Do housewives deserve monthly salaries from their hubbies...?

Question

if they dont have other jobs?? just wondering.. your thoughts

Answer 1

YES!!!!!!!

I am all for it. It won't be called "salary", but sort of a monthly gift. 10% of his income would be fair. Save up the money in your personal account. You'll need it on rainy days.

Answer 2

Absolutely. They're still providing support for their husbands, cleaning the house, cooking, buying groceries, possibly raising children. If the wife had an outside job, they might have to hire third parties to perform these job duties, and those people would certainly be paid. A housewife serves an economic function.

There was an article in the New York Times or Wall Street Journal years ago that estimated the actual value of being a housewife, and it was actually pretty high, like around $90K/yr. They may have taken into account certain savings that accrue when the woman doesn't have to work outside the home, like not needing to buy suits or spend money on dry cleaning, and a lower gas bill.

According to Oprah, a wife should have funds separate from her husband's (i.e., in a separate account; they might still be community property if you're in a community property state) in case he decides to leave her and wipe out their accounts.

Answer 3

No, it is part of their communal marriage arrangement and while if he is the breadwinner, she should be be allowed a certain amount of money for the budget, expenses and spending money.

Not so if she receives a salary, it is like saying to (especially the wife) that she is a paid employee, a disposible unit that can be replaced by a mere outlay of cash. And the older you get, the bettter is not to put this idea in his mind as he might think it is better to trade you in for a new model half your age and expects half of what you earn.

Better plan is to be indispensible to your hubby and encourage him to want to give you more through "excellent service", just like a paid employee would.

Answer 4

Housewives need free access to the household account.

It is both the husbands and wife's money.

A house wife cannot run a house without access to the account to pay bills and buy groceries.

The only exception would be if she had a spending habit that the household couldn't afford. Only then should an 'allowance' be given.

Answer 5

I don't like the word salary for it, but the order of priorities for the money should be:

1. Bills
2. Necessities
3. Discretionary money

The discretionary money should be agreed upon and used both together and separately. Saved, if possible.

Notice I didn't identify a husband or wife in there.

Answer 6

Staying House wife is not a simple task. My wife stays at home all day and its really tedious. Sons of 9 and 5 are really trouble some. We are really happy to compare our kids with others on the morality side. (I MEAN IT AND THE CREDITS GO TO MY WIFE). Bringing up kids is the foremost we do for their future.

To be frank, we never had a separate account till date between me and her. I hardly know the accountability of the money that I earn and we spend. Till date we never had an issue and it goes smooth and happy.

Answer 7

No. When I got married I did not see myself as the employee of my husband!!

People usually see themselves as a team when they get married. The team needs an income and a home and often have children. Sometimes both partners work. Sometimes they don't. Either way, there are floors to be washed, bathrooms to be cleaned, bills to be paid, etc. etc.; and somebody needs to do those things. If one person is working, and the other is at home and caring for the children, I don't see that as doing work for the husband. I see it as being the one who is taking care of that part of all the shared responsibilities.

When my kids were little I was mostly home with them during the day, and the way I see it, those were my children (although his as well), it was my home (although his as well), and it was a mutually agreed-up arrangement between us that I would be with the little children while he worked.

I handled the money, the yard, the house, the kids, the pets, and whatever else needed to be done; but I never saw it as doing something that was for someone else. I saw it as being the person on the team who happened to handle that set of tasks/responsibilities because the other person on the team was working (and working long hours).

I actually felt as if my role as "manager of the personal or home life" was an executive one rather than an one of employee; and one thing I used to say to my family was, "The person who does the cleaning is the person who gets to make the rules about things like not eating in the living room."

People often say, "If the guy wasn't married he'd have to do that stuff." Well, if my husband hadn't been married he also probably wouldn't have had the eight-room house on an acre of lawn with a garage to clean. He wouldn't have had to think about two cars if he were single. He wouldn't have had three kids with educations to supplement, pediatric needs, and tons of laundry. The life we had built was something we built as a couple, and neither of us would have had all that work that had to be done by someone if we had remained single and without children.

At the same time, though, with the "someone has to be responsible" approach, the money should not be considered just the husband's money either; because as a team, if the wife is the one to do the stuff in the house and for the children and gives up the chance to go out and earn her own money then the couple's income should also be seen as a shared one and not just as belonging to the wage-earner.

Both partners in a marriage are supposed to be a "team". Women are not maids, babysitters, or hookers. I think treating the role of stay-at-home mom as if the woman should be paid for taking her share of the responsibilites is very demeaning.

I never saw my role as stay-at-home mother as a job. I saw my role as mother as a relationship: I was someone's daughter, someone's wife, someone's sister, and someone's mother. I didn't see my role as "cleaner of the house" as a job either. I saw it doing what grown ups do. I also never saw myself as a "housewife". I saw myself as someone who had ambitions and plans for work but who happened to be unemployed (for a good reason, but unemployed nonethless). I certainly didn't see being someone's wife as a job.

It is very true that some women do so much in terms of things they do for their family or husbands that people often under-value what stay-at-home moms do; but when couples have that arrangement it is because they think it makes sense or because they think it is best for their children or because it works for them. It is so much more appealing to think of all the work and thinking and planning that stay-at-home moms do as an enormous effort (and sacrifice) they do for love than to reduce the role of stay-at-home moms to employee with a husband who pays her for babysitting, cleaning, and bookkeeping.

Answer 8

I say yes, especially if their are small children at home as well, wishful thinking!

If only we lived in a parallel universe, where all the men threw their money at us and asked how much more we wanted, wait that's the Pussycat Dolls!

Answer 9

No. Being loved thoroughly is enough! Besides, it has recently been estimated that a mom/homemaker is worth around $130,000 - so we are worth a lot more than most men could pay! Most of us do it because we love our families.

Answer 10

I think that they feel fulfilled by operating the household like they want it and they get shopping sprees like they please (or at least my mom did when I was growing up) So I think the average spree is more than a salary and more fun!