3 ms·

Sounds almost like that if we (putting the hard hat on and hiding under the table) find a way to exclude one parent from workforce, things will get back to norm

Sounds almost like that if we (putting the hard hat on and hiding under the table) find a way to exclude one parent from workforce, things will get back to normal.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
Your reasoning is sound, but I believe it’s untenable in public discourse (for various reasons).
- zaphod12 5y ago
  Forced exclusion sounds terrible. It's about having options, so there is not forced inclusion, which is the trap we've found ourselves in.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    Long term, the fix is to push wages up so single earners can support a family and a stay at home partner. Short term, don’t have kids if you can’t afford expensive daycare and need both incomes to break even.
    - passerby1 5y ago
      How would it work? Maybe I'm wrong, but once wage goes up there'll be prices growth for housing, daycare and other related things because more families is now able to afford it. It's simply the supply-demand equilibrium. So raising a single earner wage does not seem to do anything good, maybe without decreasing at the same time wage for the second earner (which is unacceptable for obvious reasons).
mensetmanusman 5y ago
I’m not sure this is necessary. I wonder if a future advanced society will support women who want to have large families during their college/educational years. Our family had 2 children in the dorms while I was getting my doctorate, and they were a joy for the floor (e.g. we didn’t require the emotional support animals they were sending to every floor). Also, having the communal environment was ideal for finding child care here and there. A situation like this would help such women reach their (per Pew research) goal of ~3. Imagine if you had free tuition if you had a child while in college? Raising children while young is also super helpful activity wise…

3 ms·

Sounds almost like that if we (putting the hard hat on and hiding under the table) find a way to exclude one parent from workforce, things will get back to norm

by AlexTWithBeard 5y ago

Sounds almost like that if we (putting the hard hat on and hiding under the table) find a way to exclude one parent from workforce, things will get back to normal.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
Your reasoning is sound, but I believe it’s untenable in public discourse (for various reasons).
- zaphod12 5y ago
  Forced exclusion sounds terrible. It's about having options, so there is not forced inclusion, which is the trap we've found ourselves in.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    Long term, the fix is to push wages up so single earners can support a family and a stay at home partner. Short term, don’t have kids if you can’t afford expensive daycare and need both incomes to break even.
    - passerby1 5y ago
      How would it work? Maybe I'm wrong, but once wage goes up there'll be prices growth for housing, daycare and other related things because more families is now able to afford it. It's simply the supply-demand equilibrium. So raising a single earner wage does not seem to do anything good, maybe without decreasing at the same time wage for the second earner (which is unacceptable for obvious reasons).
mensetmanusman 5y ago
I’m not sure this is necessary. I wonder if a future advanced society will support women who want to have large families during their college/educational years. Our family had 2 children in the dorms while I was getting my doctorate, and they were a joy for the floor (e.g. we didn’t require the emotional support animals they were sending to every floor). Also, having the communal environment was ideal for finding child care here and there. A situation like this would help such women reach their (per Pew research) goal of ~3. Imagine if you had free tuition if you had a child while in college? Raising children while young is also super helpful activity wise…