She's not a dolt. Other articles have pointed out that, after child care and work related expenses, a woman's share of the family income often becomes negligable. And the economy is the same as it was in 1950, that being a free market economy where "we makes our choices and we pays our money." The one omission where I find fault with the article is that it assumes a father for every household. No fault divorce and the feminist drive toward Daddy-state government is fast driving fatherlessness into the rule rather than the exception.
Although this is somewhat true if the kids are in daycare, it doesn't hold water once the kids are in school. My wife is a teacher(they don't make squat) and she tithes, pays her own gas, can buy the kids clothes, and pays our mortgage with her salary so it is well worth her effort to work.
"Poor" Americans [that is, those identified as "poor" by the Census Dept.] today are better housed, better fed, and own more property than did the average U.S. citizen throughout much of the 20th Century. In 1988, the per capita expenditures of the lowest income fifth of the U.S. population exceeded the per capita expenditures of the median American household in 1955, after adjusting for inflation.
http://www.heritage.org/library/categories/healthwel/bg791.html
First of all, we're living in a mixed economy, not a free market economy. Secondly, the cost of living has skyrocketed over the years while real-wage earnings have fallen. I'm not going to quote figures here, because they are readily-avilable elsewhere, but the days when a single breadwinner could support a middle-class suburban family lifestyle are long gone. |