Same! Except my wife quit her money-making job to take care of our kids full-time. I go to work, come home, and spend time with my family. Every Friday my employer deposits about $1,500 in my account, which represents an income stream of about $6,800/mo, not to mention paying for my health insurance and putting about $100 in my 401k. All I have to do is show up for about 40 hours Monday through Friday.

For a side hustle, we bought a home around 2015 for $125k. We've paid off about $70k of the 2.8% 15-year mortgage and property taxes at $1100/mo, it's now estimated to be worth about $330k. That represents an income stream equivalent to about $2200/mo due to that asset's value rising at about 15% per year. If it wasn't for the fact that I live here, I'd be divesting a lot of my investment in that obvious bubble ASAP. Similarly, my parents built my childhood home nearby in '96 for about $80k, their property is now worth about $750k, you do the math.

Congratulations on buying your house in 2015, it would be difficult to buy such a property at that price today without some large concessions on location or quality of the home.

However, I do agree with the sentiment of your post. It's a lot easier to live below your means as a way to grow income rather than to stretch yourself to try to make extra money externally. 40 hours at a well played, balanced job with low living expenses is truly a great path.

When I do the math, I do not consider my primary residence to be of any numerical value since I do not want to live anywhere else. And even if I did want to live somewhere else, I would have to account for the costs of acquiring a new similar residence, which in a similarly desirable area would have risen just the same in price.

And assuming I needed to live somewhere else, it would likely be because something undesirable has happened to the whole area, so the price at that point would be much lower than whatever it is at times before then.

You need to put more in to your 401k

You're probably right, on looking up the details it's actually $120 per weekly paycheck, matched by my employer, so it's not so bad as the estimated $100, especially if you assumed that was monthly, but that's still not on-track for my retirement target. I also haven't poured much into the Roth since my eldest was born. But kids are expensive...

(Also, I see I also need to use more of that ~4 weeks of vacation I've saved...)

Your comments remind me of Bill Watterson of Calvin and Hobbes fame.

Assuming average 3% inflation, your parents have earned an equivalent of about $3000 worth of today's purchasing power per month on average.

Wouldn’t you have to subtract the cost of the parents’ alternative living accommodations from those “earnings”?

I dont think so because they were able to live in the property while it gained value, so they didn't need to spend on other accommodations. Alternative living costs would factor in towards the decision to sell and what they can get with that value today, but im not seeing how it reduces the earnings.

You would need to subtract the YOY property taxes and maintenence costs (with inflation) to get actual net earnings, though

What is the point of unrealized gains if you can never realize them (spend them)?

One use case is being able to borrow more against the increased value, but I do not think that it is a good idea for 99% of people to use their primary residence as leverage.

If you have kids, you lose "come home and relax" unfortunately.

Just don't have kids!

Yes, unless you love your kids.

No, that's completely false. You can love your kids but still find it non-relaxing to take care of them. Just ask... literally any parent.

Don't ask me... Spending time with the kids, looking after them or not is super relaxing. It's the best bit of life.

I agree that it's the best bit of life. But how on earth you manage to find a crying baby that decides to wake you up in the middle of the night relaxing is beyond me :)

Its ok. They don't want to admit reality. I ahve 3 kids (one is a baby) and I love them to death but crying baby is never fun and certainly not relaxing and I am happy to admit that.

True true. And after they learn to walk you got about two weeks and the learn how to run and then you’re chasing them for 5 years. Mine are 13 and 10 and it’s pretty nice atm. The 10 year old still thinks I hang the moon and the 13 year old is just enough of a smart ass to make me laugh.

hahaha so true. I have a 9 year old, 8 year old and 5 months old (I know I know. Diaper days are back again). The 9 year old already talks like she is 13 and the 8 year usually follows her and well, the 5 month old. Baby doing baby things :)

How old are your kids?

Even when you love your kids, I don’t think caring for them can be described as relaxing.

For almost my entire marriage, my wife has either been at home with our kids or trying to get a teaching job in a saturated market. When she has worked, it was never a big contributor to our income.

She'll be joining the workforce full-time in the next 6-9 months in a new field. I'm psyched for a pretty significant boost to our overall income that we've never had before.

That’s what most people do, which is fine. However, since I’m only going around once, I’d like to find a different path.

Next level house hacking.

and for the rest of your life...