Search Results: raising kids

Ideally the division of assets/finances would be as though the unpaid labor (housework, childcare, etc) of the mother and father had been paid.

The unpaid labor of a stay-at-home mother equals $120,000, and that of a working mother equals $90,000[1], in addition to her working income of (on average) $25,000[2]. Thus $115,000.

The unpaid labor of a working father equals $34,000[3], in addition to his working salary, an average of $49,000. Thus, $83,000.

Therefore, if we add 83+115 or 83+120, that’s $196,000 or $201,000 that the family would have been making if unpaid labor had been paid[3].

$115,000 is 57% of $201,000, and $120,000 is 59.7% of $201,000.

Therefore, assets/finances would be as though the mother had been making 57% or 59.7% of the income during the time they were raising kids together.

Am I missing something? (Genuine question.)

[1] https://inhabitat.com/inhabitots/experts-crunched-the-numbers-and-heres-what-moms-should-be-earning-for-all-the-unpaid-work-they-do/

[2] https://money.cnn.com/2014/10/13/news/economy/being-a-dad-pays/

[3] https://www.salary.com/how-much-are-dads-worth-in-2014/

[4] https://www.conceiveabilities.com/surrogates/surrogate-mother-pay
By the way, for as long as unpaid labor is accounted for in the division of assets/finances, then I disagree with alimony because the mother is getting more of the assets, anyway.
(And no I don't support alimony being given to the father either (in the average situation) because he has the additional benefit of being able to get a higher-paying job easier than her because he got more work experience than her.)