibly even a cook. It was fairly common in those days for the kids to bond with the nanny, if she was kind and affectionate, rather than with the mom. In those days, it was considered the nanny's job to hug the kids; parents didn't touch their kids. So of course the kids are going to bond with the person who touches them and shows them love.
Crazy stuff. And having kids was expected of everyone, whether they were fit to be parents or not. It's only in the last couple of generations that having children has been considered optional, as its become more acceptable for married couples to choose to be child-free.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
