3 ms·

This would imply that women work and get paid, but do not contribute. The reality is that woman who work DO contribute. That is, they produce things for all of

This would imply that women work and get paid, but do not contribute. The reality is that woman who work DO contribute. That is, they produce things for all of us, including themselves. Introducing women to the workforce does not mean there is more money chasing "the same scarce resources" - in fact there is much more stuff for us to buy with our money now, and in fact (all else equal) woman working may drive DOWN the price of good and services.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
> there is more money chasing "the same scarce resources" - in fact there is much more stuff for us to buy with our money now Humans are status seeking, so stuff is not just stuff. People value obtaining products/services that others cannot afford. The most basic example of this is the common advice to “buy the cheapest home in the most expensive neighborhood”. Meaning, if you want your kids to hang out with kids of parents who earn at least as much or more than you, then you bid up housing prices as much as you can to minimize the number of families under a give income level that can afford the homes in the school district. > in fact there is much more stuff for us to buy with our money now, and in fact (all else equal) woman working may drive DOWN the price of good and services. This is also true, and it did drive down the price of many goods and services, including the price of labor itself. But it can also be true that prices for average or below average product/service decline, and above average products/services to increase.
wizofaus 3y ago
Except prior to women joining the workforce they were providing essential services that they weren't being financially remunerated for.
pfannkuchen 3y ago
Goods and services did get cheaper relative to incomes, but there is more money to bid up land prices. I think this aligns with what we have seen happen?

lotsofpulp 3y ago

> there is more money chasing "the same scarce resources" - in fact there is much more stuff for us to buy with our money now Humans are status seeking, so stuff is not just stuff. People value obtaining products/services that others cannot afford. The most basic example of this is the common advice to “buy the cheapest home in the most expensive neighborhood”. Meaning, if you want your kids to hang out with kids of parents who earn at least as much or more than you, then you bid up housing prices as much as you can to minimize the number of families under a give income level that can afford the homes in the school district. > in fact there is much more stuff for us to buy with our money now, and in fact (all else equal) woman working may drive DOWN the price of good and services. This is also true, and it did drive down the price of many goods and services, including the price of labor itself. But it can also be true that prices for average or below average product/service decline, and above average products/services to increase.

wizofaus 3y ago

Except prior to women joining the workforce they were providing essential services that they weren't being financially remunerated for.

pfannkuchen 3y ago

Goods and services did get cheaper relative to incomes, but there is more money to bid up land prices. I think this aligns with what we have seen happen?