Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How many single income families could put 100k down and finance another 400k? That's minimum, by the way.
Half a million is minimum to buy a house? LOL Understandably prices like that are to be expected in certain areas but give me a break. If you can't afford a half million dollar home you buy one where you can afford and you certainly don't have to go to the ghetto to get one.
You are proving my point perfectly. You say homes "in your area" are very expensive. Well, then go to an inexpensive area. I live in a large metro area, and there are homes to be had for $500k, and not too far away are homes for $100k.
I was surprised to find out my home was worth more than a million...... if I can only find out how to transport it to that area.
I know I'm going to immediately be accused of misogyny for even thinking about such a thing, but it's a worthwhile debate to have. Note: I'm not asking whether it's a good thing that women are integrating into the workforce and outpacing men, that is, whether the plusses outweigh the minuses. I'm only asking whether there are any minuses.
There's interesting clip of Aaron Russo being interviewed prior to his death where he talks about women's lib. He claimed that his friend Nick Rockefeller laughed & basically said that the Rockefellers/Globalists were behind that movement because 1) they weren't collecting taxes from half the people in the country & 2) they could get the kids into school at a younger age & better indoctrinate them if the Mother's were out of the home. It's just him saying it, not a fact per se, but when looking at their progressive body of work, it certainly fits their mindset & M.O.
If a woman is thinking that, then she shouldn't have married the man. You marry someone and have children with them when you are a partnership. In everything - raising children, finances, the works.
This is the ideal situation. The reality is that a marriage can start out that way, and then it can result in a completely different scenario, where the woman is in a situation that is largely unhealthy but stays because of limited options. It's smart for a woman to have ongoing work history/education or other skills that they continue to work at to fill in potential gaps of work history, even if her marriage is healthy and strong--anything could happen to dramatically change her situation. This includes her husband losing his job, becoming disabled, passing away, cheating on her, abusing her, or divorcing her. And then she has to start all over, often competing with people with much more work experience, younger, etc. These days the workplace has become extremely competitive and whereas it used to be easier to climb the ladder, now it's more difficult. Times are different, things are more expensive-from food, to gas, to homes, to clothes, to education expenses for kids, and companies are paying less, yet requiring the same amount of work. If a woman is very very optimistic about her marriage and trusts that things will always be a certain way so be it... Most of us however understand the necessity of building a career--not just as back up plans, but for ourselves. The power of being financially independent, accomplishing goals within the context of a career that your passionate about, having a role outside of mom or wife-something that you continue at once the kids leave the nest. The ability to contribute so that your husband doesn't have to work as much as he would if he were the sole breadwinner working a career that most likely required tons of traveling, late night meetings, and early mornings and late nights at the office...
A women also can be more selective of who she seeks. Whereas if she were completely interested in being a Sahm and therefore would need to seek men in careers where this was possible--excluding men she might be interested in but aren't able to provide that lifestyle-nowadays since she is independent she can seek men that not only fulfill certain financial or career criteria but that most importantly treat and complement her in a way that she appreciates/love. This isn't to say that women previously only sought men for their earning potential and didnt love the men they married, but merely just suggesting that with more financial freedom women don't have to be as concerned as they might have in the past about a mans income.
Obviously there are plenty of negatives that most have touched on already. And I suppose that comes with territory-with good comes bad.
The obvious answer is that approximately 50% of the jobs "disappeared" (ie, we're filled by women.)
Wages have been decreasing since early 1980's relative to inflation. I do find it interesting that wage deflation seemed to occur as there were more women entering the workforce. ...
I'm going to disagree with you here. Dual income earners spend their income, which creates demand for other things, which creates more jobs... The unemployment rate doesn't correlate to an increase in women in the market. It was at like 4-5% in the 2000's and its 5.8 now. Not high.
Wages have been stagnant since the 70's, but I don't think that's cause of women, it's because of globalization of labor (immigration and overseas investment), the decline of representation of workers through unions, decline of the minimum wage, increases in CEO/shareholder pay....... all which are politically loaded topics not related to the OP.
Anyways, what is interesting is that women entering the labor force HAS caused our GDP to go up quite a bit. Why, because things that were not accounted for in GDP, such as home cooking and raising children, are now accounted for in GDP by having restaurants and daycares do it. So the GDP growth has this rather big amount of accounting inflation in it. It hasn't been just pure productivity gains.
My solution? Part times jobs and the availability of lower work weeks. If one parent has a 32 hr workweek and the other has a 25 hour one, then the kids should get enough parental time. Having one person completely dedicated to a few kids didn't exist historically, as others have said, and is rather inefficient.
Except in extreme cases, both parents don't "need" to work.
They feel they both "have" to work to finance their smart phones, multiple cars, destination vacations, sports/music/etc lessons, latest fashions, and the like.
You have clearly never been poor. In middle and upper class households it may not be necessary to work. For poor families yes, both parents NEED to work.
There are some negative effects. In some cases, women have become so dominant in some workplaces that the environment is hostile to men. (Been there and done that.)
But the biggest negative effect is women being included in certain jobs that really should be left to strong large men, like policemen, firemen, paramedics. Because of the physical limitations of most women, men have to pull more than their share of the load. My brother in law, a fireman, has experience with this. Most women simply can't pull their share of the load carrying people, moving hoses filled with water, etc. This problem is also in road construction. The typical job the women are doing is holding the caution signs.
The worst effect was that now it takes TWO full time wage earners to equal what a single wage earner could expect in the 1950s.
Big Business is thrilled to get workers for half-price, and Big Government is even happier as it confiscates about HALF of the working class's incom--and pockets the SS taxes from women who would have gotten a portion of their husband's SS benefits without working a day.
As opposed to having to put a roof over the heads of their children and feeding them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
