Gender pay gap solution: Ban stay-at-home moms

[Ticj]

What?

This is honestly the stupidest idea I think I've ever heard on this site.

I'm not even going to explain myself, it should be obvious.

[Erixi]

What about stay at home dads?

[Hooked]

Let's ban minimum wage and not enough jobs to everyone first.

Lets remove environmental regulations that are destroying jobs.

[May90]

What?

This is honestly the stupidest idea I think I've ever heard on this site.

I'm not even going to explain myself, it should be obvious.

Making being jobless illegal actually has been tried in a lot of communist/socialist countries. The results were... less than satisfactory. I guess people from OP haven't learned history well.

[Tijuana]

If child care is so expensive, and few would deny that it is, doesn't that mean we value child care very much? What happens to the wage gap if we mathematically assign those stay at home mom's the wages they would earn if they were watching kids that were not their own? I suspect we are counting stay at home moms as zero income, and I highly doubt they are being counted at the amount saved, let alone the amount they would earn if it was their job.

[Ticj]

Making being jobless illegal actually has been tried in a lot of communist/socialist countries. The results were... less than satisfactory. I guess people from OP haven't learned history well.

Thinking about it now, it sounds quite a bit like a certain DS9 episode from back in the day.

[Azadina]

Lets remove environmental regulations that are destroying jobs.

Or how about the one big thing: corporate greed.

[Raeph]

Or how about the one big thing: corporate greed.

Just throwing this here...

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-...t-5x-too-high/



If corporate greed is the cause then them evil CEOs really need to be getting greedier. 7.5-3.1% is a sad haul for legal thieves.

[May90]

Just throwing this here...

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-...t-5x-too-high/



If corporate greed is the cause then them evil CEOs really need to be getting greedier. 7.5-3.1% is a sad haul for legal thieves.

This graph looks kinda hollow though, without the absolute values presented. 6.5% profit margin might not look like a lot, but 6.5% from a few dozen billions dollars is quite fat.

Besides, these are medians. What are averages?

[Azadina]

If corporate greed is the cause then them evil CEOs really need to be getting greedier. 7.5-3.1% is a sad haul for legal thieves.

Totally "sad haul". How much is 7.5% out of 10 billion for example? 750 million. You sure you can buy bread with so "little" amounts?

[zephid]

You can't ban "stay at home moms". If someone wants to stay at home and has the means to support that lifestyle they should be allowed to.

[Krixooks]

I can't like OP enough, great find!

also @ all the people in this thread saying "this is ridiculous, enough!", you CLEARLY haven't even read the article which is quite short and succinct.

[Celista]

I don't know why you guys take Xarim seriously, in another thread he claimed that women working/being educated was the cause of all our social ills. Or some such nonsense.

[Charge me Doctor]

afaik woman are not forced to stay at home, man can do that too. I mean, at least in Russia, there is no differentiation between woman and man, there is simply "the person performing the actual care of the child"

[Azadina]

I don't know why you guys take Xarim seriously, in another thread he claimed that women working/being educated was the cause of all our social ills. Or some such nonsense.

Women can't be working obviously because the man always loses half his stuff

For that to be true, no woman anywhere works or owns anything.

[May90]

I don't know why you guys take Xarim seriously, in another thread he claimed that women working/being educated was the cause of all our social ills. Or some such nonsense.

He sometimes says things along the lines, "Women's place is on the kitchen", or, "Women are only interested in rich dominant men". I'm not sure whether he is joking or not...

[Jawless Jones]

Luckily, most progressive won’t go quite that far, though stories like this make me wonder about some of them.

The part that SHOULD have been bolded for emphasis.

This is an entirely hypothetical solution that the author doesn't even think should happen.

A solution that would benefit all families, regardless of their preferences, is an expanded child tax credit. Some families could use the credit to fund child care, allowing both spouses to work. Others might use the credit to make it more affordable for one parent to stay home with the kids. A tax reform proposal from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Mike Lee (R-UT) would expand the current child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,500. A child tax credit helps families do what they, not the government, think is best for them and their kids.

What the author thinks should happen.

Typical flamebait crap that seems to be getting more prevalent on these forums.

[Symphonic]

It’s as if progressives are okay with children being raised collectively but somehow creeped out by actual families.

This is my favorite line. It's totally true. It would be so much more effective to give families with children more with the child-tax credit than to incentivise sending your kids off to daycare. It's win-win, because the extra child-tax credit really could allow mothers the chance to work if that's what they want to do, or not. They are now empowered to make whatever decision they deem best. Most will choose to stay home. This benefits everyone.

[Al Gorefiend]

We should immediately start funding for gene splicing research and by 2020 surgically implant all newborns with both male and female genetic material.

When everyone's a hermaphrodite, there is no gender politics.

That, or we kill all men (except me, of course) the human race will fall to me to usher in the new generation.

4 billion women on Earth, I better get started.

[Symphonic]

If child care is so expensive, and few would deny that it is, doesn't that mean we value child care very much? What happens to the wage gap if we mathematically assign those stay at home mom's the wages they would earn if they were watching kids that were not their own? I suspect we are counting stay at home moms as zero income, and I highly doubt they are being counted at the amount saved, let alone the amount they would earn if it was their job.

Doing the math in our family, if my wife was to work full time, her entire paycheck would go to daycare. So what's the point of sending them to daycare when it is not benefitting monetarily, and only hurting your relationship with your kids by allowing someone else to raise them.