It is claimed that both husband and wife need to be currently responsible for sustaining the family. I completely agree with this view, and will give my reasons below.
Firstly, I believe that should the couple both work, they can appreciate the hard work of each other better. This is because not only is a sense of frugality fostered in this case, but family bonds will also be reinforced. One good example would be families with a sole breadwinner, as the partner who works is likely to be under stress to make the ends meet which may make relationships tense,
eventually leading to different conflicts. The drawback of this is that couples will have to spend less time together and it can lead to various misunderstandings in the form of jealousy, but the root of the problem is the lack of trust there. It should hence be admitted that to have two breadwinners is hence to have thriving families.
Secondly, in my opinion, in order to achieve financial independence faster, both spouses need to make money. In other words, the higher the cash flow into the family budget is, the earlier partners can afford themselves to purchase real estate, cars or any other dream possessions. For instance, in my country, Uzbekistan, dual income families divide the money into two categories, namely the one half for the monthly expenses, such as groceries, clothes and entertainment, and the other earmarked for the savings, making their future financially secure. Although other people may believe that a child’s upbringing may be compromised when both parents are employed, it is an inevitable sacrifice to provide our children with all the best. Instead of promoting the idea that there should be only one breadwinner in a family, we could therefore embrace that both partners are earning money.
In conclusion, I fully support the view that the family budget should rely on both spouses.