3 ms·

in 2010 , "fewer than one in three (28.7 percent) children now have a stay-at-home parent, compared to more than half (52.6 percent) in 1975" [1] With regards

by paletoy 12y ago

in 2010 , "fewer than one in three (28.7 percent) children now have a stay-at-home parent, compared to more than half (52.6 percent) in 1975" [1] With regards to healthcare ,health care in other places in the world is just as good and much cheaper. And about real estate: isn't finding a good job while living in a small town quite a big problem ? [1]http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/two-paycheck-couples-are-quickly-becoming-the-norm/2012/04/18/gIQALSzlRT_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/two-paycheck-couples-...

maxerickson 12y ago
The interesting thing to figure out about the 2 income family thing is how much of it is people choosing to work and how much of it is people working out of necessity. A lot of things have happened in the past 50 years to change how people are making the choice. I have to concede that I haven't provided evidence to dismiss economic necessity as a driver of the change. For healthcare, I tried to frame it in terms of things not having gotten worse. That isn't anything to be terribly proud of, but an angry claim about health care in the U.S. declining since the 1960s needs an awful lot of evidence and should probably be quite specific. There are lots of reasons I think a facile comparison of expense isn't very interesting, but a big one is that high end medicine (test all the things) doesn't have much impact on things like medicaid or access to antibiotics.
- paletoy 12y ago
  Max, surely healthcare(at the level available at the time) was much more affordable in 64. Just at the share of healthcare as part of GDP(which rises at maybe double than inflation for a long time) - the general inequality in society.And people in general are angry about this affordability issue, while greatly appreciating the miracles of medicine(reflected in high end medicine). Also some people are angry about the somewhat lacking quality of medicine. And they are probably right - more affordable/equitable healthcare can be had while still having high quality medicine. And the problem with quality in healthcare is also a problem we can solve much of through better tools and procedures.

by paletoy 12y ago

maxerickson 12y ago

The interesting thing to figure out about the 2 income family thing is how much of it is people choosing to work and how much of it is people working out of necessity. A lot of things have happened in the past 50 years to change how people are making the choice. I have to concede that I haven't provided evidence to dismiss economic necessity as a driver of the change. For healthcare, I tried to frame it in terms of things not having gotten worse. That isn't anything to be terribly proud of, but an angry claim about health care in the U.S. declining since the 1960s needs an awful lot of evidence and should probably be quite specific. There are lots of reasons I think a facile comparison of expense isn't very interesting, but a big one is that high end medicine (test all the things) doesn't have much impact on things like medicaid or access to antibiotics.

paletoy 12y ago
Max, surely healthcare(at the level available at the time) was much more affordable in 64. Just at the share of healthcare as part of GDP(which rises at maybe double than inflation for a long time) - the general inequality in society.And people in general are angry about this affordability issue, while greatly appreciating the miracles of medicine(reflected in high end medicine). Also some people are angry about the somewhat lacking quality of medicine. And they are probably right - more affordable/equitable healthcare can be had while still having high quality medicine. And the problem with quality in healthcare is also a problem we can solve much of through better tools and procedures.