Actually I think 200 years ago the wage would be something like $3 per week or maybe a month..
I know when I was born in 1961 my dad was making $45 dollars per week and was supporting a stay at home mom and 6 kids.
The dollar today is not what it was 1814. The author is correct that the standard of living has greatly improved for the lowest wage earners or the average working man. But the $3 per day argument is misleading.
in 1812:
the average annual income for an English laborer or farmer in 1800 was around 15-20 pounds.
In the USA, it was $1.96 per month for civilians.
It peaked in 1814 at $2.54 per week.
It then declined to $1.43 per week in 1819.
From another source on the War of 1812:
At the start of the war privates were paid $5 a month, non-commissioned officers $7 to $9, and officers $20 to $200.
To stimulate enlistments, Congress in late 1812 raised the pay of privates and non-commissioned officers by $4. At $8 a month, privates still earned less than the $10 to $12 that unskilled laborers normally made, but as the bounty increased, army wages soared well above the civilian average.
[Quote from Donald R. Hickey, The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989), pp. 76-77. Hickey's footnotes are omitted.]
Actually, to keep up with inflation, an unskilled worker should be making around $70 per hour now, which should be the minimum wage, if you're going to have one.
A skilled worker, such as a technician, finish carpenter, etc., should be making slightly over $100 per hour.
In both cases, the spouses could then stay home.