5 ms·

Companies were smaller. Pay difference between the top and bottom of the corporate hierarchy is greatly affected by corporation size. We mostly stopped breaking

by burfog 8y ago

Companies were smaller. Pay difference between the top and bottom of the corporate hierarchy is greatly affected by corporation size. We mostly stopped breaking up corporations long before we had those higher tax rates, and the technology changes since that time have made very large corporations easier to manage. We dropped our tariffs while increasing our regulations, which caused outsourcing. Americans lost their jobs to foreign countries. We increased the supply of workers, particularly low-skilled workers, by failing to apply our laws at the border and with visa overstays. As a simple matter of supply and demand, the price of labor plummeted. We increased the cost of living with regulations. It all adds up: zoning, car safety, building codes, etc. This is great if you are not poor and you can't bear the sight of poor people living in conditions that are not as nice as the ones you can afford. Large numbers of women entered the workforce. The extra family income let the dual-income couples bid up the price of housing and other things. To keep up, others felt forced to do likewise. With that being the norm now, prices are higher and so people generally aren't financially better off.

rixed 8y ago
> Large numbers of women entered the workforce. ... With that being the norm now, prices are higher and so people generally aren't financially better off. Women are financially better off.
- burfog 8y ago
  Before: did the housework, prices were low After: doing the housework, prices are high, also need to work to cover the higher prices, and much of the extra money goes to childcare and transportation and other work expenses That doesn't look like "financially better off" to me. It looks more like being enslaved to landlords and corporate America.
  - rixed 8y ago
    I get why, in a world where women depend on men for income, housework fall on women (not only housework but other even nastier things). But in a world where women earn their own income I don't think your can continue to assume that. It's probably more like: Before: was enslaved to men. After: is enslaved to landlords and corporations. That's still progress in many cases, I think.
    - lin19 8y ago
      That "progress" came with things like: Less than replacement level fertility rates More unstable families Higher single men -> leading to higher suicide rates among men Generally unhappier women in general But it's all great because we eliminated the role of a housewife and a mother.
      - rixed 8y ago
        > Generally unhappier women in general Sounds dubious. Data source for that one?
        lin19 8y ago
        I wish what I said were fiction: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/the-chart-that-shows-how-feminism-is-ruining-womens-lives/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/the-chart-that-s... https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-rights-happiness-wellbeing-gender-gap https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-...
        rixed 8y ago
        The data provided in the first link show that: 1. women are happier every year since ~2010; 2. the gap are closing between women and men reported happiness; 3. we have no data prior to ~2010 so we cannot compare with a situation where women were predominantly housewives (you'd have to go much furhter in the past for the UK I guess). So I don't see how this could support the theory that working women are less happy than housewives. The piece from the Guardian I found more interesting if only for the longer time span considered. And it sites the "dual burden" of work + house chores (trial, with childcare) as the source of the decrease (relative to men) of women happiness. which makes sense. Especially the part about Switzerland is enlightening. But what is compered here is present working women vs present housewives. How would compare the average present women to the average women from 60 years ago is still unknown, and it is not beyond imagination that housewives today also benefit from the more equal standing/rights between men and women in the present time. So, still not convinced that we should go back to a world where women are not expected to work :)
lin19 8y ago
The hidden factor is the racial diversity that has since increased. It has even been found out in many studies that diversity reduces social trust. Reduced social trust -> Less appetite for increased taxes Even now you can see that as long as communities are homogeneous, they can get away with an insane degree of progressive policies that are extremely punishing at an individual level.

by burfog 8y ago

rixed 8y ago

> Large numbers of women entered the workforce. ... With that being the norm now, prices are higher and so people generally aren't financially better off. Women are financially better off.

burfog 8y ago
Before: did the housework, prices were low After: doing the housework, prices are high, also need to work to cover the higher prices, and much of the extra money goes to childcare and transportation and other work expenses That doesn't look like "financially better off" to me. It looks more like being enslaved to landlords and corporate America.
- rixed 8y ago
  I get why, in a world where women depend on men for income, housework fall on women (not only housework but other even nastier things). But in a world where women earn their own income I don't think your can continue to assume that. It's probably more like: Before: was enslaved to men. After: is enslaved to landlords and corporations. That's still progress in many cases, I think.
  - lin19 8y ago
    That "progress" came with things like: Less than replacement level fertility rates More unstable families Higher single men -> leading to higher suicide rates among men Generally unhappier women in general But it's all great because we eliminated the role of a housewife and a mother.
    - rixed 8y ago
      > Generally unhappier women in general Sounds dubious. Data source for that one?
      - lin19 8y ago
        I wish what I said were fiction: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/the-chart-that-shows-how-feminism-is-ruining-womens-lives/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/the-chart-that-s... https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-rights-happiness-wellbeing-gender-gap https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-...
        rixed 8y ago
        The data provided in the first link show that: 1. women are happier every year since ~2010; 2. the gap are closing between women and men reported happiness; 3. we have no data prior to ~2010 so we cannot compare with a situation where women were predominantly housewives (you'd have to go much furhter in the past for the UK I guess). So I don't see how this could support the theory that working women are less happy than housewives. The piece from the Guardian I found more interesting if only for the longer time span considered. And it sites the "dual burden" of work + house chores (trial, with childcare) as the source of the decrease (relative to men) of women happiness. which makes sense. Especially the part about Switzerland is enlightening. But what is compered here is present working women vs present housewives. How would compare the average present women to the average women from 60 years ago is still unknown, and it is not beyond imagination that housewives today also benefit from the more equal standing/rights between men and women in the present time. So, still not convinced that we should go back to a world where women are not expected to work :)

lin19 8y ago

The hidden factor is the racial diversity that has since increased. It has even been found out in many studies that diversity reduces social trust. Reduced social trust -> Less appetite for increased taxes Even now you can see that as long as communities are homogeneous, they can get away with an insane degree of progressive policies that are extremely punishing at an individual level.