U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-23-2020, 02:57 PM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
31,164 posts, read 67,984,889 times
Reputation: 36994

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ312 View Post
If a male compares the cost of condoms over an 18 year period to the cost of ...
That sort of fellow is NOT the one being discussed. His parents and grands have already failed him.
The Q is about the fellows (and girls) who are happy to have others pay the costs.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2020, 02:58 PM
 
2,775 posts, read 770,698 times
Reputation: 4495
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
The Q is about the fellows (and girls) who are happy to have others pay the costs.
Which question? It has nothing to do with the OP.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 03:00 PM
 
1,747 posts, read 887,551 times
Reputation: 4349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
No, but a good flag that this thread has expended itself in all the nonsense one topic can hold.
I dunnnnoooo.

Seems many agree that women's labor is foundational to world-wide economic success. Saying they should be compensated makes sense, as everyone is paid for their labor.

Personally, I think the economy should change....not what we want from women. Make Earth less polluted, etc.

But if that's the route people want to take....import women; sweet-talk them into having children...well, pony up then. It's a huge thing to ask of anyone: to have children. Where's the up side for them, as individuals? Why should they save the world and lose income, promotions, etc for others without compensation?

It's not ludicrous. What is ludicrous is to ask women to (again) sacrifice for others.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 03:24 PM
 
2,775 posts, read 770,698 times
Reputation: 4495
Quote:
Originally Posted by crusinsusan View Post
Seems many agree that women's labor is foundational to world-wide economic success. Saying they should be compensated makes sense, as everyone is paid for their labor.
But that's not the question at hand. It's about women in labor, not women's labor.

And it's all gotten a little scattered to make much further sense. But carry on, do...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 03:34 PM
 
1,862 posts, read 573,512 times
Reputation: 3677
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
We probably do need to rethink it - our current method of The State providing Social Security depends on having a (relatively) stable and/or growing number of workers working to pay payroll taxes to support each retiree drawing SS. I don't think we're there yet, but at some point what happens when there are not enough people from who to extract a payroll tax?

Slightly less connected are public sector pensions. They are funded by the assumption of an ever-larger number of people from whom taxes can be collected in real time to pay benefits to retirees. This would be a great place to start to trim that future expense if you're a taxpayer. If you're a pension collector rather than a tax payer you'll have a different view of the world, of course.
People will have to work longer to collect -- FRA = 75. With fewer younger people in the workforce, less age discrimination. With the advent of 401(k) plans and HSA, less dependency on government programs. Probably some taxation of benefit programs as well.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:04 PM
 
1,747 posts, read 887,551 times
Reputation: 4349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
But that's not the question at hand. It's about women in labor, not women's labor.

And it's all gotten a little scattered to make much further sense. But carry on, do...
Au contraire. Women's "labor" doesn't end at birth. Unless you're thinking of those dystopian stories where children are removed from their parents (ie: Logan's Run). Women's "labor" typically runs 18 years and 9 months. Birthing "labor" average is 8 hours. But that's just the beginning. In fact, according to The Street it costs about $233k to raise a child until age 17.

It's not "a little scattered" either. It actually goes to the root of the problem. It's foundational. The economy makes it too difficult, financially and physically (day care, support, etc) to raise children anymore.

If the world wants them, the world should pay for them. Why should women foot the bill?

This is indeed the bottom of the issue.

Or we could just save the earth.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:21 PM
 
1,862 posts, read 573,512 times
Reputation: 3677
Quote:
Originally Posted by crusinsusan View Post
Au contraire. Women's "labor" doesn't end at birth. Unless you're thinking of those dystopian stories where children are removed from their parents (ie: Logan's Run). Women's "labor" typically runs 18 years and 9 months. Birthing "labor" average is 8 hours. But that's just the beginning. In fact, according to The Street it costs about $233k to raise a child until age 17.

It's not "a little scattered" either. It actually goes to the root of the problem. It's foundational. The economy makes it too difficult, financially and physically (day care, support, etc) to raise children anymore.

If the world wants them, the world should pay for them. Why should women foot the bill?

This is indeed the bottom of the issue.

Or we could just save the earth.
Not to mention the lost opportunity cost of deferring 401(k) contributions.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:32 PM
 
1,747 posts, read 887,551 times
Reputation: 4349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maddie104 View Post
Not to mention the lost opportunity cost of deferring 401(k) contributions.

Yes. On this site alone many women can attest to what children have cost their retirement.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:36 PM
 
2,775 posts, read 770,698 times
Reputation: 4495
Quote:
Originally Posted by crusinsusan View Post
Au contraire. Women's "labor" doesn't end at birth.


I didn't say that. This thread is almost entirely about birth rate and population. To move on to the concepts of "women's labor" is... only mildly relevant topic drift.

I mean, at this point I don't care and I've thrown in some drift myself. But don't get all up in mah grille over a side subject I wasn't even addressing. Even as the parent who was the mostly-home one for six kids.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:58 PM
 
1,747 posts, read 887,551 times
Reputation: 4349
Actually, you said:
"It's about women in labor, not women's labor."

You added italics for the word "in". So I spoke to that. Women "in" labor...you said it was about that. I pointed out that her labor doesn't end in the hospital.

Again, it's not thread drift at all. It's the root of the problem: Economy and birth rate/fertility rate and the economic realities/cost to women are intrinsically intertwined.

I'm sorry you think I'm 'all up in your grille' - I assure you, I'm not...it's an important topic, that's all. But it surely isn't a side topic. It's what the topic is built upon: the foundation/root of the "problem."
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:38 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top