3 ms·
I would argue the answer is to offer both men and women the chance to have X time leave per child per Y time worked, that way there's no economic incentive to d
by threatofrain 8y ago
I would argue the answer is to offer both men and women the chance to have X time leave per child per Y time worked, that way there's no economic incentive to discriminate.
- phamilton 8y agoThat still incentivises having children later. Lost growth compounds over a career, so delaying it would still make sense. It would then hurt those who choose children earlier.
- threatofrain 8y agoThat's a problem that may require more policy nuance, but I thought both men and women face a similar modicum of risks for waiting too long for kids, so men cannot get an advantage on women over this.
- phamilton 8y ago> men and women face a similar modicum of risks for waiting too long for kids Sadly, biology disagrees. That aside, the original thread was that those who delay children have fewer children and the conclusion is this situation selects against the things that lead to delaying children. If career ambition is genetic, then each generation will have less of it. At least, that's the theory here.