Posted on 04/06/2007 2:22:32 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
But if I go back to work and put my kid in daycare I can write it off my income taxes.
Yet because I don't work and sometimes pay a friend to watch my daughter, or pay for her to attend a camp program, I can't claim that on my taxes, because I don't work.
The tax code encourages the 2 income family, in some cases. In our case the tax code is why I didn't go back to work in "the real world."
Not quite true, but it really was World War II that caused women to start working because the men were off to war, but your emotional outburst is interesting.
You have to add in some of our extravagences to the equation.
You said it so much better than I did..........see my post at #27.
What intrigues me is the amount of guilt-tripping that each side of this issue tries to do on the other, to rationalize their own choices. No man could get away with demonizing a group of women the way that women do it to each other.
There are times when the being at home gets to me, which is why I do the Wednesday night volunteer cooking at the Lodge.....it’s my break time. I’ve run the entire gamut of working from home, out of home, etc., since we became parents. Working FROM home is the best, especially now when most of it consists of working AT home.
It was a major blow to our monthly income, especially after we moved when I had no income at all...........but we’ve survived and will continue to do so.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
IMHO, if there is a “flaw” in the system it’s this. If you take a leave of absence or are unemployed for 10 years, you lose all your SS credits.
I worked for 15 years, full time before I had my son and decided to be a stay at home mom when he was born. I stayed home and homeschooled until he went into the dual credit program during high school (so I was unemployed for 15 years.)
When I started back to work, I noticed on the statements that SS sends every so often that once you’ve been out of the work force for 10 years, you lose all your SS credits and you have to start to earn SS credits again (credits that would come into play if you happened to sustain a disability etc.)
I probably wouldn’t have ever paid attention to this, but while I was out of work I was diagnosed with MS. I’m no where near needing to file for disability, I can work just fine. But there are MSers whose disease is more severe than mine.
If they would have been in my same position, they would not be able to receive SS disability even though they had paid in for 15 years prior to deciding to stay home. On the other hand, a young person, just diagnosed that has only paid in for 5 years, could be considered for disability.
My point is, I don’t think it’s right to remove the credits you earned early on in your career, just because you drop out of the work force for a certain period of time.
Written like she might have had her children with her doorman.
G K Chesterton, well said.
“How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No; a woman’s function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness.”
The job is large indeed and vitally important. So why not celebrate and validate its importance? Why the attack on motherhood-as-career/avocation? feminists want to undermine the ‘patriarchy’ and the only way to do that is to dissolve the family. And the center of the traditional family is the dual star of income-creating Dad and child-raising Mom - married of course. Divorce, feminism, economics have eaten away at it, but it is a durable and successful structure. But success has enemies. Never mind that economic conditions and standard of living make it easier not harder to have a 1 income family, its all about status and pride. Such things are more important than the next generation and the family.
Back later...I am off to Tennebrae.
it is truly enough to make a mom’s head spin.
I never paid attention to Ms. Friedan when her little book came out, early in my adulthood. I thought she was a kook then, and her ideas haven't gotten any better with age. If it weren't for stay at home moms, kids in schools would never be able to go on field trips because of the lack of adult supervision, and those kids' education would suffer because there would be no classroom volunteers available.
Of course, Ms. Bennett would truly be horrified to learn that with our younger two, not only did I stay home, but our kids did, too! We've homeschooled our two younger ones since middle school, and I must say, hubby and I have enjoyed the last six years tremendously because we've come to know the kids SO well, and have enjoyed our time with them. And since they were not immersed in the sometimes brutal, mostly negative, and always smart a$$ed teenage culture in high school, they are much more pleasant kids with whom to spend time.
Enjoy yourself, hope to see you later!!!!
An attack on men, there, assuming they will just up and leave and that it is reasonable to set your financial plans around failing marriage. Consider the statistics that show 2/3rds of more of divorces are initiated by women. why is that not mentioned? Why not instead advocate make sure such an event *wont* happen by focussing on that relationship right?
“Work/family arrangements are personal and individual decisions. I think it should be left at that.”
They do have wide social consequences though. Dual income families contribute to inflation if there are enough of them. Entire blocks of empty houses during the day can contribute to crime. There is more sense of community when at least a good percentage of families have one parent available during the day. It is also more difficult for a teenager or pre-teen to get away with poor behavior when many stay at home parents are in the neighborhood.
But, dual income families also increase demand for after school activities, long preschool/school hours, more expensive toys and clothing, and eating out. They have less time to keep gardens, sew, or do many crafts, so that is pushed on the rest of the economy. There are probably millions of jobs that depend on dual income families consuming in the way that they do.
I believe, however, that in general, a good society should encourage stay at home moms, and slightly discourage working moms. This way, the balance doesn’t tip to the point of forcing moms that don’t want to into the workforce and keeps single income families viable for the middle class.
But still mom has to work. I found this very interesting. By Scott Burns....
Since 1954, the size of the United States' tax code has increased by almost 500 percent. Tax regulations created by the Internal Revenue Service have increased in volume by 939 percent, and in April 2006, Americans will spend a combined total of 6.5 billion hours, at an estimated cost of close to $500 billion, in order to simply pay for the privilege of footing Washington's bill.http://www.ndsmcobserver.com/media/paper660/news/2005/11/08/Viewpoint/Abolish.The.Irs-1048611.shtml?norewrite&sourcedomain=www.ndsmcobserver.comIt is time for the FairTax.
It makes mine spin, that’s for sure.
And just why should they work instead of being a Mom?
I wasn’t aware of that either. It doesn’t seem right that you would lose your prior credit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.