We are long past the days of Ozzie and Harriet and Leave it to Beaver where Dad goes to work every day and Mom stays home and raises the kids. Many people who thumb their nose at families where Mom works speak from experiences 20 years ago or live in more rural or less economically vibrant areas.
NOBODY seemed to work on Ozze & Harriet. Ozzie was always hanging around the house.
...and are therefore wrong?
I'm head of a single-income family, so structured in order that we can homeschool our children. Some people deliberately choose this life, even today, and it's not out of ignorance.
Nonsense. We live in an 'economically vibrant area,' 35 miles from NYC.
I stayed at home and raised all four of our children. Homeschooled the youngest. Never had a single problem with any of my kids getting into drugs, alcohol, tattoos, piercings, or any of the other 'fads' so many of their peers --children of dual-career parents-- fell for.
We did all this on ONE income --my husband's. And he doesn't have a fancy degree.
Don't tell me I'm the exception. Lots of stay-at-home/homeschooling moms live in my area. And they live well, if not opulently.
People who insist that you need two incomes to support a family are either lying or delusional. Too bad for their children.
"Many people who thumb their nose at families where Mom works speak from experiences 20 years ago or live in more rural or less economically vibrant areas."
Tea in China?
We've watched society deteriorate horribly as more moms have entered the workforce.
That's only if you buy into consumerist culture. And I speak from experience today in a big city--not as a 70 year old from the sticks perspective. I'm self employed and business has been thru some tough times until a couple of years ago. I would happily live in a rented double-wide before I would send my boy off to day care. I have happily ridden the bus around town when times were tight and eaten mostly rice and beans.
The baubles and the curb-appeal don't mean squat. Beyond a roof over your head and three squares, it's all extras. Sometimes they're fun. But they're extras. Anyone who forgets that usually ends up with their kids in daycare while they try to live the fabulous life.
My wife's family is from rural Mississippi--today. A bunch of them live in double-wides. Frankly, they have their priorities on a lot straighter than the dual-income-one-kid-in-daycare-curb-appeal families I know. If my business went into the toilet, I'd move rural and make it work. Kids belong with their families, not government certified nannies.
I have to disagree with you on this.
If you look at the standard of living they had back then, it in no way equates to the expected standard of living today, and to equal that standard from days of yore, is considerably less expensive than what people expect as normal today.
An example. Your average car today bears little resemblance to the car of the 50's or 60's in way of luxuries. Power windows, AC, power steering, CD/Tape, etc.
Multiply that x1000 for your household items.
If one were to live with only the amenities that those "Ozzie and Harriet" families had then, in all aspects of your life, and eliminate all debt but for house and MAYBE car, you find the costs to be very reasonable and well within range an average single income earner.
For this reason, I've never felt comparisons to family incomes from that time period to be valid.
Our standard of living today is simple SO much higher than it was then, that they cannot be reasonably equated with regard to income.
Extremely expensive housing areas not withstanding, live like they did then, and nearly ANYONE can do it on one income.