Why is the U.S Labor market so hostile to child rearing?

[yurano]

only if you did not plan for it - dont let greed determine what you need

profits may go down slightly for those few months, but they will return when she does, so be sure to have a plan in place for working with lower profits for a few months

And we wouldn't need military if we had world peace.

How about we make practical arguments, not ones based in fantasy land?

[Total Crica]

And we wouldn't need military if we had world peace.

How about we make practical arguments, not ones based in fantasy land?

mine was practical - plan for it

[Vyxn]

Wrong. Women entering the workforce is the only reason why real household income has held as steady as it has instead of plummeting. There's literally not economic data that supports your statement. Income has for whatever reason become disconnected from productivity in a way never before seen in American history.

two making what at one time it only took one to make
If women entering the work force didn't lower wages then family incomes should have significantly increased not held steady

[Acidbaron]

That's only because they know the Father's don't want to be at home lol

Jokes aside, it means the person is looking for a stable long term job in majority of the cases.

[Acidbaron]

two making what at one time it only took one to make
If women entering the work force didn't lower wages then family incomes should have significantly increased not held steady

Yes, let's forget that wages barely increased and that the cost of living did increase. Blame it on the women it's easier that way, seems to be your thing to do "when i doubt simply find a demographic to blame it on"

[Stacyrect]

I don't know but as a single dad, it sucks ass. My daughter recently had the flu, threw up in school and I had to go pick her up. Went to the pediatrician. Wasn't anything serious, but having to leave work early caused me to get a write up for leaving work early. Employer's are not kid friendly.

[Symphonic]

I think it depends. I don't make very much money (under 50k a year), but because of where I live my wife doesn't have to work. She stays home with our 3 year old and 7 month old. Before I had this job she had to start working when our first kid was only 2 weeks old. When he was about 6 months, we couldn't do it any more, we were never seeing each other (she worked days, I worked graveyard - because we didn't want anyone else to watch our child) - and we decided she should quit her job. The day after she put her notice in, I got a call from a job that I had interviewed for earlier and they wanted to hire me. That was enough to get us through, and I've had a couple raises since then. In any event, it is ridiculous that 6 month paid maternity leave isn't the norm.

I think people should be paid appropriately based on where they live, so families that choose to only have one parent work, it is possible.

[dir]

The real solution is technology: all children produced in vitro, no more pregnancies.

I agree with everything up until this point. The solution is much more simple. Women that want to have children and/or aren't actively trying to avoid it need to face the reality of their place in life. They need to understand that their desire to have it all does not mean that other people should be required to pay for what they desire. If it's an accident, or poor planning, or anything else... it isn't their employers duty to care for them.

This next part is not a response to your post, but I'm combining it with this one to save space.

Imagine this common situation. A person driving through a city with heavy traffic; a long line of cars behind them - all under the control of ill-conceived traffic light timers in a poorly planned city. Another person, attempts to nose into the line of cars via a parking lot that they cut through in order to save time. It's your decision. Do you let the person in front of you and everyone behind you? Do you make that person deal with where they are and wait their turn?

This situation is worth thinking about as a metaphor for the cost of kindness. Many people let the person in to appear kind, or because they feel obligated for some reason. Many people don't think about how inconsiderate it is to force other people to wait even longer because you had to let that dick in.

Is kindness really kindness when displacement isn't even considered? Was the nice thing you did really worth the disrespect you showed to the people effected by your decision? What did you prevent by placing someone before someone else?

The argument to help is often supported by the cost of inaction and acknowledging the unfortunate cost of action is often portrayed as bigoted and unreasonable. It's sad. None of us exist in a vacuum and there are costs for everything.

[Deleted]

My mother had to work, because my father became ill when I was a little child. He felt really guilty bc he couldnt support the family.

Sometimes men cant earn money for their families or maybe they have other dreams than being a engineer or any other career thats provide enough money...

Or there are fathers or mothers who have to raise a child alone? What should they do?

I think you're arguments are short sighted.


And no, I dont care for children at all. But I think a child shouldnt be a problem if you want to go work. In worst case they have to take of their children when there are ill, but cmon, a child doesnt mean you're going to drop out early every month.

[Mistame]

Mean while in Europe.... Both mother and father get months off what they can use seperately, some countries even go as far as giving you a nanny to help with the first month, ranging from 30 to 40 hours per week this person cooks and cleans also not just infant care but also house care.

Good for Europe. But guess what. Outside of basic assistance for low-income families, the only people responsibility for providing for a child are the parents.

The real solution is technology: all children produced in vitro, no more pregnancies.

Clones are not people!

[Anonymous1038853]

Clones are not people!

Just for the sake of clarification: pregnancy in vitro does not necessarily mean that the infant is a clone. The two are unrelated: Hypothetically, you could perform a cloning via surrogacy. All in vitro means is that the pregnancy takes place outside of the body. The term translates to mean "in glass." You would still use the same spermatozoa and ova as you otherwise would. Just the pregnancy would be carried in an artificial womb.

[Mistame]

Just for the sake of clarification: pregnancy in vitro does not necessarily mean that the infant is a clone. The two are unrelated: Hypothetically, you could perform a cloning via surrogacy. All in vitro means is that the pregnancy takes place outside of the body. The term translates to mean "in glass." You would still use the same spermatozoa and ova.

I realize this. The "" denoted satire.

[Anonymous1038853]

I realize this. The "" denoted satire.

Right, and I already figured you realized this. But a common interpretation would be that your satire was with respect to the alleged non-human status of clones, rather than the non-relationship between in vitro fertilization and cloning.

[triplesdsu]

Let me say this, you don't really know how fucked up things are until it happens to you or someone you're close to. It's sad, but true.

I just spoke to my older sister today after a couple months. She's about to have her child any day now. I asked her, "when do you plan on re-entering the labor force?" She replied, "ASAP". I'm pretty sure the APA recommends at least 4 months before a woman enters the labor force after having a kid. Don't matter though, she has to in order to help with living expenses.

My brother in law is no scrub. He makes halfway decent money, but he would be stretched thin due to child-care costs.

How can the labor force impose so much on people for doing what they're fucking programmed to do? Sure, maybe saving some dough before having a kid is ideal. But you know what? Not everyone can do so in a reasonable timeframe. Assuming that you start saving at 18 and starting from the bottom, you're not going to be able to say that "now you're here" until years upon years; interest takes awhile to compound. You get the money saved to address expenses and BAM, you're in your thirties and hitting the reproductive wall. Have fun with that.

Not sure how this is the labor markets fault. There shouldnt be child care cost if your sister had chosen not to work, but if their family is accustomed to a certain lifestyle that requires both to work, then she's choosing to work. People get paid to work, if they arent working then obviously they are going to make less money but again this isnt a reflection of the market as much as the careers they chose and the lifestyle they want. Children are expensive, that is not a secret. However, I am not really sure what your complaint is or how you think it should be.

[alexkeren]

Your arrogance is sickening. The vast majority of American workers do not have anything more than the minimum. To say 'try to work at one of those' ignores the fact that labor in America is extremely weak, and getting weaker. At the same time workers have less power, the government is weakening, not strengthening, worker protections.

Actually you are the arrogant one, or at least ill informed.

Maternity leave, FMLA, etc are easily obtainable and required by law (maternity leave). One should always include as part of their looking for work what benefits they will get at said job. Granted one can't always be picky about what job they end up with, but being aware of what benefits are included and what can be obtained outside the job IS VITAL.

[Captain N]

Actually you are the arrogant one, or at least ill informed.

Maternity leave, FMLA, etc are easily obtainable and required by law (maternity leave). One should always include as part of their looking for work what benefits they will get at said job. Granted one can't always be picky about what job they end up with, but being aware of what benefits are included and what can be obtained outside the job IS VITAL.

FMLA is 12 weeks of unpaid leave and not easily obtainable. You need to work 1250 hours the previous year to be eligible for it. That's fantastic for people who work full time hours but for those who don't they're out of luck Oh and those 1250 hours must be worked within one Company -- you're not eligible if you make those 1250 hours working two separate jobs.

[triplesdsu]

so you want business to be forced to pay women for maternity leave? surely you must realize that will lead to men getting a preference when it comes to hiring. Now I'm not suggesting we just say "fuck them", I think it's something Social security should cover, if we can pay SS to drug addicts and alcoholics certainly we can give it to new families.

I might be mistaken as Im a guy, but I believe women can get disability for a time due to pregnancy. There are also insurance style programs like Aflac that i've search some enroll in ahead of time for additional supplemental income. Too many people here seem to think businesses should be run like charities. They are not, they're goal is to make money. If they dont make money they close and no one makes money. Paying people not to work is generally not a very successful business model unless your business is extremely successful and can afford it as a means to recruit and retain good people.

[Mistame]

Right, and I already figured you realized this. But a common interpretation would be that your satire was with respect to the alleged non-human status of clones, rather than the non-relationship between in vitro fertilization and cloning.

Fair enough.