Kids vs No Kids – This May Suprise You
I recently read an article on MSN about comparing the standard of living for couples with, and without kids. There were some surprising results that I would not have guessed, but that I can definitely see how it would come about.
Take for example groceries. This should be a no brainer right? More mouths to feed means a higher grocery bill. Well, not by as much as you might think:
“On groceries, for example, in December, married parents making between $50,000 and $75,000 per year spent $362. Married couples without kids in the same income bracket spent $330. Less, sure, but only 9% less. That’s not an aberration. Across income categories, married parents spent about 14% more on groceries in 2009 than childless couples — which is about the same difference in total annual spending (not including mortgages or rent) between married people with kids, who spent $46,160 last year, and married people without kids, who spent $40,304”.
Wow. $5,856. That’s the total difference in annual spending between married couples with kids and married couples without kids. I thought that this would have been a much greater difference. It appears married couples without kids are making the most of their remaining years without kids. My only question, is are they saving enough.
This brings to mind a similar discussion going on over at OutOfDebtAgain about shopping at whole foods. I think the premise of this story is typical of many Americans. Say for example you are making $50,000 a year. You will (hopefully) have a standard of living appropriate for a person making $50,000 a year. Now let’s say you are trying to save as much as you possibly can, trying to grow your retirement nest egg. Suddenly you get a raise to $60,000 a year. Do you increase your spending or saving? I’m willing to guess that many Americans will increase their spending before savings.
I realize that many people hold off or decide not to have kids to maintain a certain stand of living. But can you imagine how much money these couples without kids who spend so much on other items could be saving if they were to reduce their living expenses a little. If the information presented in this article is even the slightest bit accurate, then apparently couples with no children either have much more expensive tastes, or well, I don’t know what else it could be, feeding the hungry every month?
March 19, 2010
· 
myfinancialobjective · 
9 Comments
Tags: Children Cost, Children Expenses, Kids cost · Posted in: Good Finds
myfinancialobject... (95)
BibleDebt (28)
Financial Samurai (19)
Darren (18)
Evan (14)
Financial bondage (11)
FinancialBondage.org (11)
chris (8)
FinEngr (8)
Investing Newbie (8)
9 Responses
Cool and interesting post. I have two little ones at home and I just don’t see a huge difference in extra money spent on the kids. As I think more about it though, I would wager to say the parent priorities have changed. Instead of making crazy purchases of whatever you wanted as a married couple, you usually take the cost of kids into your mind when spending as a parent. I don’t buy much of anything for myself because I would rather use the money for activities with my kids. Money is still being spent, but much more thought is put into it.
I would agree that most people will increase their standard of living inline with any extra income they receive.
Jeff @ DeliverAwayDebt´s last blog ..Friday Frugal Tips – Review Edition
Thanks for the mention. When I see the reports on how much people are spending on groceries, I always want to know how much are they spending on eating out? Because if they factored in the amount of money spent on fast food or restaurants I guarantee it would be a lot more.
Interesting and insightful post!
Jeff, very good point you make regarding taking costs into consideration much more. I don’t have kids, but I can imagine how much more important every little thing you purchase is.
Mrs. Accountability, No problem! That’s also a great point. I’m willing to guess that you would find a correlation between whole food shoppers and slightly more expensive eating out habits. Just a guess…
Rannie, thanks!
I think our family of 5 spends less on food costs (if you count eating out) than we did when it was just me and my husband. As DINKS we were constantly going out to dinner or going to bars. Now we cook at home most nights and can’t get away from the kids long enough to go out to a nice dinner or get some much needed drinks!
Stay at home Mom, I’m not surprised at all by what you stated. Priorities do a 180 when children come into the picture. I don’t know from experience, but I believe it!
MyFinancialObjectives´s last blog ..Warrant Buffett’s Humble Abode
Yakezie Challenge Carnival #4 - The Growth Edition « Eliminate The Muda! - March 21, 2010
[...] My Financial Objectives looks at Kids vs No Kids – This May Surprise You [...]
Okay, this post pretty much challenges my view about kids sucking up money.
However, it is unclear on the stats about how old the kids are. Generally speaking, during their formative years, kids don’t require much $$. Once they kick puberty years, you will spend serious money.
SahmCFO has good points about DINKS’ spending habit.
For me, having children will require more than financial sacrifice. Actually, financial sacrifice is the easier part compared to other kind of sacrifices. Therefore, I will not be pressured to have children by society (read: my parents
).
Bytta@151DaysOff´s last blog ..Day 25: Being 37 is Sexy
Yes the stats are a bit vaugue. I agree that during puberty years kids will cost a lot more. Thinking back to how much it must have cost my parents to feed me alone must have been astronomical haha.
Leave a Reply