The Japanese government’s policy to investment in preschool will simultaneously benefits individual families and the international competitiveness of Japanese economy in two ways. First, the family benefits from the additional income and the economy will benefit from the inclusion of workers with skill needed in growth industries such as businesses that requiring higher levels of social skills (see today’s NY Times article in the Update section http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/upshot/how-the-modern-workplace-has-be... second, preschool is dynamic environment for children to practice the social skills they will eventually need to be more successful in the future economy. In short, preschool is our infrastructure.
8
We need to get smarter about birth and birth control here in the USA.
We need both!
Our lives (future lives) are going to depend on this!
We need both!
Our lives (future lives) are going to depend on this!
8
Hmmm. So the cost of child care is high 'sometimes eating up a third of one's take home pay.' And that is presumed to be the reason for a declining number of women in the workplace?
First, child care is not a life long need. When kids go to school that cost plummets.
Second, I know a number of young moms that choose to stay home with their kids. Not a bad idea in my mind.
Third, to complain that care is too high suggests that you don't think caregivers, mostly working women aren't worth the price?
Lastly, having kids is a choice. We make this choice up front knowing that kids are very expensive.
First, child care is not a life long need. When kids go to school that cost plummets.
Second, I know a number of young moms that choose to stay home with their kids. Not a bad idea in my mind.
Third, to complain that care is too high suggests that you don't think caregivers, mostly working women aren't worth the price?
Lastly, having kids is a choice. We make this choice up front knowing that kids are very expensive.
10
I don't think describing the Republican's as having a "tin ear" really does them justice. Perhaps, a "lead ear" and an "ice heart" and topped off with an "wooden head." They make no connection to their War on Women, their relentless war on supporting a complete range of choices in health care and the everyday decisions that women and families have to make to survive. Finally, their penchant for blaming people who are not wealthy. How could anyone, male or female EVER vote for a Republican?
29
For the sake of argument, say Burn-ie gets elected and college becomes [a] free-for-all. Statistically, women graduate college at a higher rate (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/10/31/women-more-likely-... yet still earn less.
Having worked in the public sector on the legal unit for the Feds (EEOC) as an Assistant Investigator, the Equal Pay issue has often been attributed to poor negotiating skills for the salaried positions. https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/02/22/bill-aims-close-gender-w...
This article, however, is more directly en pointe: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/14/on-equal-pay-day-everyth...
Having worked in the public sector on the legal unit for the Feds (EEOC) as an Assistant Investigator, the Equal Pay issue has often been attributed to poor negotiating skills for the salaried positions. https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/02/22/bill-aims-close-gender-w...
This article, however, is more directly en pointe: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/14/on-equal-pay-day-everyth...
1
Gail. what's the idea of writing a serious editorial for Saturday morning? Are you trying to ruin my weekend? So Japan now has 1% more women in the work force than we do? And they have over a year's worth of paid maternity leave? And they are building pre-kindergarten care centers?
American women just need to stop being so lazy, and get more creative. They should use Marissa Mayer as their inspiration. She keeps popping out babies in her middle years, AND is working through her pregnancies to re-float the good ship Yahoo to its pre-2004 glory days. She had a beautiful nursery built right next to her CEO office. Excellent idea.
Can't ordinary women just bring their kids to work, put them in the employee lounge and give them an iPad to keep them busy? You know. kind of like women who bring their kids into the fields while they harvest crops? See, there is more inspiration for American women, and it doesn't cost anything. So, stop whining, all you American women, and get busy being creative in your childcare solutions! When the employee lounge gets full, use any available conference rooms as well. See, this isn't so hard. I feel better about my weekend already.
17
Let's just get down to brass tacks. America is now ruled by mean, stingy, thoughtless, selfish, privileged, disconnected rich jerks who care not a lick that hardworking people are needlessly stressed because they can't find affordable quality caregivers for their kids, senile parents, disabled loved ones or, sometimes, themselves. Pretty much that sums up the problem behind everything, including the lead article in today's NYT that, wow, taxing the 1% might be good.
But I guess it's true money can't buy you everything including, apparently, humanity.
But I guess it's true money can't buy you everything including, apparently, humanity.
31
The more we claim to be exceptional the more we show we are anything but. it is 2015 and there is still no universal health care let alone child care. What there is however is some universal gun care.
25
Japan also needs to encourage women to HAVE babies - their birth rate is plummeting - I suspect that is the real reason Abe is proposing this - Hail Mary Pass to stimulate population growth.
The US needs to do it's own analysis of the needs and impacts of this (rather) dire situation on the work force and population. I have no idea what my kids will do if they need to work and reproduce - because I'll be working.
The US needs to do it's own analysis of the needs and impacts of this (rather) dire situation on the work force and population. I have no idea what my kids will do if they need to work and reproduce - because I'll be working.
2
If I had to sum it up, Japan is always ahead of us in some way and it's a bit like calling Paris. reminding them they are 6 hours ahead, only to have a French woman reply with a sigh, 'well, at least we're ahead of you in some way'.
All my women friends in the US of A. are working hard, whether they want to, or not. They don't have a choice and wonder if they will ever be able to retire. Earlier this week, two friends of forty years and I had a reunion, one is working overtime, she never stops walking, and has yet to find a chair that she likes.
The other 'officially' retired, but keeps getting called back because she is much needed. Her recollection of her flight from Khartoum in the middle of a war was news to my ears and set my hair on fire. She was so busy she forgot to tell me.
None of us are single mothers. Most of my friends have children, some grown and working, living at home with them. Some of us are working and living on food stamps, and one friend who started at 16 wants to take a break and is feeling at odds about it.
A friend who was held hostage in Africa with some others a few years ago by a 'terrorist group of intellects' and came home in one piece, eventually retired, took up volunteer work, only to fall in her apartment the other day, and nearly died. She is up again and walking.
When asked recently what I do for a living, I replied brightly 'nothing' and got stared at for being rude. It is the men who are being fired. or retired.
All my women friends in the US of A. are working hard, whether they want to, or not. They don't have a choice and wonder if they will ever be able to retire. Earlier this week, two friends of forty years and I had a reunion, one is working overtime, she never stops walking, and has yet to find a chair that she likes.
The other 'officially' retired, but keeps getting called back because she is much needed. Her recollection of her flight from Khartoum in the middle of a war was news to my ears and set my hair on fire. She was so busy she forgot to tell me.
None of us are single mothers. Most of my friends have children, some grown and working, living at home with them. Some of us are working and living on food stamps, and one friend who started at 16 wants to take a break and is feeling at odds about it.
A friend who was held hostage in Africa with some others a few years ago by a 'terrorist group of intellects' and came home in one piece, eventually retired, took up volunteer work, only to fall in her apartment the other day, and nearly died. She is up again and walking.
When asked recently what I do for a living, I replied brightly 'nothing' and got stared at for being rude. It is the men who are being fired. or retired.
3
We are the worlds policeman. We spend our trillions on weapons to fight wars. These others get a free ride so they support their citizens and prosper. The military -Industrial guys have a BIG lobby and they are active 24-7 promoting more weapons. The mothers have no lobby, too bad for them.
20
Kind of ironic that people vote against their own best interests. What are people to do? The wake up call might not be too late!
7
The foci of Republicans' women's agenda are, and will remain for the foreseeable future, pointed at other than women's plights in and around the workplace.
For 'the Individual', the Republican Party has for quit some time not been the better of the choices available in which to seek political redress for abuses. Has this Not been made clear?
For 'the Individual', the Republican Party has for quit some time not been the better of the choices available in which to seek political redress for abuses. Has this Not been made clear?
5
The GOP wants grandmothers & grandfathers to step up & take over child care for mothers in the workplace. At the same time they want those same seniors to stay on the job for additional years before retirement as well as seizing & nullifying any private sector pensions & awarding them to executives. Reducing their social security & Medicare are necessary for the fiscal health!
The option is for women to join the military if they want to take advantage of the largest child care network in the country. We must protect Denmark from Vladimir Putin! Inflamed conservative heads are to be soothed!
The option is for women to join the military if they want to take advantage of the largest child care network in the country. We must protect Denmark from Vladimir Putin! Inflamed conservative heads are to be soothed!
15
Dear Ms. Collins,
"Japan has a higher proportion of working women than we do."
Japan also has 195 million less people.
So, possibly, one solution is to get rid of 195 million people and I'll bet the numbers will get better. Of course, where to PUT 195 million people could present a problem but, once more, a solution looms large; a giant "refugee crisis" with Americans running across the Canadian border!
Or, better yet, a "Reverse Illegals Problem" with Americans flooding into Mexico; probably better because Canada has winter and all that cold and ice while Mexico is warm and only has a tiny drug cartel problem.
Then there's the Mars situation; the red planet has water and plenty of space a veritable "clean slate" when it comes to a "land of opportunity" sort of like the "United States Mars Edition".
Better yet, just "cook" the population figures; no immigration needed only some very sloppy counting (Like the solution to "declining test scores"; make the tests EASIER).
It would much easier for our politicians, in between fund raising, to achieve this goal as opposed to really attacking the conjoined problems of poverty, single parents and racism; THAT would require them to, shudder, actually work.
"Japan has a higher proportion of working women than we do."
Japan also has 195 million less people.
So, possibly, one solution is to get rid of 195 million people and I'll bet the numbers will get better. Of course, where to PUT 195 million people could present a problem but, once more, a solution looms large; a giant "refugee crisis" with Americans running across the Canadian border!
Or, better yet, a "Reverse Illegals Problem" with Americans flooding into Mexico; probably better because Canada has winter and all that cold and ice while Mexico is warm and only has a tiny drug cartel problem.
Then there's the Mars situation; the red planet has water and plenty of space a veritable "clean slate" when it comes to a "land of opportunity" sort of like the "United States Mars Edition".
Better yet, just "cook" the population figures; no immigration needed only some very sloppy counting (Like the solution to "declining test scores"; make the tests EASIER).
It would much easier for our politicians, in between fund raising, to achieve this goal as opposed to really attacking the conjoined problems of poverty, single parents and racism; THAT would require them to, shudder, actually work.
8
Childcare is a problem for working PARENTS not working MOTHERS. If we keep talking about the costs of childcare and unpaid family labor (caregiving for others and homemaking) we are part of the problem. It disproportionately affects women who parent alone. Lost income from lost paid labor force participation affects everyone in the family and the economy as a whole. It affects women with partners to the extent that they take on or are given the burden of providing unpaid labor. Why? Because we don't value tasks traditionally performed by women. And one reason women drop out of the labor force more than men? Because they have job skills in areas that are also devalued and are paid less. We need to stop gendering all these roles.
9
I have come to the opinion that we all work too much and that the best thing we could do for ourselves and for the planet would be to spend a lot more time walking, reading and visiting and a lot less time producing and consuming.
9
If this country had instituted any kind of child friendly or young mother friendly program, that would have been a outlier of gigantic proportions.
The powers that be care only about the young if their in the womb.
Beyond that? Fuhgettaboutit!
This is of course the fool's view.
Victorian self-righteousness might sound good at a church supper, but it doesn't actually play in Peoria.
Regrettably, in American life, particularly among shrill conservatives, cruelty towards others is viewed as some sort of badge of authenticity.
It shames us all.
The powers that be care only about the young if their in the womb.
Beyond that? Fuhgettaboutit!
This is of course the fool's view.
Victorian self-righteousness might sound good at a church supper, but it doesn't actually play in Peoria.
Regrettably, in American life, particularly among shrill conservatives, cruelty towards others is viewed as some sort of badge of authenticity.
It shames us all.
11
We are a nation designed for stay at home moms, period. There is no notion of working women as a valued asset. Once a woman has a kid its mommy track time (been there done that, many times). So now you are in a dead end job with long hours, not great pay yet day care is your single largest expense. But also US workers get relatively little time off so, child home sick for 3 days - this is panic mode. School meetings, doctor appointments? All daytime. Working women do not get vacations we use vacation days to take care of this stuff. Its exhausting, so if you can just quit and stay home you would. However I do know many working women who were glad for the job when the husband got laid off (myself included) you still have income and most importantly, benefits. You sort of NEED to be a two working person household but it is a constant struggle in this culture.
17
This is good. Most women didn't want to work, they were forced to by America's decline.
1
Please read "Global Love."
www.defaulttogoodness.com
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Nature, unfortunately---and to the detriment of women---trumps ideology.
www.defaulttogoodness.com
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Nature, unfortunately---and to the detriment of women---trumps ideology.
Several years ago, after working full time for 35 years as a single parent, I retired and was spending a couple of months in the winter at a hostel on Cozumel Island in Mexico. There I met a young couple from Germany with their baby who were taking a year off, with pay, at government expense. They were guaranteed to get their jobs back. Such a fairy tale could only possibly come true in the U.S., at least in part, if Bernie Sanders becomes our President. Here's hoping voters aren't hoodwinked by Clinton happy talk.
9
Corporate interests can not be in front of the families working the equalities market fits well with corporate vision
This issue has depressed men's ability to return to the work force as well. Care expenses put a floor on what job's the parent(s) can take. A lot of stay at home dads were staying at home because (thankfully) their wives could go back to work but the math of care expenses probably prolonged their own layoffs, while they also worked to find a job that even paid to go to work.
4
It goes well beyond a lack of support for women during child rearing years. Those of us over 50, living through layoffs, have a decided lack of opportunity re-entering the work force. The economy has rebounded, but not for everyone.
7
I think the underlying issue is that "being a mother" is not considered a serious endeavor. Rather, it's considered with the same indulgent smile as say, artwork. Women love their children so it's a labor of love; it's not "really work." It's something women do outside the reward of real societal responsibility, like Social Security; now THAT'S there because of the REAL work that realized those benefits.
Strangely, the Republicans - deep down - seem to relish the idea of barefoot and pregnant because given their complete lack of sympathy for working mothers, it would seem that that the sooner they exit the workforce, the better. And that's what's happening, and it's happening because we have substantial Republican influence.
I admit that I think plenty of children are detrimentally coddled these days. I have neighbors that would rather make other neighbors late to work with a horrendous traffic bottle neck of chauffeured kids at the school entrance, than get their kids out of bed early enough to take the tax-paid school bus. But there are plenty of kids that aren't coddled, that come home alone and have struggling parents that can't provide the fundamentals for them. We as a society are only as strong as our next generation, so given the choice, I would rather have indulged kids with bright futures, than those struggling because we don't want to demand legislation or shell out enough dough to help mothers - and dads - raise them.
Strangely, the Republicans - deep down - seem to relish the idea of barefoot and pregnant because given their complete lack of sympathy for working mothers, it would seem that that the sooner they exit the workforce, the better. And that's what's happening, and it's happening because we have substantial Republican influence.
I admit that I think plenty of children are detrimentally coddled these days. I have neighbors that would rather make other neighbors late to work with a horrendous traffic bottle neck of chauffeured kids at the school entrance, than get their kids out of bed early enough to take the tax-paid school bus. But there are plenty of kids that aren't coddled, that come home alone and have struggling parents that can't provide the fundamentals for them. We as a society are only as strong as our next generation, so given the choice, I would rather have indulged kids with bright futures, than those struggling because we don't want to demand legislation or shell out enough dough to help mothers - and dads - raise them.
5
Has it also occurred to anyone that maybe some women just don't want to work, but would prefer to stay at home and raise their children? My daughter, in her 20's and with a fabulous career, says that she, and many of her friends, aspire to someday leave the work force and be at-home moms. That's okay too!
5
What is she talking about? Abortion is legal. She seems to lack perspective. Also, maybe some mothers want to stay home and raise their children, believe it or not.
2
Amen sister. Stay healthy, we need you to help all of us survive this election.
1
The summer my spouse was about to start grad school, when we were so poor we lived in a mobile home with a VW bug parked outside, someone showed up at my door, asking if we were interested in childcare.
I asked how much it cost. "NOTHING" was the reply. It turned out our rural trailer park in upstate NY was part of Appalachia. Who knew? And our tiny town, so small it had only a miniature post office, a church and no bar, was slated for a Head Start program in the church basement.
I was teaching in a tiny school 2 miles away. Did I hesitate to sign up my son?
That childcare was a godsend to us! It was like a miracle! Not only did it involve daycare but even transportation! Summer's too. Which was beneficial as I needed to take grad courses to keep my certification.
The French have wonderful education across the board. Parental leave. Free daycare. Many other nations as well.
You should not have to be poor to qualify for free daycare.
I asked how much it cost. "NOTHING" was the reply. It turned out our rural trailer park in upstate NY was part of Appalachia. Who knew? And our tiny town, so small it had only a miniature post office, a church and no bar, was slated for a Head Start program in the church basement.
I was teaching in a tiny school 2 miles away. Did I hesitate to sign up my son?
That childcare was a godsend to us! It was like a miracle! Not only did it involve daycare but even transportation! Summer's too. Which was beneficial as I needed to take grad courses to keep my certification.
The French have wonderful education across the board. Parental leave. Free daycare. Many other nations as well.
You should not have to be poor to qualify for free daycare.
75
God's beautiful, sweet, caring, loving, fulfilling creatures called "women" should not be viewed as economic entities.
3
Why is more people having to work considered a good thing?
3
This is why we need women columnists. Thank you for being one more voice in the wilderness
5
So, as always: in order for some women to be well-compensated, some other women need to care for their children - cheaply.
4
I was considered a survive-r for the companies I worked for, getting hired not on having the required college background that everyone else was required to have for entering the field, but on my past experience. I advanced and turned down advancement beyond what I wanted to do and that was to build and manage a team... anything higher like director or RVP was rejected. However, for four different companies I worked for was willing to relocate many times where they thought I was needed or wanted to put me. My spouse stayed-at-home and raised the children and went along where-ever the work took us. When we got married we had equal jobs, but not equal pay, so we concluded I should continue working and she would raise the children.
When I lost a job once, due to major closing and downsizing though there was an option to say on and see what happens, I explained that we could go anywhere she wanted, because my background experience was then in demand across the country and overseas. When I took early retirement, we discussed where she wanted to live and that is where we went.
In the life of having an occupation and working at raising a family there has to be give and take, but there is always one that gives more than the other... The stay at home mom or dad.
When I lost a job once, due to major closing and downsizing though there was an option to say on and see what happens, I explained that we could go anywhere she wanted, because my background experience was then in demand across the country and overseas. When I took early retirement, we discussed where she wanted to live and that is where we went.
In the life of having an occupation and working at raising a family there has to be give and take, but there is always one that gives more than the other... The stay at home mom or dad.
14
You're wrong, much has changed from the days of Nixon with respect to the GOP. As bad as he was I would gladly choose him over any of the sad lot they have put together to run for President. Nixon was a progressive and an optimist in comparison to this sorry set. As paranoid as he was , he did not spew the hatred, venom and insensitivity that this crew does. Sure he was for the rich but not solely at the expense of the poor and those in need. How sad is the state of today's Republican Party that I can say we long for the days of Tricky Dick!
18
I'm 100% for paid family leave in the six month range, and wouldpony up more taxes to ensure access by all. That said, it is the cost of childcare for 0-5yr olds and the subconscious lack of support by husbands that cause women to drop out of the workforce., if there even is a husband or partner. Taking care of little adorable but high maintenance kids is really exhausting. Who gets up in the middle of the night? Who does most of the feeding, caring, teaching and logistics of parenting? In rare cases its shared equally. Heading off to work without sleeping to give a big presentation is a nightmare. Been there too many times to count. I wish I could have taken a leave for a couple years, but everyone knows that if you do that, you'll never get back on a decent career track.
17
I struggled throughout my career with childcare costs and juggling responsibilities... and I wondered why there was no discussion about it. Why, for example, could a desk be a deduction while child care was just a tax credit? Now the #s are worse, but at least the conversation has started.
We need need more women in government. Without more equal representation, women's concerns will have neither the attention they deserve nor adequate consideration for the depth or breadth of the issues. Women are as different as men are different, as is evidenced by the comments here-- and they deserve to have their voices heard.
We need need more women in government. Without more equal representation, women's concerns will have neither the attention they deserve nor adequate consideration for the depth or breadth of the issues. Women are as different as men are different, as is evidenced by the comments here-- and they deserve to have their voices heard.
17
To get the right answer you have to ask the right question. The right question is "Why are wages in the USA so low that it requires two earners to provide a decent standard of living?"
22
Now we wait for the hysterical to chime in about "if you can't afford a child, don't have one" and "if you don't want to raise your child yourself, don't have one" (the latter never directed at the father of the family, of course) and "why should I have to pay for your kid? Nobody gave me anything."
This is usually from the generation that got their public college education 75% paid for by the taxpayer and had a minimum wage that was $20/hr in today's dollars (those figures are circa 1970 or so.)
Guess what? If the minimum wage was still $20/hr, and college cost 1/3 of what it does now, we probably wouldn't have to be subsidizing people's childcare. This is just one more way that ordinary middle class people are struggling. Telling them to start thinking of children as a luxury item is part of the bizarre "it's your fault for not being wealthy" trend that the wealthy love to encourage -- like telling the middle class they shouldn't expect to afford to live in NYC, or to go to a private college, and where did they get these crazy ideas that they should be able to have a kid or two?
If that's your "new normal" then you are lowering your standards for decent society. Count me out.
This is usually from the generation that got their public college education 75% paid for by the taxpayer and had a minimum wage that was $20/hr in today's dollars (those figures are circa 1970 or so.)
Guess what? If the minimum wage was still $20/hr, and college cost 1/3 of what it does now, we probably wouldn't have to be subsidizing people's childcare. This is just one more way that ordinary middle class people are struggling. Telling them to start thinking of children as a luxury item is part of the bizarre "it's your fault for not being wealthy" trend that the wealthy love to encourage -- like telling the middle class they shouldn't expect to afford to live in NYC, or to go to a private college, and where did they get these crazy ideas that they should be able to have a kid or two?
If that's your "new normal" then you are lowering your standards for decent society. Count me out.
133
Our goal should be to create an economy that enables two parent middle class families to *choose* to have one parent to do the incredibly difficult job of raising kids at home. Many moms or dads would love to stay home, but just can't, and need to get very creative with childcare. Mortgages are too high, rents too high, cost of living too high, everything is too expensive while salaries have remained stagnate. I would argue that having kids in childcare is not as good for our economy, long-term, than having the luxury of having one parent stay home to raise kids--either mom or dad, or mom or mom, or dad or dad.
Maybe a sign of a good economy is when ONE middle class salary can support the bills. It use to be that way. Let's support families by increasing wages so a parent may stay home--and work!--raising kids how they want.
Maybe a sign of a good economy is when ONE middle class salary can support the bills. It use to be that way. Let's support families by increasing wages so a parent may stay home--and work!--raising kids how they want.
7
If child care and elder care are regular full time jobs, they are likely to cost just as much as what one can make by taking any other regular full time job.
3
When I was driving a cab in the suburbs of Boston, I met many women with children that are on welfare or supported by the state. They can't afford to work because of the cost of childcare and each child increases their income. It makes more sense for them to stay on welfare than to work. They look at having a child as an opportunity for a free ride. They get a free apartment, free cab rides, food stamps, and more. If they get a minimum wage job they can't afford child care, or anything else. Better to have nothing and live off the system. This is the American system. Appalling! I would like to bring these Republicans in the cab for a day to see firsthand what these people endure. More cost effective to have a baby than work.
9
Dear Molly, I would first suspect the dearth of decent jobs is the issue.
5
I don't have the statistics for this, but I think that many daycare workers are making minimum wage or close to it. That's a shame - it's an important job! Yet by all accounts daycare is prohibitively expensive. Something wrong here.
16
Has any journalist in any national media outlet ever asked outright any Republican politician who is pro-birth but anti-maternity leave, anti-early education, anti-student loan relief, anti-birth control, anti-abortion, anti-women's health care, anti-regular folks in general and anti-regular women in particular--has any journalist ever demanded to know how this Republican sees our society in five, ten, twenty years? What is the plan here, the goal? Ask in a venue where everybody in the country can see and hear, and demand an answer!
40
It is very difficult to afford to raise a child in Japan. Marriages are being delayed and healthcare costs for elderly parents are an issue.
7
There are also those of us you leave to care for elderly parents. It's a blessing to be able to do this, but it does make professional full-time work almost impossible as the care needs are very unpredictable.
15
When my wife and I married, she gave up her jobs teaching at two universities and was "at home" for the next 16 years. Our children were lucky enough to have their mother at home. Now that the children have grown, she is a professor again.
But in those days, just MY salary allowed us to live in a 2.5 bedroom apartment in Brookline, MA. Now my daughter and her husband both have jobs and are living in a tiny apartment in Brooklyn.
So what happened to all the extra money that female employment brought to the families? It has gone somewhere, but surely not to the families. Some will say it has gone to the 1%. Others to our costly wars. Others to our costly and ever rising medical expenses.
But that families were better off then in the late sixties is something which I have seen with my own eyes.
But in those days, just MY salary allowed us to live in a 2.5 bedroom apartment in Brookline, MA. Now my daughter and her husband both have jobs and are living in a tiny apartment in Brooklyn.
So what happened to all the extra money that female employment brought to the families? It has gone somewhere, but surely not to the families. Some will say it has gone to the 1%. Others to our costly wars. Others to our costly and ever rising medical expenses.
But that families were better off then in the late sixties is something which I have seen with my own eyes.
154
Why do women keep voting for legislators who talk about "family values" while offering policies which do not support families?
32
Gail, I'm not certain you should refer to it as parental leave if it only applies to women / mothers.
4
Thanks for talking about an important issue, Gail. Don't stop!
7
I have observed this problem with my daughter and daughter in law. Both have very good high paying jobs, but the cost and balancing act they go through to obtain quality child-care is a continual challenge. There is no question that their careers have been somewhat marginalized working in a male dominated environment that views child care as an annoyance that they have to put up with.
21
Child care is a full time job that requires a living wage if the parents don't do it, and elder care is a full time job that requires a living wage if children don't do it.
21
At least women are "expected" to care about their children. Try being a man who requests parental leave, or even leaves work on time to pick up his children from daycare.
117
Without drawing fire from the crowd, could someone tell me what the benefit is to the worker without kids who has to cover for the parent who leaves work to pick up the child or who takes child care leave? And don't tell me I will feel better about myself because I have promoted a socially just cause.
18
On top of all this, as an early childhood educator working at one of these expensive schools, I live paycheck to paycheck because my wages barely allow me to keep my head above water. I absolutely love what I do, but I am not sure I can do it forever.
23
Ya know, Gail, this nation just can't get out of the 1950's. Republicans view that decade as our finest time, when men could make enough income so that women could stay home and be discriminated against in the work force.
The high cost of child care means that, once again, the wealthy greatly surpass 99% of the population. Providing family support is an investment in this nation. It moves this nation forward economically, as you write.
So here it is, 2015, and we have a group of Republican presidential wannabes who want to take us backwards. Yes, nothing has changed.
The high cost of child care means that, once again, the wealthy greatly surpass 99% of the population. Providing family support is an investment in this nation. It moves this nation forward economically, as you write.
So here it is, 2015, and we have a group of Republican presidential wannabes who want to take us backwards. Yes, nothing has changed.
27
Again, another column that completely ignores the fact that fathers are not stepping up to their child care responsibilities. It's an unending loop. Women make too little to justify the child care cost, so they leave their jobs to take care of the children, forgoing promotions and raises for years, so they will always make less than their husbands. How about we find a bunch of couples and ask them directly whether there was ever a serious discussion about the man leaving his job, interrupting his career for 10, 15 years? Yes, the cost of good child care is high. But why is it always the woman's problem to solve?
120
Coupled with the high cost of child care, there is (still) the disparity in pay between men and women. This makes the decision for a woman to consider returning to work even more difficult, since as you pointed out that the expense of childcare can exceed income gained. Elect a Republican President and absolutely nothing will change for women, except there will be even more womb laws.
22
And the lack of affordable, high-quality child care is also at the core of dropping birth rates. You really can't afford to have children these days if your family friends on your income.
41
Another embrassment for our country...as many parts of the world try to make progressive moves on this issue, we are looking backwards. I have seen for years how women struggle to keep up with employer demands while crazing over getting home to pick up their kids and keep a household. and those were the married ones who I would have thought had at least some iota of help from their husbands. Often, as manager, I would say to them go, I will pick up the slack here. I see it now in education, where demands are growing, and principals are demanding more nad more, so much that many women are putting in 8 hours at home to complete tasks, while having to meet family demands a well. Nothing has changed, and I think its actually gotten worse as the demands of the workplace grow. No wonder so many women have possibly given up and just decided to choose family over work. Our backward society is winning, but only because there is no other choice.
11
The issue is not just economic but psychological as well. Without a job and a career (the two unfortunately are not always the same) a woman is nothing. Children are great - I have two - but being a mother is not a job description. It is part of the normal human life-cycle of being a child, a parent, a friend, a spouse that should come in addition, not instead, of making something out of oneself by participating in the economic and social activity of the country and the world. When my kids were small, literally everything I made went into child care. Not only did it keep me sane, as I hated changing diapers, but it enabled me to have a good career and to take care of myself economically later in life. Nor do I see that it had any adversary effects on my kids. But had I been told it would, I would still do the same. You only have one life. Once you sacrifice your career, it is not coming back. Women in countries like Israel and most parts of Europe understand it very well. There isn't a question of whether to go back to work but only when (3 months or 6 months).
7
Collins column ignores several important realities.
America's fertility rate is much higher (1.9 versus 1.4) than that of Japan. That will affect the need for and consequently the source of childcare.
There is no breakdown of the relative pay of Japanese women to that of Japanese men compared to the equivalent American ratio. That affects a number of things including the financial importance of a two-worker household.
There is no indication of the change in the ratio of American women's pay to that of American men, not just the ratio of those working. The possibility of financial advancement will affect many people's decisions as to the value of low compensated employment.
The vast cultural differences between Japan and the U.S. greatly affect gender based role evaluations.
America's fertility rate is much higher (1.9 versus 1.4) than that of Japan. That will affect the need for and consequently the source of childcare.
There is no breakdown of the relative pay of Japanese women to that of Japanese men compared to the equivalent American ratio. That affects a number of things including the financial importance of a two-worker household.
There is no indication of the change in the ratio of American women's pay to that of American men, not just the ratio of those working. The possibility of financial advancement will affect many people's decisions as to the value of low compensated employment.
The vast cultural differences between Japan and the U.S. greatly affect gender based role evaluations.
4
Gail writes a serious column about a serious topic. I do see some humor in various corners of it ... bur probably it isn't Gail Collins material -- probably more Joan Rivers.
It's worth asking why people work , and how much they work -- not just women. I know a couple who are 20-something ski-bums, they both work just enough to keep it going, at the moment no idea of kids or settling down or having a higher-cost-of-living life. They're sports bohemians.
I know two families where the women are the "bread-earners" and the men are the home-makers and have fill-in work.
I spent a decade as a single dad, raising a child -- increasingly common. I can tell you that being a single parent and raising a child is very hard, and there are endless compromises -- being a parent vs the work -- so much so that one never feels at peace about it.
When women or men don't work -- it's often a complex set of tradeoffs, that the work isn't rewarding enough to justify it's costs, and the people in question are not living at the bottom, where there is no other choice -- somebody is working.
If one is asking why fewer women work in the US than other countries, it isn't all about child care, though that matters. It's about the jobs and working conditions too. -- Japan has a desperate labor shortage ... no surprise employers make conditions better. The US has not fully recovered from the recession -- lots of people are still underemployed, wages are not good -- what's the surprise?
It's worth asking why people work , and how much they work -- not just women. I know a couple who are 20-something ski-bums, they both work just enough to keep it going, at the moment no idea of kids or settling down or having a higher-cost-of-living life. They're sports bohemians.
I know two families where the women are the "bread-earners" and the men are the home-makers and have fill-in work.
I spent a decade as a single dad, raising a child -- increasingly common. I can tell you that being a single parent and raising a child is very hard, and there are endless compromises -- being a parent vs the work -- so much so that one never feels at peace about it.
When women or men don't work -- it's often a complex set of tradeoffs, that the work isn't rewarding enough to justify it's costs, and the people in question are not living at the bottom, where there is no other choice -- somebody is working.
If one is asking why fewer women work in the US than other countries, it isn't all about child care, though that matters. It's about the jobs and working conditions too. -- Japan has a desperate labor shortage ... no surprise employers make conditions better. The US has not fully recovered from the recession -- lots of people are still underemployed, wages are not good -- what's the surprise?
7
If cars weren't deeply embedded into our national psyche, fueled literally and figuratively by the oil companies, no doubt women wouldn't be allowed to drive. Exceptions would be to take the kids to school, to doctors' appointments, to soccer and piano lessons. But perhaps I misjudge the legislative bodies: they might be thrilled their ladies lunch and shop to keep them pacified.
I know some incredibly smart, talented and sometimes driven (not chauffeured) women to whom many smart talented and driven men I know can take no back seat. We, as a society and as a country, and for that matter the entire world, are far better off with their enormous contributions and achievements.
And unless I am mistaken, women can bear children. I have yet to meet the man who can match that accomplishment.
Yes, the GOP collection would relish a strict patriarchy. But it is just another one of the ingredients to their recipe for relish we should eschew.
I know some incredibly smart, talented and sometimes driven (not chauffeured) women to whom many smart talented and driven men I know can take no back seat. We, as a society and as a country, and for that matter the entire world, are far better off with their enormous contributions and achievements.
And unless I am mistaken, women can bear children. I have yet to meet the man who can match that accomplishment.
Yes, the GOP collection would relish a strict patriarchy. But it is just another one of the ingredients to their recipe for relish we should eschew.
13
The lack of maternal leave and child-care are valid problems, but are certainly not the only things that have led to the decreasing fraction of women working - the fraction of men of working age in the work force has also declined severely since 2000. Is this a result of policies or lack thereof such as maternal leave or to more pervasive economic and/or sociological factors? Policy-makers and economists seem remarkably incurious about this. As Gail says, other countries have not had the problem.
7
I just hope women (and all of us) will make a better showing in the general election than in the recent midterms. This will anger some readers but the percentage of no shows at the polls was heartbreaking. We all need to take political responsibilities seriously. If we could somehow have a miracle turnout next fall we could do something about child care including all day kindergarten and adequately funded schools and after school programs. Where I live these things are a bad joke, enough to make parents and teachers despair.
I recently learned that a 67 year old friend of mine with a dependent adult child is not registered to vote. A liberal leaning women with a masters degree in english working in education can't be bothered to vote in our vote by mail state. We had a fairly intense row about it and I simply cannot understand her attitude.
I recently learned that a 67 year old friend of mine with a dependent adult child is not registered to vote. A liberal leaning women with a masters degree in english working in education can't be bothered to vote in our vote by mail state. We had a fairly intense row about it and I simply cannot understand her attitude.
18
If I understand this column correctly:
You are suggesting that Federal Dollars and Private Wealth underwrite infant and toddler care so more women are then freed up from those daylight responsibilities, right?
And this would put them on equal footing with men, who do not have such responsibilities and therefore are free to compete for jobs and work at jobs
unburdened.
And what do men get out of this brilliant, equitable plan?
You are suggesting that Federal Dollars and Private Wealth underwrite infant and toddler care so more women are then freed up from those daylight responsibilities, right?
And this would put them on equal footing with men, who do not have such responsibilities and therefore are free to compete for jobs and work at jobs
unburdened.
And what do men get out of this brilliant, equitable plan?
2
You are absolutely correct, Peter. It is ridiculous for women to work alongside Neanderthals such as your friends and yourself. (Actually, I'm probably maligning a society with greater equality of the sexes than is evident in this day and age.) Women, delicate and helpless, should remain locked in their cages until you need to enter them to satisfy your needs.
1
Oh, Gail! Business loved it the day women went to work --- they could hire a lady for half of what they paid a man, and guess what, there went the other man's wages, whether his wife wanted to stay home or not.
Then, the women yelled and screamed for equal pay, which any person doing the job of any other person deserves the same pay, but, of course, we learned the women were just as greedy as the men, because equal pay wouldn't apply to the lady taking care of their children.
Until...... and now, outrageous childcare. But as far as I am concerned, the lady taking care of your children deserves everything you can make and then some.
So, what do the young families, like my daughter's, do? They enlist the help of grandparents, because they cannot afford the cost of daycare. But, it is not even about daycare --- kids get a little age on them and they become involved in sports and activities and they need a ride here, a ride there. (Rural America's activities are not around the corner and up the elevator.)
Gail, I am "Grandma" and I am flat out exhausted. I bought into this cockamamie nonsense for my daughter, (sent her to school -- great job, nice things) but I will be dead trying to care for the kids. Yesterday, arthritis and all, I toted around my one and a half year-old granddaughter, all day. My only vacation is their vacation. I went part-time with the youngest and now my kids are without $140 a week. The ladies were cuckoo! (Look up cuckoo bird!).
Then, the women yelled and screamed for equal pay, which any person doing the job of any other person deserves the same pay, but, of course, we learned the women were just as greedy as the men, because equal pay wouldn't apply to the lady taking care of their children.
Until...... and now, outrageous childcare. But as far as I am concerned, the lady taking care of your children deserves everything you can make and then some.
So, what do the young families, like my daughter's, do? They enlist the help of grandparents, because they cannot afford the cost of daycare. But, it is not even about daycare --- kids get a little age on them and they become involved in sports and activities and they need a ride here, a ride there. (Rural America's activities are not around the corner and up the elevator.)
Gail, I am "Grandma" and I am flat out exhausted. I bought into this cockamamie nonsense for my daughter, (sent her to school -- great job, nice things) but I will be dead trying to care for the kids. Yesterday, arthritis and all, I toted around my one and a half year-old granddaughter, all day. My only vacation is their vacation. I went part-time with the youngest and now my kids are without $140 a week. The ladies were cuckoo! (Look up cuckoo bird!).
42
Isn't this still the same path women (and now frequently men) must choose in our imperfect world? First, a woman/man has the choice of having a career, a child, or both. If a child is chosen, the choice is made in the dynamic that exists right now: the burden will be large, the greater still for each additional child. Yes, jobs and careers are perilous. The wisest choice is to have a partner to share the duties and the joy. And yes, that partnership is perilous too. It's life, Gail. You can legitimately agitate for a different reality, but please don't tell me that those who have made their choices are victims of an indifferent capitalism. The options haven't changed that much over the years. And lest I be branded a Conservative, notice I said a child is a choice.
Live with it.
Live with it.
5
The Scandinavian countries--those hotbeds of socialism cited by Bernie Sanders--have both maternal leave and paternal leave. And, they have parental leave that can be used by either parent.
Among the most generous are provided in Norway. A mother can take 35 weeks of maternal leave at 100% salary or 45 weeks at 80% salary. A father can take fourteen weeks of paternal leave at 100% salary. Parental leave--for either parent-can be taken on other occasions on similar terms. And It's paid through their Social Security system.
In Scandinavia, both the mother and the father are recognized as important in their roles of raising children. Now there's a radical idea.
Among the most generous are provided in Norway. A mother can take 35 weeks of maternal leave at 100% salary or 45 weeks at 80% salary. A father can take fourteen weeks of paternal leave at 100% salary. Parental leave--for either parent-can be taken on other occasions on similar terms. And It's paid through their Social Security system.
In Scandinavia, both the mother and the father are recognized as important in their roles of raising children. Now there's a radical idea.
26
Gail notes that the major impediment is the cost of child care. Some of that cost must be going to those who provide child care ... mostly women. This is our current economic balance point.
Why do we desire to get more women in the work force? If our objective is some form of fairness or symmetry, we can get to that by subsidizing child care through government money or corporate plans. But this is an economic loss, in that it diverts money (from government or businesses) that would have been used for other purposes.
If our objective in getting women in the work force is purely economic, then we'll have to make child care more efficient. That can be done through larger groups, a reduced caregiver-to-child ratio, and other innovations. We should remain open to suggestions.
Why do we desire to get more women in the work force? If our objective is some form of fairness or symmetry, we can get to that by subsidizing child care through government money or corporate plans. But this is an economic loss, in that it diverts money (from government or businesses) that would have been used for other purposes.
If our objective in getting women in the work force is purely economic, then we'll have to make child care more efficient. That can be done through larger groups, a reduced caregiver-to-child ratio, and other innovations. We should remain open to suggestions.
I would also add that childcare for older kids is totally nonexistent. We patch together s system of rides, shifting work hours and latch key to manage our teens. Yes, they are teens but they need supervision and rides after school. This country is awful in how it treats families and the right is the worst - they cloak themselves in the banner of family yet tear it down every chance they get.
11
Apparently the GOPs job is to make sure you're born then make sure you're miserable.
19
I have a masters degree. I have friends with RN's, law degrees, and other advanced degrees, all whom are not working but raising their children after doing the cost/benefit analysis of work Vs childcare costs. We all decided to cut costs, go without the latest gadgets/phones, cable tv, designer handbags, and stay at home. We are all very lucky that we CAN do this, but at the same time, unlucky that we have to have this huge hole in our careers.
Childcare is so expensive, it's not worth it for us to work.
Childcare is so expensive, it's not worth it for us to work.
10
Can we finally just face up to the fact that American exceptionalism lies only in the zeal with which we cling to the 17th and 18th centuries.
I realize I have cast that net pretty wide and many will say that only one of our political parties is stuck in the past; to which I say to the rest of us "let's throw those bums out, then." But we don't. In 2010 progressives stayed home allowing a small loud minority to hold the government hostage. Had the numbers of voters who elected Obama voted in 2010 we would be well on our way to a real progressive golden age.
Because it is not just women who are under represented in the work force and in the wages department. Had congress authorized spending on infrastructure to the degree our nation cries out for it we would see full employment with rising wages.
Of course, had congress done such a thing the credit would have gone to Obama, at least in part, and those traitors would have none of that.
I realize I have cast that net pretty wide and many will say that only one of our political parties is stuck in the past; to which I say to the rest of us "let's throw those bums out, then." But we don't. In 2010 progressives stayed home allowing a small loud minority to hold the government hostage. Had the numbers of voters who elected Obama voted in 2010 we would be well on our way to a real progressive golden age.
Because it is not just women who are under represented in the work force and in the wages department. Had congress authorized spending on infrastructure to the degree our nation cries out for it we would see full employment with rising wages.
Of course, had congress done such a thing the credit would have gone to Obama, at least in part, and those traitors would have none of that.
16
The cost of child care has risen, while middle class income has stagnated or declined. Decent jobs are not available for many young people anyway, they've been automated or sent overseas. The 40 hour week and established, reliable work schedules have been done away with by the business community, who do not in fact believe in 'family values' no matter how often they claim to. Why try to pursue a useful career, unless you can move to Switzerland or Denmark?
9
I actually found this article confusing. Not the part about the high cost of child care / early childhood education. Should the government help bring the cost down? Yes. And there should be more generous parental leave laws.
I think I'd be less confused if Gail cited some statistic showing that with more generous parental leave women would not drop out of the workforce so disproportionately -- i.e., data to show that making it easier for women to stay home makes them return to work more.
Gail also asserts that lower childcare costs would make significantly more women participate in the labor force. I mean, it stands to reason. But without citing any data, it could be argued, e.g., that our national prosperity allows more women to stay home -- because they want to stay home and they can -- and that that's the major cause of the lower labor force participation. Another counterargument: it'd be so expensive to provide those benefits that the net economic impact would be really bad.
Clearly, more generous leave policy and more government subsidized child care would be appreciated by a lot of parents. But would it yield a robust improvement in women's workforce participation? And would it justify the cost? I mean, if you want to persuade, cite a little data.
I think I'd be less confused if Gail cited some statistic showing that with more generous parental leave women would not drop out of the workforce so disproportionately -- i.e., data to show that making it easier for women to stay home makes them return to work more.
Gail also asserts that lower childcare costs would make significantly more women participate in the labor force. I mean, it stands to reason. But without citing any data, it could be argued, e.g., that our national prosperity allows more women to stay home -- because they want to stay home and they can -- and that that's the major cause of the lower labor force participation. Another counterargument: it'd be so expensive to provide those benefits that the net economic impact would be really bad.
Clearly, more generous leave policy and more government subsidized child care would be appreciated by a lot of parents. But would it yield a robust improvement in women's workforce participation? And would it justify the cost? I mean, if you want to persuade, cite a little data.
1
Our nation's declining birth rate is likely linked to the economic dilemma of working primary caregivers. For better or worse our nation depends on an ever-growing economy and an ever-growing economy requires an ever-growing population.
For decades we avoided addressing our declining birth rate with immigrants who tend to be younger and have more children. But net immigration from Latin America has slowed to a trickle since we blew up our economy. So what do we do now?
For decades we avoided addressing our declining birth rate with immigrants who tend to be younger and have more children. But net immigration from Latin America has slowed to a trickle since we blew up our economy. So what do we do now?
2
The US can import as many educated skilled immigrants as it wants and needs.
1
I have been a working mother since my children were born and now supervise women with small children. I try to be understanding about time off requests but it seems the women almost always are the ones calling in for sick kids, requesting time off for teacher conferences and well child check ups. I dread when my phone rings in the morning because someone is unable to come to work. Truthfully, I love middle aged employees whose kids are grown. They are very dependable and hard working.
6
Carson and the other Republicans seem to think that the only legitimate purpose of government is to drop bombs on other countries. The social democracies of the world provide better lives for their citizens than does the government of this country with its Wild West ethics of every man for himself. I am reminded of Tom Selleck's last statement to the bad guy in Guigley Down Under, just before the gunfight. "This ain't Dodge City and you ain't Bill Hickok".
9
No matter what measures, policies, programs. etc. we put in place, the business community will find a way to undo society's wishes.
8
The simple Republican response to improving the economy is to reduce taxes on the wealthy. The concept is that they are the job creators - except that they are not because consumer spending, not offshore investments, is the job creating mechanism. We all create jobs by earning and spending.
11
It is just as clear as it can be - if you pay any attention at all, which I guess most of us don't - we have GOT to get the GOP back in the minority position from which they function best, if at all. Businessmen belong in business.
They cannot govern. They are terrible, rotten, awful at it. They don't know how to negotiate and can't compromise. All they know is giving orders and manipulating people with false advertising. They are killing us as a nation. They are killing the planet and they support - loudly and constantly - our killing each other.
Please, folks, it is in your own best interest if you want a job, a living wage, clean air, clean water, safe roads and bridges, at least decent schools, and - yes - reliable, safe day care so mom and dad can both work to vote in Democrats in large numbers. We need a huge Democratic wave election next year. Hint: even economists are saying it.
They cannot govern. They are terrible, rotten, awful at it. They don't know how to negotiate and can't compromise. All they know is giving orders and manipulating people with false advertising. They are killing us as a nation. They are killing the planet and they support - loudly and constantly - our killing each other.
Please, folks, it is in your own best interest if you want a job, a living wage, clean air, clean water, safe roads and bridges, at least decent schools, and - yes - reliable, safe day care so mom and dad can both work to vote in Democrats in large numbers. We need a huge Democratic wave election next year. Hint: even economists are saying it.
18
The elephant in the room in all child care discussions are the Working Women who DO paid child care .... and who mostly earn slave wages doing it. As expensive as child care is, and as much of a drag that cost is on a woman's ability to work, the money is not going to the Working Women who DO it.
It's a true conundrum - how can we fairly compensate the Working Women who care for children while also lowering the costs for all the Working Women who do the presumably "more important" work that caregiving Working Women make possible?
It's a true conundrum - how can we fairly compensate the Working Women who care for children while also lowering the costs for all the Working Women who do the presumably "more important" work that caregiving Working Women make possible?
11
The problem is two-fold. Families cannot afford childcare, and a woman who takes time off to raise children has a harder time returning to the workplace.
So if you stay home for a period of time until your kids are in toddler care or pre-school, you have lost your marketable edge. You have that gap in your resume, that the computerized resume reader automatically uses to punt the resume out of the system.
I have read opinions that our policies are fair, because childbearing is a personal choice. Can I charge the future elderly for providing them with a source to pay for their social security and medicare? They made a choice to retire. Yes, yes, it is sarcasm.
It is all about how we choose to value things in our society. And right now, anything that doesn't produce an immediate cash return on investment, and cannot be monetized is valueless. And that is why women are falling out of the workforce.
So if you stay home for a period of time until your kids are in toddler care or pre-school, you have lost your marketable edge. You have that gap in your resume, that the computerized resume reader automatically uses to punt the resume out of the system.
I have read opinions that our policies are fair, because childbearing is a personal choice. Can I charge the future elderly for providing them with a source to pay for their social security and medicare? They made a choice to retire. Yes, yes, it is sarcasm.
It is all about how we choose to value things in our society. And right now, anything that doesn't produce an immediate cash return on investment, and cannot be monetized is valueless. And that is why women are falling out of the workforce.
17
Not in this conversation is that this is all about married women. Most singles working on only one salary must cover the cost of maintaining a household. A household shared even by a family is less per person than the cost of a single person. Even so, singles are increasing. Why? Work now does not support conditions favorable for dating let alone even thinking of starting a family. In the world of nature this is like a plant so lacking in soil water and light the biological mechanism to flower and make seeds goes untripped.
At the same time we scorn women who bear children single, we also scorn women who are unwilling to permanently encumber their lives when the means to support those children are so insecure. Men's insecurity with their work only adds to the insecurity of women who facing facts must subtract a man's contribution to child bearing and rearing because it simply cannot be counted on no matter how good the man is. In this economy anyone can be pushed into ruin. Therefore, everyone is at greater risk of having children in poverty. The number of children now living in poverty proves this case.
All salaries must support a household for the worker and costs of life must be included in the equation equaling what it takes to support life: healthcare, retirement, savings for the vicissitudes every everyone encounters at one time or another, and to invest in the future of our children and the environment they grow up in.
At the same time we scorn women who bear children single, we also scorn women who are unwilling to permanently encumber their lives when the means to support those children are so insecure. Men's insecurity with their work only adds to the insecurity of women who facing facts must subtract a man's contribution to child bearing and rearing because it simply cannot be counted on no matter how good the man is. In this economy anyone can be pushed into ruin. Therefore, everyone is at greater risk of having children in poverty. The number of children now living in poverty proves this case.
All salaries must support a household for the worker and costs of life must be included in the equation equaling what it takes to support life: healthcare, retirement, savings for the vicissitudes every everyone encounters at one time or another, and to invest in the future of our children and the environment they grow up in.
11
Perhaps it's about choices.
Bringing up children is a job, often said to be the most important job of all. How about making a decision to choose between a career outside the home and the one in the home? And not having to have both.
Just because women can have both doesn't mean that they need to have both.
Bringing up children is a job, often said to be the most important job of all. How about making a decision to choose between a career outside the home and the one in the home? And not having to have both.
Just because women can have both doesn't mean that they need to have both.
34
That's unrealistic. Most households need two incomes. Education is expensive so whether you have kids or not, there are student loans to pay off. Dropping out of the workforce can be catastrophic in later life.
2
Most people do not have the luxury to be able to afford to "choose" unpaid work over paid work. I can't believe I am having to say this.
2
Very few families are able to live on one salary. Open your eyes.
1
I was a kid when Phyllis Schafly was in her ascendance. I remember being struck by the hypocrisy of a woman telling other women that they should stay home with their families, while she ran around the country, leaving her family at home.
I'm so tired of the hypocrisy over attitudes about government support. Government support is OK for big businesses (tax breaks), but not family leave or childcare?
I'm so tired of the hypocrisy over attitudes about government support. Government support is OK for big businesses (tax breaks), but not family leave or childcare?
18
"...Ben Carson has described preschool as 'indoctrination.' ”
More evidence a person can be both a brilliant surgeon and a crackpot on pretty much everything else.
More evidence a person can be both a brilliant surgeon and a crackpot on pretty much everything else.
16
I am a 57 year old white woman and I have always worked. Since I was a teenager, through college and entered the full time work force at 20. I am a nurse, so shift work is available 24/7. I put my husband through law school while having a new born half way through it. I choose not to put my daughter in day care by doing off hours shift work, there by having a family member, mostly my husband, care for our daughter. When the weekend option came along it was a godsend to us. I could stay home through the week while my husband was working, be the room mother for our now 2 daughters, and work 24 hour weekend shifts. This also gave my husband a healthy dose of Mr Mom and how that feels.
Motherhood is by far one of the most difficult jobs with the lowest pay around. At least the lowest monetary pay, the best job in the world for happiness and love. I have always looked at child rearing as a one time to do it right job, no do overs, so do it right and you will have a lifetime of returns on your investment. This is not easy.
My daughter, who has a PHD in Geochemistry, is now a mother. She has moved close to us and I am her "daycare" for her part time job. I would say her company is progressive in that they gladly made her FT job PT and they pay for childcare per hours worked. But this is a global company and there are very few women in STEM with her qualifications.
Mr Carson needs to remember how hard his mother worked and grow some empathy. Not everyone can live his narrative.
Motherhood is by far one of the most difficult jobs with the lowest pay around. At least the lowest monetary pay, the best job in the world for happiness and love. I have always looked at child rearing as a one time to do it right job, no do overs, so do it right and you will have a lifetime of returns on your investment. This is not easy.
My daughter, who has a PHD in Geochemistry, is now a mother. She has moved close to us and I am her "daycare" for her part time job. I would say her company is progressive in that they gladly made her FT job PT and they pay for childcare per hours worked. But this is a global company and there are very few women in STEM with her qualifications.
Mr Carson needs to remember how hard his mother worked and grow some empathy. Not everyone can live his narrative.
122
I am the mother of 3 grown children who chose to give up her very good, very demanding professional job to raise them. Once they were all in school, I worked part time in my field, marketing, with the expectation that I could go back to work full time once they got to driving age. And I did - and then the recession hit and my job was cut.
From personal experience I can say that there is no room in this economic recovery for older women like me to use our skills. I could probably get a part time menial job, but no employer wants to hire someone who may run up health benefit costs or whose professional compensation has been high.
Ageism combined with prejudice against people like me who have chosen to route around child rearing is not a glass ceiling but a brick wall.
From personal experience I can say that there is no room in this economic recovery for older women like me to use our skills. I could probably get a part time menial job, but no employer wants to hire someone who may run up health benefit costs or whose professional compensation has been high.
Ageism combined with prejudice against people like me who have chosen to route around child rearing is not a glass ceiling but a brick wall.
13
I'm glad Gail included a quote from Dr. Ben Carson on the "indoctrination" of preschool. I now know that when my two year old grandson Carter is running around day care with his buddies, laughing, and jabbering in some indecipherable language, that seemingly innocent anarchy, is really something much more sinister.I know that women everywhere are tempted to do some serious soul searching after his prescient remarks,delivered in that omnipresent monotone, that there was no war on women because "men give pregnant women their seats", liberals were "riling up"women on the issue of abortion, and that men should "re-educate women".Dr.Carson really has to stop pandering to attract the votes of young single women! The word "Savant"could be used to describe to describe his prodigious Neurosurgical skills. There is another word often paired with savant, beginning with "I" and ending in "T"that describes his outrageous remarks on just about everything else.
13
Carson believes that God guides his scalpel too.
1
Because of the availability of birth control, women are generally having fewer children than in times past and yet we still cannot provide decent family leave, accommodating workplace policies or affordable daycare.
We also have a cohort of grandparents who no longer are willing participate in helping with childcare for their grandchildren. I speak as someone who was lucky enough to be able to take five years off when my (one) child was born, and whose mother was willing to help out. I am glad I did. However, I had to give up a well paying, secure job with a pension and benefits in order to do this because my employer would not accommodate my wish to go part time.
When my husband became ill and could no longer work I had to scramble to find work, at much lower pay, with no benefits and no pension. I spent years juggling child care and invalid care and trying to earn a living . He subsequently died leaving us even worse off. Public policy needs to change, no one should have to make these hard choices.
We also have a cohort of grandparents who no longer are willing participate in helping with childcare for their grandchildren. I speak as someone who was lucky enough to be able to take five years off when my (one) child was born, and whose mother was willing to help out. I am glad I did. However, I had to give up a well paying, secure job with a pension and benefits in order to do this because my employer would not accommodate my wish to go part time.
When my husband became ill and could no longer work I had to scramble to find work, at much lower pay, with no benefits and no pension. I spent years juggling child care and invalid care and trying to earn a living . He subsequently died leaving us even worse off. Public policy needs to change, no one should have to make these hard choices.
19
We deserve it. We don't voice our opinions at the polls. I don't know a single woman (and I'm talking from lower to upper middle class) who isn't holding down 20 jobs, let alone one that pays.
Seriously think about being a wife and mother and all it requires. All of a sudden I'm a pediatrician, a hunter and gatherer of food, a master chef, a maid, n expert social planner, a pseudo psychologist, a professional athlete (gotta stay in shape), chauffeur, interior decorator and hold down a full time job. And then I'm too tired to realize some old jerk who sees his family three times a year and is out begging for money while choking down a 200 dollar dinner is making decisions about my life and family planning. Shame on us. Start voting!!!!
Seriously think about being a wife and mother and all it requires. All of a sudden I'm a pediatrician, a hunter and gatherer of food, a master chef, a maid, n expert social planner, a pseudo psychologist, a professional athlete (gotta stay in shape), chauffeur, interior decorator and hold down a full time job. And then I'm too tired to realize some old jerk who sees his family three times a year and is out begging for money while choking down a 200 dollar dinner is making decisions about my life and family planning. Shame on us. Start voting!!!!
22
I've always thought it odd that country club memberships and luxury suites in sporting arenas are considered legitimate business expenses. Why can't money spent on these items be spent instead on child care -- where are our priorities? Young families are expected to fend for themselves when it comes to child care - how about older more established families fend for themselves if they want to belong to a golf club?
11
Great column. I always enjoy those articles that look back on congressional actions in the 1970's as passing (with bipartisan support!) bills that would be demonized these days in Republican primary debates. And I love the articles that bring in how the US stands in relationship to the rest of the world.
Too many myths surround the issue of women working for wages outside of their homes. More columns and articles need to be written. Thanks, Ms. Collins for an excellent OP-ED.
Too many myths surround the issue of women working for wages outside of their homes. More columns and articles need to be written. Thanks, Ms. Collins for an excellent OP-ED.
7
I'm 100 percent behind making child care available at a reasonable cost to all working families, but it bothers me that Gail Collins's column is based on such a shaky interpretation of the available statistics.
Quick fact checking reveals that the employment participation rate for both sexes has been on the decline for the past decade, anyway, and when you poke around, you see that the employment rate for men and women is statistically very close. The reasons are subject to dispute--some of it has to do with more working age people remaining in school--but the dismal employment rate obviously points to a weak economic recovery and a still fragile economy.
If policy makers want to see a future with a younger working population able to help support the old and the retired, they'd better understand that one of the ways to cajole modern women into having children is to make universal child care readily available.
Come to think of it, Republican leaders may very well have a not so hidden strategy of driving women out of the workforce, and making them stay pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen in order to leave the dwindling number of jobs to men.
As 21st century robots destroy more and more jobs, however, employment possibilities for both men and women will only get worse.
Quick fact checking reveals that the employment participation rate for both sexes has been on the decline for the past decade, anyway, and when you poke around, you see that the employment rate for men and women is statistically very close. The reasons are subject to dispute--some of it has to do with more working age people remaining in school--but the dismal employment rate obviously points to a weak economic recovery and a still fragile economy.
If policy makers want to see a future with a younger working population able to help support the old and the retired, they'd better understand that one of the ways to cajole modern women into having children is to make universal child care readily available.
Come to think of it, Republican leaders may very well have a not so hidden strategy of driving women out of the workforce, and making them stay pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen in order to leave the dwindling number of jobs to men.
As 21st century robots destroy more and more jobs, however, employment possibilities for both men and women will only get worse.
2
In the play "Lysistrata," the women of Athens, fed up with the men's endless wars, decide to stop having sex with them until they put an end to the Pelopponesian War. The men ended the war.
Women today could take a lesson from this play, written 2,500 years ago, and stop having children until they are provided with a viable system of maternity leave and child care. If the government has no interest in helping families raise the nation's future workers, voters, soldiers, inventors and payers of social security & Medicare, then today's women should just say no to children. Government policy has hardly changed in the 44 years since Nixon's "communistic" remark. Once the childbirth numbers start going down and down, you can be sure politicians will take note.
Women today could take a lesson from this play, written 2,500 years ago, and stop having children until they are provided with a viable system of maternity leave and child care. If the government has no interest in helping families raise the nation's future workers, voters, soldiers, inventors and payers of social security & Medicare, then today's women should just say no to children. Government policy has hardly changed in the 44 years since Nixon's "communistic" remark. Once the childbirth numbers start going down and down, you can be sure politicians will take note.
6
Judging from how reluctant many men are to fully or even partially participate as fathers, how little they regard raising children and taking care of a house as work, and how they much accuse women of getting pregnant for the sole purpose of obtaining child support, I don't think that the men would be fazed much if women threatened to not have children. It would mean more attention and money for them! I think that the only thing that might work is if we took a leaf from Lysistrata's book and just quit having sex with them. That alone might get their attention.
4
We lived in Denmark in 1966. Day care there was excellent, almost free and thought to be a necessary function of government if women were able to exercise their right to equal representation in the work force.
I know of a married woman CPA who dropped out of the work force until her children were in school because day care costs almost equaled her salary.
If we want our birth rate among educated women to at least be at the replacement level we need to mimic the Scandinavian system.
I know of a married woman CPA who dropped out of the work force until her children were in school because day care costs almost equaled her salary.
If we want our birth rate among educated women to at least be at the replacement level we need to mimic the Scandinavian system.
8
Mr. Underwood, Gail isn't talking only about single women with children. My daughter has two advanced degrees in psychology and her husband is a guidance counselor in one of. NYC's best high schools. And yet, and yet, my husband and I subsidize her to the tune of $500 a month for her nanny and another $1000 to pay back school loans because their income won't cover the cost of these and her rent! Her school loan still has several years to go and if she takes advantage of the mayor's pre-school for her daughter she doesn't know how she can get child care for the morning walk to school and then again for after school hours.
None of her friends have been able to save enough to purchase a home or an apartment without their parents paying the down payment. This is the life of the so-called "middle class" in NYC today. When candidates talk about freeing the individual I wonder whether they ever lived in a family where their parent "freed" them to earn their own. None of the 158 families who paid half of all election contributions got to their money without borrowing from others, without depending on others, and that is how all human progress is made -- not just through the work of the solitary genius. We are all richer when we support each others' endeavors and that includes raising a family not just building a company and amassing a billion dollars and more.
None of her friends have been able to save enough to purchase a home or an apartment without their parents paying the down payment. This is the life of the so-called "middle class" in NYC today. When candidates talk about freeing the individual I wonder whether they ever lived in a family where their parent "freed" them to earn their own. None of the 158 families who paid half of all election contributions got to their money without borrowing from others, without depending on others, and that is how all human progress is made -- not just through the work of the solitary genius. We are all richer when we support each others' endeavors and that includes raising a family not just building a company and amassing a billion dollars and more.
8
The fact that modern economies are so radically out of sync with the human life cycle probably explains the reduction of birth rates in them to below replacement levels.
8
Come on Gail. Hillary Clinton, the now progressive wannabe "laced into" Carly Fiorina. And then she turned around and scolded Bernie Sanders: "We're not Denmark." A clear nod to the fears of her corporate puppet masters.
We could and should be much more like Denmark, and the other civilized social democracies. If you vote establishment, you just get more of the same. No matter what campaign promises might be made.
You can be sure that Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who will actually change anything in a substantive way.
We could and should be much more like Denmark, and the other civilized social democracies. If you vote establishment, you just get more of the same. No matter what campaign promises might be made.
You can be sure that Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who will actually change anything in a substantive way.
11
Bernie is a flake and a fake: an independent running as a democrat. Thanks but no thanks.
1
Ms. Collins:
Permit me a bit of nostalga as an offering to the debate we should be having: the quality of life. Once upon a time in America, back when banks paid you for allowing them to use your money, there existed many one income households.You weren't considered much of a man if your wife had to work, even in blue collar families.
More and more woman did work, mostly part time, This is how many in the "middle" class got ahead. Men got a reprieve and it became the norm. Today
the two income household is the norm. That fact has had a tremendous impact on what those on the right call family values. I don't see how anyone is expected to have any time for values with tightly scheduled and frantic existence.I am certainly not advocating that women stay home, that's not even an option for most if you want to pay your mortgage.
Income inequality, as Mr. Sanders keeps pointing out, is the real issue. If wages were sufficient perhaps a new norm might arise. Perhaps, a two income household would be based on two people working part time. Maybe a four day week could be the new full time standard. this would obviously would create new jobs, for women and for men.
Too radical? Why? Because we can't imagine it? Quite obviously this would also greatly mitigate many of the social services in question here. More importantly it would give people choices they don't have now. It isn't even real socialism, that bogeyman of the uniformed. It's only fair.
Permit me a bit of nostalga as an offering to the debate we should be having: the quality of life. Once upon a time in America, back when banks paid you for allowing them to use your money, there existed many one income households.You weren't considered much of a man if your wife had to work, even in blue collar families.
More and more woman did work, mostly part time, This is how many in the "middle" class got ahead. Men got a reprieve and it became the norm. Today
the two income household is the norm. That fact has had a tremendous impact on what those on the right call family values. I don't see how anyone is expected to have any time for values with tightly scheduled and frantic existence.I am certainly not advocating that women stay home, that's not even an option for most if you want to pay your mortgage.
Income inequality, as Mr. Sanders keeps pointing out, is the real issue. If wages were sufficient perhaps a new norm might arise. Perhaps, a two income household would be based on two people working part time. Maybe a four day week could be the new full time standard. this would obviously would create new jobs, for women and for men.
Too radical? Why? Because we can't imagine it? Quite obviously this would also greatly mitigate many of the social services in question here. More importantly it would give people choices they don't have now. It isn't even real socialism, that bogeyman of the uniformed. It's only fair.
8
Your numbers are skewed. If you look at the percent of females between the ages of 25-54 who are employed (the prime working ages), over the last 40 years the percent of women employed has increased steadily and steeply until it peaked in 2000 at about 75%, then it began to dip and since the 2008-09 recession it has dipped further. Looking at the 75% number in 2000 your notion that we need government financed day care and preschool looks weak.
12
you miss the forest for the trees. It's about encouraging more women to join and stay in the workforce, especially when they become moms so that policies help them support their families. I don't believe Gail called for complete government financed day care but the costs are clearly out of control and we're not doing anything about it. If you're okay with the status quo, there's one major political party that will suit you just fine.
1
When my daughter returned to work after her three months off, she found a day care center licensed for four infants that is working out well for what seems to me a small fortune. That she was willing to do this, I think, comes from the fact that she herself attended a small day care center in Manhattan back in the seventies. It never occurred to me then that quality, affordable day care would not become universally available by now, but then we hadn't experienced conservative backlash.
In the eighties (at work) I began to encounter women who were appalled by day care. The preferred nannies, live-in if they had the space, because they were more flexible (and easier to take advantage of, IMO) Somehow we Americans reject any kind of collective solution to common problems in favor of our own private fiefdoms. Of course longer working hours often demanded in today's work force are incompatible with almost any non-family day care most people can afford, so I think women drop out of the work force in defeat.
It's a sad end to the kind of transformation that the women's movement once hoped to bring to the work place. Everybody works in competition with everyone else now. This really discourages working on solutions to broader social issues.
In the eighties (at work) I began to encounter women who were appalled by day care. The preferred nannies, live-in if they had the space, because they were more flexible (and easier to take advantage of, IMO) Somehow we Americans reject any kind of collective solution to common problems in favor of our own private fiefdoms. Of course longer working hours often demanded in today's work force are incompatible with almost any non-family day care most people can afford, so I think women drop out of the work force in defeat.
It's a sad end to the kind of transformation that the women's movement once hoped to bring to the work place. Everybody works in competition with everyone else now. This really discourages working on solutions to broader social issues.
7
Americans have always loved to talk about "family values" while trashing actual families, including working mothers. As an aging country, we need young people in the workforce, period. We would be investing in our own future if we did everything possible to make child care abundant and cheap, same with education up to and including college. Anything to get people hooked into the workforce and keep them there.
Today's infant will as an adult, working and paying into Social Security, be supporting several generations of American retirees who simply will not die. We need to help young mothers raise their children while staying in the workforce, not make life harder on them. Once again, thank you, short-sighted Republicans, for getting it wrong and endangering our future.
Today's infant will as an adult, working and paying into Social Security, be supporting several generations of American retirees who simply will not die. We need to help young mothers raise their children while staying in the workforce, not make life harder on them. Once again, thank you, short-sighted Republicans, for getting it wrong and endangering our future.
13
It's not the cost of childcare but who pays. Most workers are not doing the math to deduct from pay the cost of having the job, not just of child care but healthcare, time away from work of any kind, retirement planning, and education and experience required to have that job in the first place. Taking the price tags of these into account, most workers would find they are working for slim wages indeed.
I was sent a recent job description for a remote job in the healthcare industry. The exact pay was not mentioned but required a desk top or laptop new enough for a recent version of microsoft environment, a hardline internet connection, a dedicated quiet space for the entire work shift and free from distractions including children, the elderly or disabled. There are no benefits of any kind. In other words, they are asking me the worker to foot the bill for their operating expenses! I had never seen such a naked attempt to rope me into pay less than what the job cost me. They were actually asking me to donate everything I have to prop up their business model!
The sad thing was at the bottom was a tab about the company, etc. including one about fraud. Evidently there are look alike companies outright fraudulent and they were offering me a phone number to verify they were legit.
This IS the state of work for America today: Coned or even more conned.
I was sent a recent job description for a remote job in the healthcare industry. The exact pay was not mentioned but required a desk top or laptop new enough for a recent version of microsoft environment, a hardline internet connection, a dedicated quiet space for the entire work shift and free from distractions including children, the elderly or disabled. There are no benefits of any kind. In other words, they are asking me the worker to foot the bill for their operating expenses! I had never seen such a naked attempt to rope me into pay less than what the job cost me. They were actually asking me to donate everything I have to prop up their business model!
The sad thing was at the bottom was a tab about the company, etc. including one about fraud. Evidently there are look alike companies outright fraudulent and they were offering me a phone number to verify they were legit.
This IS the state of work for America today: Coned or even more conned.
9
The percentage of women participating in the US workforce noted herein seems nearly equivalent to the total percentage of all people of workforce age in this country as reported in recent monthly labor statistics.
1
The government estimates 30 million boomers are caring for their long-lived parents now. If a loved one is fully disabled, owns a home, but is ' too rich' to qualify for Medicaid - it falls to a mostly female family member to drop out of the workforce and provide countless weeks, months and years of uncompensated care. In Medicare speak this is what is known as a 'credible care-giver' who must be present in the home in order to receive any Medicare homecare benefits ( nurse/therapist aide etc.) . While Medicare requires this, there is no commensurate Social Security contribution made to the 'credible caregiver', as well the government doesn't even track you as un-employed - because you left the paying workforce for personal reasons. You also have no health insurance while you are the primary care-giver for any family member.
I see myself all the time in Doctors waiting rooms, the pharmacy, the ER, The VA ,women providing skilled care for parents who are one long illness away from losing their middle-class perch. Lastly trying to resume a professional career after years of caregiving - your resume now stale, your appearance tempered by all the stress is a sober reminder of just how invisible middle aged women are.
I see myself all the time in Doctors waiting rooms, the pharmacy, the ER, The VA ,women providing skilled care for parents who are one long illness away from losing their middle-class perch. Lastly trying to resume a professional career after years of caregiving - your resume now stale, your appearance tempered by all the stress is a sober reminder of just how invisible middle aged women are.
23
Carly Fiorina believes in paid leave . HP paid her millions to leave.
The GOP could care less. They have made it clear-women are just
breeding vessels. Forced birth regardles of the health consequences
is the position of the entire GOP field.
The GOP could care less. They have made it clear-women are just
breeding vessels. Forced birth regardles of the health consequences
is the position of the entire GOP field.
51
A few random thoughts. First, we waited to have kids until we could afford them. This meant that we bought low priced cars and saved. When we bought a house, we bought one smaller than we could afford. People need to think and plan for kids. Having said that, child care is very expensive. We are a far more mobile society, so grand parents and siblings may live afar away making it harder. Gail probably is correct that something should be done, perhaps a larger tax credit. One other thing I an curious about is a factual question. We have been reading that the work force participation rate has been going down in general. Is it more pronounced for women, or is Gail starting with a bad premise? It could be that men are down, women are down by a similar amount, and what Gail talks about is not responsible for the drop. One can still be for policy changes, but I am not sure if she understands the facts.
4
My mother raised three children on a teacher's salary (low compared to executives, salesmen, and other "male" professions) in the 1950s. I heard her complain once that the child support my father sent was not enough. He was career Navy and stationed overseas, meaning he was not around to help. She had to get help from her mother who wasn't exactly well off either. We had absolutely nothing growing up. My mother was constantly stressed. When we went off to college, tuition did not exist. We were able to go because it was free. All of us worked through college to cover living costs.
Women have always worked, and raised the kids, and cleaned the house. It is a fiction that women stayed home in some little suburban paradise. Watch the movie "9 to 5" from that era. Today, Republicans would mock the ideas in that film that was so relevant then. It's relevant now, but attitudes toward women have worsened. I fail to see how we can succeed as a society without support for women and families, and that must include family planning (birth control and right to abortion), childcare, elder care and affordable or free college education. We no longer have a situation where families can make it on one salary. Women make 77 cents to men's dollar. Even with both parents working, they often can't afford infant or childcare. We will collapse as a society if we continue to lay this Catch 22 on women and families.
Thanks for a terrific column. Please write more on this topic.
Women have always worked, and raised the kids, and cleaned the house. It is a fiction that women stayed home in some little suburban paradise. Watch the movie "9 to 5" from that era. Today, Republicans would mock the ideas in that film that was so relevant then. It's relevant now, but attitudes toward women have worsened. I fail to see how we can succeed as a society without support for women and families, and that must include family planning (birth control and right to abortion), childcare, elder care and affordable or free college education. We no longer have a situation where families can make it on one salary. Women make 77 cents to men's dollar. Even with both parents working, they often can't afford infant or childcare. We will collapse as a society if we continue to lay this Catch 22 on women and families.
Thanks for a terrific column. Please write more on this topic.
279
For the same job and hours, the pay is the same.
1
Yes, the early years with children are hard, but daycare is only the first hurdle. We felt lucky to find high quality daycare and averted our eyes every month when we wrote the check. But, once you have school age children, it doesn't mean all the challenges of working go away. Schools are in session for 6 hours a day. Usually working parents need some kind of before or after care to close the gap, even with flexible schedules. Then there are all the miscellaneous days off: Monday and Tuesday fall break, Wednesday early dismissal, Friday teacher planning. What if your child gets sick? Don't forget summer break. Consider the cost of weekly camps or hiring a full-time nanny. As the kids get older, the sports and activities expand, so many families are on the road all afternoon/evening, eating dinner late, staying up for homework. At any point along this trajectory many families decide it just isn't worth the stress to have both parents working, and women usually opt out. Of course this comes at price--loss of income and loss of or a diminished career. Let's expand our picture of what's happening to women--the challenges don't end at at five.
24
Well, a large chunk of the country would be happy w/ women walking around in red-white-blue tents. You sound uppity to them.Hie thee to the kitchen.
Ike warned that MIC aka Military Industrial Complex would steal from that which makes a society bloom + flourish -- like child care.
Ike warned that MIC aka Military Industrial Complex would steal from that which makes a society bloom + flourish -- like child care.
8
The GOP's war against women is run by deviant fascist old men.
34
I'm all for women's equality in the work and for family-friendly workplace policies for men and women. But I am not sure that striving to have fewer mothers raising their own children, and more children in daycare, is a good goal, nor is having the fewest number of mothers raising their own children possible a good measure of national greatness.
8
"It’s incredible that we’ve built a society that relies on women in the labor force yet makes no discernible effort to deal with this problem."
Why would this even surprise anyone. We are also committed, well the GOP anyway, to forcing women to carry every single solitary zygote to term no matter what. Then they are abandoned as soon as they take their first breath.
It makes perfect sense if you are from a place with no moral compass just a set of arbitrary rules put in place to serve some ancient ritual copied into a book of questionable authenticity beyond being a fable.
Why would this even surprise anyone. We are also committed, well the GOP anyway, to forcing women to carry every single solitary zygote to term no matter what. Then they are abandoned as soon as they take their first breath.
It makes perfect sense if you are from a place with no moral compass just a set of arbitrary rules put in place to serve some ancient ritual copied into a book of questionable authenticity beyond being a fable.
27
Readers can parse these data in any number of tortured ways (Japan is not the US! We have a lot of immigrants who don't want women working outside the home! Hooray for stay-at-home moms!), but the fact remains, and ask any woman who tries to do this, that juggling work and children in this society is difficult and stressful. We all have anecdotes of men bringing their wee ones to work only to have them cooed over, while women receive snide remarks about getting their childcare under control. We are less productive, less well rested, and less respected than our male colleagues. I don't care how much you spin the data, this country is just too hard for women who have children and work outside the home, and we all know it.
39
A lot of posters here attack conservatives and republicans for being cruel, cheap and child-hating. This may be true for a lot of them, of course. However, the real issue is a clash of visions as to how society should be organized. Conservatives dislike large, bureaucratic, top-down uniform solutions to such issues as child care and prefer society to work these things out on an individual, organic basis without government interference. This would be an attractive vision if it were at all possible, but of course it is probably Utopian. Experience in most other advanced societies shows that a government program is perfectly feasible. Conservatives should make more of an effort to show that their vision can be realized if they expect liberals to stop criticizing our current system. Why can't conservatives show some region or group of people who have succeeded in making the conservative vision work? That they don't do this is the fundamental weakness of conservative values.
21
No, conservatives LOVE large, bureaucratic, top-down solutions. Just read the comments about the editorial on immigration: all the conservatives are eager to spend billions on ejecting all illegal aliens and keeping them out. They just love these solutions to the problems they identify. All others need not apply.
8
Ideology doesn't put dinner on the table.
This may not be a popular view here, but I think that there is nothing better than when a mother (or father) can stay home with their children, at least until the child starts the first grade. There are some major downsides to both parents working outside the home (for one thing, households get very messy). In Germany young mothers (or fathers) get paid to stay at home when their children are young.
93
"In Germany young mothers (or fathers) get paid to stay at home when their children are young."
That's... what the article is about. The author wants paid leave.
That's... what the article is about. The author wants paid leave.
1
The article is not about whether that is better or popular. She is obviously saying that women ARE staying home, because childcare is so expensive. But the cost to the women's career and lifetime earnings is substantial--in places like Germany and France and elsewhere one can return to one's job--which is another form of support for parents.
2
This is just one example of the economic Darwinism in the USA.
1
Several weeks ago I saw a comment on the topic of working versus stay at home moms. This comment was from a person who was obviously the anti government, Social Security type. What struck me was this - there is the conservative idea that women should stay at home with the kids, better for the kids etc. However, this person then said that women and children should not be eligible for Social Security benefits from the wage earner. The claim was the widow, children etc should go on welfare. Unbelievable. In any event, if there are no real supports for women working, they also lose the earning record for Social Security. Which becomes a big problem down the road. I'm sure the response from the commenter I reference is that they should set up an IRA.
12
We are a selfish nation and it's getting worse each day. Corporations don't care if women are in the workforce -- if they cared, there would be daycare centers in office buildings and factories and the people who wished to avail themselves of the service could pay for it at a more reasonable rate than they now pay buying care independently. Plus the parent (male or female) would be doing one stop each morning dropping their child at the in-house daycare and then going to their job in the building or complex.
I recently read a letter to the editor in which a man complained about poor kids getting a free breakfast at school. My area has the highest unemployment rate in NJ and the highest foreclosure rate in the country due to the cutbacks and closures in the casino industry so these are formerly middle class children who now qualify for free breakfast because their parents are unemployed with no new jobs in sight -- even ones that pay minimum wage. The fact of a retired man wanting to deny a child food says a lot about the mindset of the kind of people who now vote for people like Trump and other Republicans like him who wish to grind other Americans down when they are already ground down by circumstances beyond their control. Not only did this man want to take away the free breakfast, he wanted their SNAP allotment reduced by the $1.99 that it costs each day for feed a child in school. So much for American "exceptionalism."
I recently read a letter to the editor in which a man complained about poor kids getting a free breakfast at school. My area has the highest unemployment rate in NJ and the highest foreclosure rate in the country due to the cutbacks and closures in the casino industry so these are formerly middle class children who now qualify for free breakfast because their parents are unemployed with no new jobs in sight -- even ones that pay minimum wage. The fact of a retired man wanting to deny a child food says a lot about the mindset of the kind of people who now vote for people like Trump and other Republicans like him who wish to grind other Americans down when they are already ground down by circumstances beyond their control. Not only did this man want to take away the free breakfast, he wanted their SNAP allotment reduced by the $1.99 that it costs each day for feed a child in school. So much for American "exceptionalism."
52
You are spot on. But, of course, the government says the economy is good. It is -- for a few.
3
That is just heartbreaking to hear but sadly this does seem to be the prevailing school of thought for many Americans who can't seem to acknowledge that they might have been in the workforce during a more prosperous era and benefited from a healthier economy and outlook. We are witnessing the erosion of the social contract fueled by conservative rhetoric and frankly I am not hopeful for the future.
11
Coming soon to America: children begging in the streets without shoes or coats. Already present in America: women with small children on the street corner with a cardboard sign begging for change, food, work, anything. I see this often in my town now. Once the unemployment runs out, they have to do something. That Repubicans regard these desperate families with disdain and dismissal is horrifying.
Remember the ERA? The Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution? No? Well, you're not alone. Young women especially are kept ignorant by our schools (and regrettably, their mothers) of this and other big pushes to level the gender playing field. With today's tools for political organizing and mass opinion shaping, wouldn't this be a good time to revive the movement? Especially with a genuine woman candidate running for the Presidency?
21
I agree. And I also remember the ERA and its simple statement of equality. I also remember the day in 1982 when the last legislature refused to pass it. A very sad day, as so many things would be different today if it had passed.
But I fear not enough of today's state legislatures would approve it, regressing as they are to more primitive attitudes about women.
One fervent hope I still have is that women will wake up and unite rather than follow the absurd ways of opponents, who really are in it to divide women. As someone said the other day, who can believe that Phyllis Schaffley is still quoted about anything?!
But I fear not enough of today's state legislatures would approve it, regressing as they are to more primitive attitudes about women.
One fervent hope I still have is that women will wake up and unite rather than follow the absurd ways of opponents, who really are in it to divide women. As someone said the other day, who can believe that Phyllis Schaffley is still quoted about anything?!
1
From a European point of view, the 3 months unpaid parental leave is quite medieval. It reels also of insensitiveness and lack of respect for the reality of motherhood in a modern, liberal, capitalistic society. Motherhood AND womanhood. And I'm the typical macho Frenchman.
It also shows how unrealist and illogical are the people who refuse such help to American women and at the same time reject immigration: how do you expect to have a demographically balanced and expansive population if you punish the mothers-to-be and the people who could help?
There are other realities than finances.
It also shows how unrealist and illogical are the people who refuse such help to American women and at the same time reject immigration: how do you expect to have a demographically balanced and expansive population if you punish the mothers-to-be and the people who could help?
There are other realities than finances.
41
Despite everything Republicans still hold on to the fantasy that we live in a 1950'sOzzie and Harriet world where one person can support a whole family and the only role fit for women is to take care of the house and children. This attitude actually weakens the family as available incomes essential to the family are unavailable and a sharing of responsibilities in the family does not occur. This outcome is directly counter to what Republicans profess they want ie strong families.
But Republicans also hold other values which do not allow for the support of adequate childcare that is the belief in uncontrolled capitalism and trickle down economics which supposedly would give the family the resources to afford child care. Never mind that the woman should be in the home. Instead wages are falling for the middle class and the cost of child care is steadily rising.
So the strange unrealistic beliefs of Republicans hurt their voter constituency and does not allow our country to come up with viable solutions for childcare and a multitude of other problems confronting families. Helping people afford child care is socialist and of course anti American and our society and families continue to suffer and suffer.
But Republicans also hold other values which do not allow for the support of adequate childcare that is the belief in uncontrolled capitalism and trickle down economics which supposedly would give the family the resources to afford child care. Never mind that the woman should be in the home. Instead wages are falling for the middle class and the cost of child care is steadily rising.
So the strange unrealistic beliefs of Republicans hurt their voter constituency and does not allow our country to come up with viable solutions for childcare and a multitude of other problems confronting families. Helping people afford child care is socialist and of course anti American and our society and families continue to suffer and suffer.
19
I'm a republican and I have no idea what you are talking about. My wife works and my daughters work and go to school, so Ozzie and Harriet really? Folks should care for their own children that's not asking for much, but however that is idealistic and not in step with modern society. Child care costs money this is the uncomfortable fact for both sides, it's not free. Do we have government run child centers? What are the children being exposed to or taught? Will the parent or parents be able to have a say in what is being taught? Is this a government indoctrination center? Will the workers be unionized or non-unionized? Will this be another political job? Will the children be safe? What will the children eat, government approved meals?
I am happy that things are working out for you, but it is not for a huge segment of our population especially for the working poor. Yes child care costs money, but it would help everyone if we had a better tax code that supported child care, more availability of child care on the job, more support for families at the birth of their children and other measures. Right now we depend upon isolated families to somehow get by or the good heart of an employer to understand or help
If we we want healthy families in this world the government has a role in supporting them and not just by giving lip service to it.
If we we want healthy families in this world the government has a role in supporting them and not just by giving lip service to it.
The central problem in your post, Ron, is the word "should." Of course people should care for their children. But we have arrived at a place where it is becoming increasingly impossible to put it all together. Why can't child care and elder care be free? Why can't mothers and fathers have paid family leave? Wasn't the idea that we would become a prosperous society there so that people could relax and enjoy life? You clearly have no idea of what the reality is for so many women and families--middle class--not just uneducated and impoverished. I'd rather have to work out the problems of politics while the children are fed and cared for so that the mom and dads can work, than deny the children care due to ideologies. Are we so heartless that we would leave children hungry due to beliefs that are anachronistic at best?
1
Why is this happening?
MEN DON'T CARE ANYMORE.
We are 90% of all workplace fatalities and are told we are paid too much.
We die at higher rates from all top ten diseases, but watch as men's health is ignored in comparison to women (GO to both sites: menshealth.gov womenshealth.gov)
We get 63% more jail time for the same crime.
Prostate Cancer Month is ignored by the media.
We are treated like hamburger meat and idiots in movies but must pay attention to the depiction of women.
We are denied due process rights due to rape hysteria on campus.
Boys are failing in schools and we fund extra programs for girls in SMET.
Men don't care. We are now focused on ourselves and paying for our own families and no longer care about selfish feminism. We will not pay taxes for more women's issues
If you want to fix this, you need to get men on board and you need to start paying attention to the needs of men and boys.
You may now call me misogynist, MRA and argue points about historical suffrage and whimper about male tears. Go ahead. Argue. I don't care. It will not change the facts: men don't care anymore to hear the feminist whine.
MEN DON'T CARE ANYMORE.
We are 90% of all workplace fatalities and are told we are paid too much.
We die at higher rates from all top ten diseases, but watch as men's health is ignored in comparison to women (GO to both sites: menshealth.gov womenshealth.gov)
We get 63% more jail time for the same crime.
Prostate Cancer Month is ignored by the media.
We are treated like hamburger meat and idiots in movies but must pay attention to the depiction of women.
We are denied due process rights due to rape hysteria on campus.
Boys are failing in schools and we fund extra programs for girls in SMET.
Men don't care. We are now focused on ourselves and paying for our own families and no longer care about selfish feminism. We will not pay taxes for more women's issues
If you want to fix this, you need to get men on board and you need to start paying attention to the needs of men and boys.
You may now call me misogynist, MRA and argue points about historical suffrage and whimper about male tears. Go ahead. Argue. I don't care. It will not change the facts: men don't care anymore to hear the feminist whine.
7
How sad and misplaced your anger is!
Many feminists have always sought better conditions for women, yes. But true feminism seeks equality for both genders. Of course men need attention paid to their issues, health and otherwise. The human condition is what is important, not one gender or sexual orientation "winning" over the other.
People are different, not so much better or worse based on devaluing one sort over another. If all the people who care unite and ignore the demogogues, we can achieve some good things, like genuine equal opportunity.
Many feminists have always sought better conditions for women, yes. But true feminism seeks equality for both genders. Of course men need attention paid to their issues, health and otherwise. The human condition is what is important, not one gender or sexual orientation "winning" over the other.
People are different, not so much better or worse based on devaluing one sort over another. If all the people who care unite and ignore the demogogues, we can achieve some good things, like genuine equal opportunity.
1
Your arguments would be fine save for the fact that you seem to believe that you speak for all men. You do not. Many men are committed feminists and do not think that concern and anger about gender inequity is whining.
" We are now focused on ourselves and paying for our own families and no longer care about selfish feminism."
Do you truly not see the irony and contradiction in this? Women and children are in most men's families. Childcare and parental leave policies go right to the core of how to pay for having a family.
Do you truly not see the irony and contradiction in this? Women and children are in most men's families. Childcare and parental leave policies go right to the core of how to pay for having a family.
My employer has upped the maternity leave to 16 weeks and it is paid and they offer 8 weeks for dad's too that is also paid. This is extremely generous. Women make up a huge part of our work force but how does a small employer pay for maternity leave? How does an employer compensate for the loss of an employee's loss of production when he or she is on leave? Does the employer need to hire someone part time to fill in or do others at work have to take on more to make up for the individual who is on maternity leave? Nothing is simple and balancing the needs of the employee and the needs of the business must be addressed. What are the costs to a small business? What are the costs to our government? Nothing is free and there are costs both positive and negative to extending maternity leave for say a year.
4
Yet they do it in many European countries, who share are human genome, so it is clearly not imposssible
When reading a Collins piece, it is hard to guess where she will introduce the liberal theme. Today we only had to wade through 6 paragraphs to find that the title theme of the decline in women in the work force is because of high cost child care. its always something and usually something that the penny pinching Republicans have done. But one wonders, if the Republicans cut child care and other programs, why does the party hold so many governor mansions, control most state legislatures and have majorities in both houses of the Congress. Hard to figure.
1
Gerrymandering!
In the 2014, Democratic candidates received one million
more votes than republican candidates, yet lost the House of
Representatives, due to the way that congressional districts
have been drawn.
In the 2014, Democratic candidates received one million
more votes than republican candidates, yet lost the House of
Representatives, due to the way that congressional districts
have been drawn.
5
In part becauseof ignorance and in part by paying attention and getting their worldview from Fox and the rightwingnut pundits. And in part because the liberal purists won't vote anymore, sad but true. When more and more simply give up on even flawed democracy, the zealots win.
"why does the party hold so many governor mansions, control most state legislatures and have majorities in both houses of the Congress."
Gerrymandering. The last time the district lines were drawn the GOP was in charge, and they did a fine job of creating hundreds of safe districts for conservatives, where even moderate Republicans didn't stand a chance. We lost a fine GOP Congressman that way. Now I have a blow-hard who doesn't seem to have a thought in his head that the Tea Party didn't put there. Write him a letter and you get all the relevant talking points, only has paragraphs instead of a bulleted list.
My district is actually cobbled together from three districts. One of the other three Congressmen turned from sensible, realistic Republican who believed in science and fiscal prudence into another Conservative-bot, right before our eyes. Apparently he did not do this fast enough or persuasively enough, so he was gerrymandered out of his district, too.
I can't express how much I mind this. Our country thrives when there is a balance in power, when there is bipartisan effort to solve our very pressing problems. It has suffered tremendously from the far-right "my way or the highway" style of governing; from the government shut-downs and the refusal to address economic issues in favor of pressing the hot buttons (Obamacare, abortion, gun rights). That's not governing, it's an especially bad reality show.
Gerrymandering. The last time the district lines were drawn the GOP was in charge, and they did a fine job of creating hundreds of safe districts for conservatives, where even moderate Republicans didn't stand a chance. We lost a fine GOP Congressman that way. Now I have a blow-hard who doesn't seem to have a thought in his head that the Tea Party didn't put there. Write him a letter and you get all the relevant talking points, only has paragraphs instead of a bulleted list.
My district is actually cobbled together from three districts. One of the other three Congressmen turned from sensible, realistic Republican who believed in science and fiscal prudence into another Conservative-bot, right before our eyes. Apparently he did not do this fast enough or persuasively enough, so he was gerrymandered out of his district, too.
I can't express how much I mind this. Our country thrives when there is a balance in power, when there is bipartisan effort to solve our very pressing problems. It has suffered tremendously from the far-right "my way or the highway" style of governing; from the government shut-downs and the refusal to address economic issues in favor of pressing the hot buttons (Obamacare, abortion, gun rights). That's not governing, it's an especially bad reality show.
1
When a pair of danish grad students worked with me, the husband-and-wife worked harmoniously and when they returned to Denmark, I knew only one job awaited them, him. What would Inge do, I asked? "I'll get 90% of the pay I would get as a prof for a year if we have a second baby." I wish we were Denmark II. The girls attended a fine free university, their parents share everything equally, and about half their parliament are women. Please, Democrats an Independents, get your thumbs off women and keep the GOP's hands from the bodies of women. Equal pay, schooling, and health care must be your goals. Bernie gets it. Hillary seems to. And no one in the circus clown car has the foggiest.
32
Gail, dern you! You often make me laugh, now you make me think. I'm not sure that the number of women in the "workforce" is the best measure of a great society or of a successful economy. One effect of our economic model has been a change (a degradation?) in home life. And I don't mean that the old standard was anywhere near ideal.
Justice, equality, equal pay for women, of course. But parenting is an essential part of society, and good parenting should count for something in the mindless calculation of GDP. Good parenting with justice should be the goal--that is, both parents, if there are two, should be able to take a full role in parenting. Isn't our economy a large reason for the growing number of single-parent families? Sorry Gail, an ABC of working women is shallow.
An economy that takes no account of its effects on society is brutal.
Justice, equality, equal pay for women, of course. But parenting is an essential part of society, and good parenting should count for something in the mindless calculation of GDP. Good parenting with justice should be the goal--that is, both parents, if there are two, should be able to take a full role in parenting. Isn't our economy a large reason for the growing number of single-parent families? Sorry Gail, an ABC of working women is shallow.
An economy that takes no account of its effects on society is brutal.
10
I hear a lot of "Why should my taxes support your procreation?" People saying, "I saved up or waited to have my kids -- why can't you?" We aren't very interested in helping each other.
20
I don't see anything wrong with stay-at-home moms. Actually, whether it's the mom or the dad, if people feel they must have children, maybe it's good for someone to devote themselves to the task. Since two-income families have become the norm, obesity has shot up.....nobody has time to cook. Youngsters are less, not more, secure in the world......clingy. More of them have behavioral problems, more of them are drugged. Their time is strictly managed according to their parents' schedules. They spend less free time outdoors.
Not only that, but two-income families have grossly increased consumption. Look at the modest sized homes of the 50s compared to new homes today. Gotta have a place for all the stuff. Shopping has become recreation, not necessity. Everybody says they're so poor, but somebody is buying all that Made in China junk. It's what makes that long daily commute worth it.......or does it?
Is it such a crisis if some drop out if they can?
Not only that, but two-income families have grossly increased consumption. Look at the modest sized homes of the 50s compared to new homes today. Gotta have a place for all the stuff. Shopping has become recreation, not necessity. Everybody says they're so poor, but somebody is buying all that Made in China junk. It's what makes that long daily commute worth it.......or does it?
Is it such a crisis if some drop out if they can?
18
Nothing wrong with stay at home dads either, as long as they take on the work and responsibility. The same holds true for women.
While you raise some very valid points, particularly about what people feel they need to have vs what they need to have in the way of material possessions, you overlook the folks who are just scraping by and whose children wear second hand clothes, eat from food pantries, and otherwise have a bare existence. If it costs you more to work than to stay at home, there is something wrong.
A lot of what you say is true, but the core issue is that there has been no systemic economic adjustment to accommodate the reality of two working parents. A few flex time or telecommute places don't rally cut it, IMHO.
Gail, I really like reading Gail on the child side, which is to say "all kidding aside", the deadly serious Gail.
In comments at various columns I have commented about Hillary's Denmark laugh line by pointed out that she has a lot to learn from Denmark, Sweden, and more as concerns two essentials, health care and renewable energy
Today, Gail gives us the third essential where once again my country of birth stands out for its determination to race to the bottom. With 20 years of living in Sweden I know quite a bit about Swedish policy on the subject before us but I do not need to show that here since Rima Regas already has laid out all that poor Hillary needs to know and doesn't.
Read Rima's 2d paragraph.There in a nutshell is all that Bernie already knows and that Hillary is not even interested in learning about.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen-USA-SE
PS When a Swedish interventionist was putting a stent in my circumflex 9 y ago I asked him why he came back to Sweden from Rima's CA. His answer: "USA has no policy to help parents." True story.
In comments at various columns I have commented about Hillary's Denmark laugh line by pointed out that she has a lot to learn from Denmark, Sweden, and more as concerns two essentials, health care and renewable energy
Today, Gail gives us the third essential where once again my country of birth stands out for its determination to race to the bottom. With 20 years of living in Sweden I know quite a bit about Swedish policy on the subject before us but I do not need to show that here since Rima Regas already has laid out all that poor Hillary needs to know and doesn't.
Read Rima's 2d paragraph.There in a nutshell is all that Bernie already knows and that Hillary is not even interested in learning about.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen-USA-SE
PS When a Swedish interventionist was putting a stent in my circumflex 9 y ago I asked him why he came back to Sweden from Rima's CA. His answer: "USA has no policy to help parents." True story.
9
I don't know whether one situation is different for those starting out (of either sex) than it was in my younger days. A prime requirement then when joining a large company was a stated "no preference" in location on the application form -- in short willingness to move if that suited company needs and included a promotion. That becomes more difficult to state and have believed when both parents have valued jobs and do not essentially live from the income of one family bread winner.
9
"Working mother" is a term of derision. The GOP wants force women to have babies, then abandon them as soon as they are out of the womb. They work hard to make child-care unobtainable. They want to deny health care, so mothers with children are forced to make the "stay home with sick kid" choice over and over, knowing full well it _will_ cost her the job.
In first ring jobs...like call centers, retail, or restaurants.....there is no flexibility. It's not like a "real job" where you can call in and work at home for the day. You get an occurrence, a demerit, a black mark. You lose pay, and maybe any health insurance you have. So do you take a job and lose it, or apply for medicaid or another poverty program where you're on the dole, but at least you're not freaking out every time a phone rings. And these are not 'welfare moms,' these are women with education who cannot move up because they are also parents.
Middle and low wage women are just burned out. Until you are standing in your manager's office being told one more tardy or absence and you're out...you don't know how hard it is to balance every day stuff.
The private sector will not step up to the line one working parents until the government forces them to participate in providing basic life services. Child care. Health insurance. Family leave.
The GOP has one goal: keep us in the kitchen - barefoot and pregnant - with no recourse. There's your indentured servant class.
http://wifelyperson.blogspot.com/
In first ring jobs...like call centers, retail, or restaurants.....there is no flexibility. It's not like a "real job" where you can call in and work at home for the day. You get an occurrence, a demerit, a black mark. You lose pay, and maybe any health insurance you have. So do you take a job and lose it, or apply for medicaid or another poverty program where you're on the dole, but at least you're not freaking out every time a phone rings. And these are not 'welfare moms,' these are women with education who cannot move up because they are also parents.
Middle and low wage women are just burned out. Until you are standing in your manager's office being told one more tardy or absence and you're out...you don't know how hard it is to balance every day stuff.
The private sector will not step up to the line one working parents until the government forces them to participate in providing basic life services. Child care. Health insurance. Family leave.
The GOP has one goal: keep us in the kitchen - barefoot and pregnant - with no recourse. There's your indentured servant class.
http://wifelyperson.blogspot.com/
35
You do describe it. But I think it's worse than you describe. The Republicans want to punish women for not just having sex, but for being perceived by men as sexual. So not just barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen without recourse, but punished by impoverishment for being sexual enough to get pregnant in the first place, married or not. Children are regarded not as our future, but as punishment for women being sexual. That's why they don't want to support children's needs, parents' needs, family needs. This will reach a point where society will collapse.
I am the owner of a small company with an all female staff in their childbearing years. I am also the mother of 3 grown children. No woman I know wants to go back to work full-time in the first year after having a child. Even after the first year, a full time job leaves little room for the second shift women are still managing--household and child care and the many other things every woman needs to take care of during the week. Time for exercise and self care? Usually goes out the window for a good long time.
Women who work full-time while their children are very young usually have to for financial reasons. Ideally, planning on a more part time schedule with a company that is responsive to flex-time employees would work better. As a company owner, I look at how roles and essential work functions can be divided into two part time jobs to accommodate my staff's schedule preferences. First time mothers to be rarely anticipate the level of fatigue and stress working full-time with a baby will bring on them, but when the second one comes along they have smartened up. I embrace the concept of "sequencing" where for periods of a woman's life work comes first and for other periods parenting comes first. I wish men would take a closer look at this too. Until we have family leaves that are kinder to families, saving for parental leave and negotiating that with your employer should be a part of family planning!
Women who work full-time while their children are very young usually have to for financial reasons. Ideally, planning on a more part time schedule with a company that is responsive to flex-time employees would work better. As a company owner, I look at how roles and essential work functions can be divided into two part time jobs to accommodate my staff's schedule preferences. First time mothers to be rarely anticipate the level of fatigue and stress working full-time with a baby will bring on them, but when the second one comes along they have smartened up. I embrace the concept of "sequencing" where for periods of a woman's life work comes first and for other periods parenting comes first. I wish men would take a closer look at this too. Until we have family leaves that are kinder to families, saving for parental leave and negotiating that with your employer should be a part of family planning!
38
Women are retiring early to care for their very elderly parents. and some are just sick of making discounted wages after years of kissing up to the other gender and telling them how smart they are when the opposite is true.
I am confused:
lean in
be less aggressive
be more aggressive
just be one of the guys
be a team player
just be quiet and good things will happen
,,give up
I am confused:
lean in
be less aggressive
be more aggressive
just be one of the guys
be a team player
just be quiet and good things will happen
,,give up
36
Both my daughter and daughter-in-law are new mothers. Both will return to work after a 12 week maternity paid leave. One works for a national TV station, and the other is an Urban educator training new teachers in the inner city. That they will return to the workplace is certain, but the irony is that the one involved in education has no more benefit in terms of child care than the one who works in TV. Seeing these two highly educated women leaving their infants at three months of age leaves me feeling sad. Those of us who argue about individualism and diversity have bought into the hurray for me and the heck with you philosophy. Of course that kind of thinking is a total cop out. They ought to read John Donne's Poem
No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
Why are we so afraid of doing the decent thing?
Women deserve full lives as mothers and workers just as men do.
No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
Why are we so afraid of doing the decent thing?
Women deserve full lives as mothers and workers just as men do.
37
If someone can explain to me why I should (through my taxes) subsidize childcare so someone else can get a semi-free ride I will listen. I will quite happily pay for all children's schooling (all the way through college too!) because that is (or should) be a societal obligation, but to ask me (or anyone else) to subsidize infant-care or pre-school care so mom or dad can dump the kids off and go out to make more $$$ is, at least to me, a non-starter. If you don't want to take care of your children when they are infants, don't have them.
13
If the government forces women to have unwanted children, then the government must help raise them. Republicans want to deny women the right to an abortion, while they refuse to acknowledge and ameliorate the burdens created by that GOP ideology.
This viewpoint assumes that Mom has a choice whether to work or not. In many if not most cases, this is not the case; the family can't make it without the money. Imposing upper middle-class values on this issue is irrelevant.
The last sentence says it all: "Nothing's changed." This is a country where some politicians talk the talk but very few walk the walk. That Barack Obama got the Affordable Care Act passed, that Lyndon Johnson got the Civil Right Act passed are miracles in the history of America. This country is falling behind because it is not moving forward.
30
Wow. One of your best, most incisive columns (and that is saying something!)
I was raised by a single mom. We'd have been absolutely lost without our beloved babysitter.
But I know how it strained my mom's budget. She was incredibly stressed all the time and though she was a professional woman, we were poor.
It didn't help matters that she was grossly underpaid compared to men in her profession, but that's another story.
Or is it.
I was raised by a single mom. We'd have been absolutely lost without our beloved babysitter.
But I know how it strained my mom's budget. She was incredibly stressed all the time and though she was a professional woman, we were poor.
It didn't help matters that she was grossly underpaid compared to men in her profession, but that's another story.
Or is it.
36
It's exactly the same story but it goes further. When I had an infant I was an adjunct at a college. I couldn't leave the job as I would be replaced before the door closed. I wouldn't be in a position to move into full time university teaching as I wasn't around to be recommended. I did stay but I paid the baby sitter just about as much as I earned (luckily I had a working husband with enough salary for us to squeak through) and I advanced in my job. I'm now working full-time and although I have the same or more qualifications as the men, I make significantly less (our salaries are secret but there's talk).
1
The attack on Planned Parenthood is not about abortion but about women not being able to control when to have children and therefore being able to stay in the workforce.
27
Guess what Gail, you are never going to get the high quality day care people think should happen in America because too many of these type of women are already in the teaching profession beyond the daycare stage, and the rest are home taking care if their own children while working 4 day work weeks, and the good college women are already nannies for higher paid working woman, and last but not least it is extremely difficult work. Nature doesn't give you more than one child every 9 months because your body and mind can't take more than 1 at a time. Having known two women who did it for twenty years, I was the one who encouraged both of them to quit as they were tired of the long hours, 12 a day and low pay, and both are happy. One now is paid by her daughter to take care of several of her grandchildren. The other works at a public elementary school. Besides, many women are finding out that not only can you not have all, some of them actually don't want it all. They have husbands that do fine, and they go without having everything that the upper east women purchase like designer bags. I mean, did most feminists ever wonder why children are failing in school? It is because their own mothers are uninterested in having children in the first place, and the federal government is basically raising them from cradle to grave in the last 40 years!
1
I know how comforting it is to imagine that women work because they want "designer bags," but mothers who work often do so because without their income, their families would be homeless. Some of them don't have husbands (not just because they are single but because of divorce or simple abandonment) and those who do may be married to a man who cannot find a job that pays enough to support the family by himself.
Take a look outside your neighborhood once in a while. Not everyone is working so hard by choice.
Take a look outside your neighborhood once in a while. Not everyone is working so hard by choice.
The down side regarding stay home Moms is the lack of retirement.
Just because the Republicans tell us they have certain values doesn't mean they do. Our Moral Majority party that keeps telling us it is THE family values party, really is NOT. Like the Russian veto, they veto legislation to help women and families, with Nyet votes for:
women's reproductive health (or the good health of all Americans at a reasonable price); family planning; a livable minimum wage, decent salaries for workers, equal pay for women; family leave to take care of a newborn or seriously ill family member; gun safety and protection from family violence, etc.
Why are the Republicans against women and families? Largely because filthy rich people in the exceptional USA hate to pay workers a decent salary, and they hate to pay their fair share of taxes, particularly taxes that go to help women, struggling families, and other people's children.
These reactionary gazillionaires will pay politicians any amount of money to make sure we don't have the support for women and families that other "democratic socialist" countries enjoy. Say "democratic socialism" to a rich person and watch him cringe and recoil.
Sadly, the Republicans are not the solution but the problem. Their incessant propaganda reminds me of the old Nichols and May skit of 2 teenagers making out in the car. He is groping her, and she says, "But will you love me in the morning?" He blurts out, "Oh yes, I will love you like crazy in the morning!"
The GOP will not love us in the morning folks.
women's reproductive health (or the good health of all Americans at a reasonable price); family planning; a livable minimum wage, decent salaries for workers, equal pay for women; family leave to take care of a newborn or seriously ill family member; gun safety and protection from family violence, etc.
Why are the Republicans against women and families? Largely because filthy rich people in the exceptional USA hate to pay workers a decent salary, and they hate to pay their fair share of taxes, particularly taxes that go to help women, struggling families, and other people's children.
These reactionary gazillionaires will pay politicians any amount of money to make sure we don't have the support for women and families that other "democratic socialist" countries enjoy. Say "democratic socialism" to a rich person and watch him cringe and recoil.
Sadly, the Republicans are not the solution but the problem. Their incessant propaganda reminds me of the old Nichols and May skit of 2 teenagers making out in the car. He is groping her, and she says, "But will you love me in the morning?" He blurts out, "Oh yes, I will love you like crazy in the morning!"
The GOP will not love us in the morning folks.
36
The Republican Party's position toward women and children is based on a warped interpretation of an anthology of myths and oral histories eventually, over many centuries, transcribed into written form and held to be inspired, sacred, inerrant and absolute. This, despite the fact that not more than one or two in a hundred have read much further into it than "In the beginning..." and certainly not anywhere near the closing word: Amen.
The Holy Roman Catholic Church is given credit (held responsible?) for much of the current situation in this regard. And the Republicans fought mightily to prevent a "crappie cruncher" (a favorite pejorative applied to Catholics in the midwest during the years of my youth, when abstinence from meat on Fridays was commonly observed by those of the Catholic faith) from being elected President of these here United States, because, if elected, he would take his marching orders from Rome, not from Wall Street. Just as the Catholic Church has fought to exclude women from active roles in the priesthood, the Republican party has diligently worked to keep them barefoot and pregnant.
I blame the ignorance and hubris of males in general. Mark Twain said, when discussing the Mormon church, he couldn't understand how polygamy ever existed in the first place. A hundred healthy young men, said Mark, couldn't satisfy (and he made pretty clear what he meant by "satisfy") one woman in her prime.
Gail, how come you aren't running for President?
The Holy Roman Catholic Church is given credit (held responsible?) for much of the current situation in this regard. And the Republicans fought mightily to prevent a "crappie cruncher" (a favorite pejorative applied to Catholics in the midwest during the years of my youth, when abstinence from meat on Fridays was commonly observed by those of the Catholic faith) from being elected President of these here United States, because, if elected, he would take his marching orders from Rome, not from Wall Street. Just as the Catholic Church has fought to exclude women from active roles in the priesthood, the Republican party has diligently worked to keep them barefoot and pregnant.
I blame the ignorance and hubris of males in general. Mark Twain said, when discussing the Mormon church, he couldn't understand how polygamy ever existed in the first place. A hundred healthy young men, said Mark, couldn't satisfy (and he made pretty clear what he meant by "satisfy") one woman in her prime.
Gail, how come you aren't running for President?
14
While I think that you are right that the United States is falling behind with respect to women at work, I also think that you are misusing the statistics that you're quoting here. The increase in female employment in Japan relative to that in the United States could certainly be due to relative declines in labor force participation, not gender imbalance. A much better statistic to quote is the ratio of female to male labor force partipation, which shows that the United States remains well ahead of most European countries in this respect, at least according to the World Bank (see: data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.FM.ZS/countries/US-JP-DK-AU-IE).
There is a small decline over the last 5 years or so of about 1 percent in this ratio, so we are failing somewhere. However, this data also shows that many of the top countries with respect to this indicator include such bastions of women's rights as the D.R.C and Uganda, so perhaps using such a naked statistic to gauge the state of women in America is intrinsically misguided anyway.
There is a small decline over the last 5 years or so of about 1 percent in this ratio, so we are failing somewhere. However, this data also shows that many of the top countries with respect to this indicator include such bastions of women's rights as the D.R.C and Uganda, so perhaps using such a naked statistic to gauge the state of women in America is intrinsically misguided anyway.
6
My wife and I are my daughter's child care for our grandson. I hate to think how he would be living and being taken care of without us. Both live with us. We are the new "modern family". We receive no child support or any help. The Republicans have espoused family values for 40 years while providing no help for families. We as a nation claim children are important and the future. Well, 25% of our future are living in poverty. We claim families are important while doing everything to tear them apart.
74
This well intentioned column, like everyone I read concerned about jobs, misses the point. Soon there will be few jobs as robots and algorithms do almost everything. Then all production and profits will need to be taxed to provide all citizens subsidies to keep our consumption based market economies thriving. Child care will not be a problem creative avenues and activities to replace work will be. Either advanced societies address this over the next twenty years or we will be headed into a new dark ages.
7
Lower fertility rates would be helpful since there will be fewer jobs to be had.
1
Thanks Gail and commenters for this discussion. Also, I would like to add that even those who see the problems here and want to move to Europe for a better quality of life are penalized by conservative policies. Those who are fortunate enough to have a skill set that enables them to find employment abroad are stiffed by the U.S. Government, which is the only first world country that penalizes its citizens with taxing them no matter where they live. So if you want 5-6 weeks of vacation and childcare now, while you are still living, you have to pay the IRS taxes just for being a citizen, as well as the country where you are living and working. This is a penalty that could only have been brought to you by conservatives, who want you to suffer even if you escape their evil grip.
16
Lack of affordable, adequate child care was the reason my family moved to Israel when our son was three years old. There our son was, at the age of three, placed in a day-care center affiliated with the university. It was strongly regulated and the staff was trained in the care of young children. This care allowed me to complete my graduate degree without worrying about my son's well-being. On his side, my son made friends there with whom he is still in touch as he approaches middle age.
Soon after coming back to the States, eight years later, the tax laws changed and required that the name and Social Security number of a child carer be produced in order to make this care deductible. It was a blow to all young families. No enhancement education costs are deductible (our son was, for lack of a better term, a musical prodigy, and boy, was that expensive!) and when we were unfortunate enough and our son was accepted in an Ivy League university I had to deplete my 401(k) savings to pay for part of his education. (Fortunately he needed no extra tutoring in high school - this is not deductible.) We never had the time or the means for having another child.
There are tax remedies galore for investors in the stock market, but none is available for investment in one's children's education. How perverse.
Soon after coming back to the States, eight years later, the tax laws changed and required that the name and Social Security number of a child carer be produced in order to make this care deductible. It was a blow to all young families. No enhancement education costs are deductible (our son was, for lack of a better term, a musical prodigy, and boy, was that expensive!) and when we were unfortunate enough and our son was accepted in an Ivy League university I had to deplete my 401(k) savings to pay for part of his education. (Fortunately he needed no extra tutoring in high school - this is not deductible.) We never had the time or the means for having another child.
There are tax remedies galore for investors in the stock market, but none is available for investment in one's children's education. How perverse.
53
WE are not a homogenous country in terms of beliefs and practices, so it is wildly inaccurate to compare statistics. What works in other countries tends to not work here because of our diversity and largely because of a long historic vein of freedom and individualism practiced and at times abused by most everyone. Japan has a long history of social conformity, and exacting shame on those who don't go along with norms. Germany is another example of a country that gravitates toward conformity not individualism. We are different. Thats said, it's always been my belief, based on being an active part of the culture, and I'll get slammed for saying this, but, many women don't want to work. Many are searching for a rich husband to buy them stuff so they can live like a Kardashian. How sad that after a hundred years of fighting for equal rights, young women now are simply after money, money that their husbands earn. I said not all, but many.
5
Many men don't want to work either. I'm sure your argument works in the exact reverse with men marrying rich women to attain a lifestyle they aspire to. And by the way, the Kardashian empire is run by women! What does this have to do with the need for affordable day care in the U.S. ?
"We are different. "
We sure are! We are capable of ignoring a serious problem for half a century, even as the rest of the world solves the same problem and moves on. In 100 years, us free, proud individuals will be glad to get work at calling centers owned by companies in India and China!
And if you truly believe that "many" women are gold-diggers, you need to stop reading Us Magazine for a while.
We sure are! We are capable of ignoring a serious problem for half a century, even as the rest of the world solves the same problem and moves on. In 100 years, us free, proud individuals will be glad to get work at calling centers owned by companies in India and China!
And if you truly believe that "many" women are gold-diggers, you need to stop reading Us Magazine for a while.
Interesting points! To me, what you're describing is just symptoms. Our economy is not doing well (at least that's the perception) and the system is skewed. The rich gets richer, the poor gets poorer, even when you have right credentials, have been a good citizen, and have worked full time for a long term (at least more than 10 or 20 years). Still, it doesn't cut it. Once you're out of work or retired, the safety net is not sufficient. Your tax bailed out the big banks on the Wall Street; yet, once you're out of the system, no one will look at you as a capable person. You're on your own. Things are harder if you're a pregnant woman or single woman with growing kids from an Average Joe's family or worse. You're out of luck. Women are not stupid. They do know how to survive and thrive. Why fight with men for equal rights and pay at work and take a bet on disappearing jobs at all, when you can have it all by marrying into comfort, pleasure, and status?
As a practicing attorney in a large firm, and later as a law professor, my greatest sympathy went to the secretaries in my offices. While I could juggle a schedule to be where I needed for my kids, the secretaries were required to be there from 9 to 5, and had to take vacation or sick time to do things with and for their kids. That inflexibility was just a fact of life for them, and one which they managed with grace and humor.
Knowing how hard it sometimes was for me to meet every commitment, I am still impressed with the management skills and creative efforts they showed in raising their children--who turned out quite well.
Knowing how hard it sometimes was for me to meet every commitment, I am still impressed with the management skills and creative efforts they showed in raising their children--who turned out quite well.
51
Thanks Gail Collins for another excellent column; this one close to my work of the last 15 years. When we talk about women leaving the workforce, the next question is "once they have left, how do they get back in?". I returned to work myself after 11 years out of the full time workforce. One of the most effective ways to return to work after a career break is through a paid reentry internship. Five major financial services companies offer formal reentry internship programs (Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, MetLife and Morgan Stanley) and now, through an initiative I am leading with the Society of Women Engineers, seven major engineering based companies are piloting formal reentry internship programs: Booz Allen Hamilton, Caterpillar, Cummins, General Motors, IBM, Intel and Johnson Controls. Strategy Consulting firm AT Kearney just announced a program and a group of mid-sized companies out of Colorado, led by the company Return Path, are also running programs. The reentry internship allows the employer to make a hiring decision based on an actual work sample and the permanent hiring decision does not have to be made until the internship period is over. And for the returning professional, the internship is an opportunity to evaluate the employer and also to get some recent work experience on the resume. -- Carol Fishman Cohen, CEO, iRelaunch.com
18
Since SCOTUS' decision on a Roe v. Wade, we have watched the Right to Life vilify women’s rights, healthcare and economic survival. During their 40 year reign of terror, this organization and their political supporters has never once addressed the issue of what happens when the baby is born? They have never uttered one word about the women's or baby’s health and economic stability. If the Right to Life and their Republican political allies were truly interested in stopping abortion they would be lobbying relentlessly for prenatal healthcare, paid parental leave, free healthcare for everyone under the age of 18 and child care that is not only subsidized but paid for and encouraged. Want to encourage the birth rate and decrease abortions? Make the role of parenting priority not just the birth of a baby. As long as this organization and their Republican allies have an agenda that begins and ends with the birth of a baby and never address the economic challenges that families face we are never going to see economic growth stability for families. The only thing the Right to Life has accomplished is allowing their Republican political allies totally ignore families’ needs and assign them to bottom rung among the Republican ruling class.
208
Very good comment which lays bare the hypoocrisy of these groups. Whenever I hear "family values" from these people, I gag.
Sorry but Americans don't feel "economically fragile" because of disproportionate wealth distribution. They feel fragile because they are either not working or working in jobs that they considered beneath their skill level. And they don't see the prospect of job growth any time soon.
We have an under- and unemployment problem that has little to do with gender. This recovery has not been good to our workforce, male or female.
We have an under- and unemployment problem that has little to do with gender. This recovery has not been good to our workforce, male or female.
16
Indeed, it was both interesting and entertaining to see the Dem candidates last Tuesday extolling the efforts and results of seven years of Obamanomics, yet turn right around and paint an utterly dreadful picture of our current economic state. Bernie in particular clearly believes that the sky isn't falling because it already fell some time ago.
And, of course, it's all Republicans' fault. Couldn't have had anything to do with two years of undivided Democratic government then repeated continuing resolutions based on the assumptions and objectives underpinning the one (1) budget that undivided Democratic government managed to pass in Congress. For those two years Republicans screamed at Democrats that it wasn't about ObamaCare, it wasn't about a failed cap-&-trade, it wasn't about immense subsidies to green start-up boondoggles that failed microseconds after enriching their founders: it was about private sector jobs, and solid middle-class ones at that. But Dems had other ideas, other priorities.
So we have the economy and the workforce we made as a nation under Democrats. Word of advice to Republicans: keep your eyes on the ball, or a very fickle electorate will give it all back to the Bernies of the world. And if THAT happens, look for America to become the gray, foggy world of Orwell's 1984, and gruel to be the staple of a people who no longer innovate because there's no reason to -- everything they produce is taken to generate enough gruel to feed everybody equally.
And, of course, it's all Republicans' fault. Couldn't have had anything to do with two years of undivided Democratic government then repeated continuing resolutions based on the assumptions and objectives underpinning the one (1) budget that undivided Democratic government managed to pass in Congress. For those two years Republicans screamed at Democrats that it wasn't about ObamaCare, it wasn't about a failed cap-&-trade, it wasn't about immense subsidies to green start-up boondoggles that failed microseconds after enriching their founders: it was about private sector jobs, and solid middle-class ones at that. But Dems had other ideas, other priorities.
So we have the economy and the workforce we made as a nation under Democrats. Word of advice to Republicans: keep your eyes on the ball, or a very fickle electorate will give it all back to the Bernies of the world. And if THAT happens, look for America to become the gray, foggy world of Orwell's 1984, and gruel to be the staple of a people who no longer innovate because there's no reason to -- everything they produce is taken to generate enough gruel to feed everybody equally.
1
Of course, your beloved Republican Party, had absolutely no role in things being as you describe them, and are not working diligently to maintain the status quo.
4
In more cases than I care to think about (including my own and my husband's), we simply "aged out" of the workforce. Trying to find a job after 50 years of age is daunting, unless you strike out on your own. Not all of us have skills that are in so much demand that working as a contractor is an option. Or, the industries that we were once in have sought out foreign contractors to do our work, since "guest workers" are cheaper than Americans and do not expect paid leave of any sort or any other kinds of benefits or the salaries that can support families of four in today's suburbia.
Anyone over 50 who loses his or her job has a long, tough row to hoe unless that person was the CEO of a company who made millions, even after being fired. That person could always try her hand at politics, like Carly Fiorina.
Anyone over 50 who loses his or her job has a long, tough row to hoe unless that person was the CEO of a company who made millions, even after being fired. That person could always try her hand at politics, like Carly Fiorina.
54
First, there are many mean spirited or sexist comments posted here which sadden me and also completely support the common view of many of us that Conservatives only care about fetuses and do not give a rats behind about actual children. Thanks for making your anti-actual-life position crystal clear.
Second, I am reminded of how fortunate I was when my children (20 and17) were born. I am a public school teacher in the Northeast which means I have a union contract that allowed me a (short) paid maternity leave. Paid by using my accumulated sick days. I stayed home 14 weeks with the first and had the second during a sabbatical. However childcare costs were crazy. My husband and I made the calculated decision that for 7 years my salary was earmarked for childcare. It cost us well over $50,000.00. And my older child has a developmental disability and for his last two years in preschool his was subsidized but still cost almost $500monthly while my daughters $900 per month. I shudder to think what it must cost nowadays.
Second, I am reminded of how fortunate I was when my children (20 and17) were born. I am a public school teacher in the Northeast which means I have a union contract that allowed me a (short) paid maternity leave. Paid by using my accumulated sick days. I stayed home 14 weeks with the first and had the second during a sabbatical. However childcare costs were crazy. My husband and I made the calculated decision that for 7 years my salary was earmarked for childcare. It cost us well over $50,000.00. And my older child has a developmental disability and for his last two years in preschool his was subsidized but still cost almost $500monthly while my daughters $900 per month. I shudder to think what it must cost nowadays.
55
Rene Descartes began looking at and testing reality by turning to his own experience; sadly, Ben Carson fails to apply the same axiom: he turns to stupid talking points. Tragically, the man most gifted in saving infants from physical health crises (with maybe the most gifted hands in the world!) has never observed the child care and early learning centers and child development labs of his own institution, apparently never talking to Johns Hopkins own experts, who would tell him: his position is refuted by abundant science and is an utter fail for anyone renown in the field of children.
More: studies show children enjoy the ancient art of astonishment. They would be astonished to find that the pleasures of stimulation from reading, listening, and moving are "indoctrination," and that Big Bird and Sesame Street, used in 150 countries in native languages, is a global rogue and international conspirator operating in front of our eyes!
Carson is an "idiot savant," who confuses his past and his skills; he is the sad vision of all he challenges; the compliant personality who internalized the script of his political masters, finds acceptance and disgorges of their myths of evil power. He who saved children, would destroy their hope and slash their future, taking away the one absolute--learning!--children need for life success.
The GOP model of child development is the ant colony or bee hive. Some are born to be workers; their freedom comes with predestined limits.
More: studies show children enjoy the ancient art of astonishment. They would be astonished to find that the pleasures of stimulation from reading, listening, and moving are "indoctrination," and that Big Bird and Sesame Street, used in 150 countries in native languages, is a global rogue and international conspirator operating in front of our eyes!
Carson is an "idiot savant," who confuses his past and his skills; he is the sad vision of all he challenges; the compliant personality who internalized the script of his political masters, finds acceptance and disgorges of their myths of evil power. He who saved children, would destroy their hope and slash their future, taking away the one absolute--learning!--children need for life success.
The GOP model of child development is the ant colony or bee hive. Some are born to be workers; their freedom comes with predestined limits.
112
Carson is a good man who, despite the awe in which we hold neurosurgeons, remains what neurosurgeons basically are: aggrandized car mechanics who have learned which brain-embedded funny-bone is connected to which hip-bone.
But he's no better than other, more sophisticated men and women -- as many on the right as on the left.
It should be noted that this juxtaposition of Republicans and retrogressive educational policies is rank demonization. It's not Democrats who push so hard for charter schools in our most impoverished communities, even if it's largely Democrats in those communities who desperately seek by the hundreds and thousands to have their kid take each opening available in such charters.
The Democratic model of child development is to enslave our children to the sub-standard capacities offered by a union-protected public school system that has utterly failed our poorest communities and needs to be uprooted in its entirety.
But he's no better than other, more sophisticated men and women -- as many on the right as on the left.
It should be noted that this juxtaposition of Republicans and retrogressive educational policies is rank demonization. It's not Democrats who push so hard for charter schools in our most impoverished communities, even if it's largely Democrats in those communities who desperately seek by the hundreds and thousands to have their kid take each opening available in such charters.
The Democratic model of child development is to enslave our children to the sub-standard capacities offered by a union-protected public school system that has utterly failed our poorest communities and needs to be uprooted in its entirety.
As a product of the public school system, starting with attending a one-room rural school in North Dakota, I am deeply offended by your snarky comments. I currently live in West Virginia, where the 'failure' of many public schools clearly is tied to their funding dependent on the local tax base. I am all for universal funding of public schools, so that children living in impoverished areas, whether rural or urban, are not placed at an immediate educational disadvantage.
1
Ed:
I'm assuming that your response is to my comment, not to Walter's. You need to address your responses, as simply clicking on "Reply" doesn't yet get the comment embedded under the one it relates to.
I'm one of the right-of-center commenters here with a history that goes back almost as far as the Times has HAD a commenting community (as does Walter), and who strongly supports federal involvement in local education to establish and maintain a uniformity of quality and effectiveness across ALL our communities.
Until we can first purge ourselves of our most conservative elements then convince even mainstream Republicans that national funding doesn't need to mean centralized brainwashing, we're going to see what we see. But, fairly, the charter school movement has been embraced by our poorer communities and should be focused on them as a good interim step worthy of intensification there if not everywhere -- and it's a Republican initiative, not a Democratic one.
I'm assuming that your response is to my comment, not to Walter's. You need to address your responses, as simply clicking on "Reply" doesn't yet get the comment embedded under the one it relates to.
I'm one of the right-of-center commenters here with a history that goes back almost as far as the Times has HAD a commenting community (as does Walter), and who strongly supports federal involvement in local education to establish and maintain a uniformity of quality and effectiveness across ALL our communities.
Until we can first purge ourselves of our most conservative elements then convince even mainstream Republicans that national funding doesn't need to mean centralized brainwashing, we're going to see what we see. But, fairly, the charter school movement has been embraced by our poorer communities and should be focused on them as a good interim step worthy of intensification there if not everywhere -- and it's a Republican initiative, not a Democratic one.
Child care in our society is mostly inhumane. To separate women from their babies too soon is a product of the industrial revolution of the past several hundred years. Advanced economies, like most of Europe, recognizes this, and gives generous assistance to mothers and children. But in this country, that is considered to be gasp! socialism. In this country, control of women is at the heart of all of this. The powers that be don't seem to mind that one in four children go hungry in the U.S. They also don't seem to mind that these hungry children live in a single parent home mostly headed by a woman and that when women DO work, they only earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. Why are women alone? Because men abuse them and the children at an alarming rate. They would rather go it alone if given the choice. The religious in this country would prefer a theocracy, with men in charge. Of course, religion is written by men for men. Religion is for the masses, while the powers that be understand it is the most efficient way to control them. Keep the men busy controlling their women, and then you can control them as well. Where is democracy in all of this? Where is our humanity? With fewer jobs, the elite would rather get the great unwashed prepared for more poverty, while they scrape off the cream for themsleves, just like is happening right now. Enter Bernie Sanders.
70
@ Carolyne Egeli - Carolyne, at one reply already and at one or two submitted not yet accepted comments I point to the need for real head to head debates between Sanders and Clinton where the nature of the question requires each to show first what they know or do not know about, for example, the situation for pregnant women from gestational week 12 to post natal at least one year.
I have no idea what either Clinton or Sanders actually know now, but given Hillary's "Denmark, are you kidding" (my phrasing) I suspect she knows nothing.
Is there any way to shape such a debate? Maybe not.
Larry
I have no idea what either Clinton or Sanders actually know now, but given Hillary's "Denmark, are you kidding" (my phrasing) I suspect she knows nothing.
Is there any way to shape such a debate? Maybe not.
Larry
1
Isn't the current Republican governing philosophy (besides shutting the government down), the annihilation of women's rights? Human decency has taken leave from politics and of course women's job numbers are deceasing. Women have no Congressional support.
Add to that the clear fact that nearly every necessity is unaffordable. If you want proof, look at food costs. Combine sustenance costs with a basic need such as child care and families are being strangled.
I won't even try to make sense of living on a fixed income. That too is not the least bit easy.
I sure would like to try living with wealth because being near poor is terribly discouraging, especially when there is no help in sight.
Add to that the clear fact that nearly every necessity is unaffordable. If you want proof, look at food costs. Combine sustenance costs with a basic need such as child care and families are being strangled.
I won't even try to make sense of living on a fixed income. That too is not the least bit easy.
I sure would like to try living with wealth because being near poor is terribly discouraging, especially when there is no help in sight.
46
I started working when I was 14 years old and I now have a PhD. With the exception of time during my studies, I always worked full-time.
When my 3rd child was born, she had health issues so I decided to leave my regular full-time job and go into private practice at only 8-10 hours a week, so that I could take care of her and my other 2 children. I did this for about 6 years. When I began applying to go back to work full-time, it was like I had been dead for those 6 years. I received absolutely no calls for interviews.
Leaving the workforce, so to speak, was the kiss of death for me and I am sure it is the same for many women.
When my 3rd child was born, she had health issues so I decided to leave my regular full-time job and go into private practice at only 8-10 hours a week, so that I could take care of her and my other 2 children. I did this for about 6 years. When I began applying to go back to work full-time, it was like I had been dead for those 6 years. I received absolutely no calls for interviews.
Leaving the workforce, so to speak, was the kiss of death for me and I am sure it is the same for many women.
153
Leaving the workforce, so to speak, is the kiss of death for anyone, even men, especially if it looks the person has family issues that means they will often be absent from work.
A tremendous amount of women are retiring as they are of the baby boomer generation. As far as daycare expenses: people should plan appropriately and not expect the government or taxpayers to support their daycare needs. One of the biggest problems in today's society is there is no accountability for one's actions. The government is all too quick (and willing) to want to tax conscientious, ambitious, hard-working people for another social program.
3
You are kidding. Honestly. My daughter and her family, two children and a husband with a phd in 'Computational Science' have moved in with us. It was an eye opener for us when we hired our daughter with a base salary of $40,000.00 and benefits and found her day-care for her 2 and 4 year old ate up 75% of her salary. The 2 year old is being taken care of by an elderly couple who has done this type of care for 20 years and the 4 year old goes to earlyu childhood learning.
No accountability for one's action? I wonder if our society is so into their own situation that they cannot see the world around them. Compassion, care and a sense of unity seems to taken out of the United States.
No accountability for one's action? I wonder if our society is so into their own situation that they cannot see the world around them. Compassion, care and a sense of unity seems to taken out of the United States.
4
Yeah cause those moms who want to go back to the workforce after having children are NOT ambitious, conscientious or hardworking?
Childcare is expensive and the less a mother makes, the lower her capacity to pay for childcare. Unfortunately, if a woman stops working in her prime career years, she is jeopardizing her capacity to support herself in the future. With a high divorce rate and nearly as many singles living either by themselves or in an unmarried partnership, old age financial insecurity hits women very hard.
I've been an employer with employees leaving for 12 weeks of pregnancy leave. Our company could not afford to pay a full wage during those weeks as we also needed to hire a temporary worker to cover the position but we did find insurance that would pay a goodly portion during pregnancy leave.
I've been an employer with employees leaving for 12 weeks of pregnancy leave. Our company could not afford to pay a full wage during those weeks as we also needed to hire a temporary worker to cover the position but we did find insurance that would pay a goodly portion during pregnancy leave.
21
This is a great piece but any discussion of affordable childcare also should include a discussion of fair wages for the people (almost all of whom are women and many mothers themselves) who take care of other people's children so they can work. I spend a fortune on daycare but I know the women who care for my son are struggling themselves - the only solution to affordable childcare with living wages is substantial government investing. I'd happily pay more taxes over the course of my life for this benefit.
59
I have always said, to the consternation of the people of color and the gays in my life, that women are the most oppressed group. My theory rests on the fact that they outnumber men and if they got together they could vote themselves into every conceivable political office. Instead they allow themselves to be divided, and they either don't vote or they vote against their own self-interests.
How is it possible for a woman to vote Republican? That's absolute masochism. Why aren't all women committed to voting for Hillary Clinton so this country can finally elect a woman president?
Women need to understand they're examples of the immortal words of Pogo: "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
How is it possible for a woman to vote Republican? That's absolute masochism. Why aren't all women committed to voting for Hillary Clinton so this country can finally elect a woman president?
Women need to understand they're examples of the immortal words of Pogo: "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
46
In grad school, we were told that all PH.D's in the social sciences and humanities agree women are and have always been the most oppressed group.
I am all for government policies that support working women and I respect both those women who need to work and those who choose to work because their work is meaningful to them.
My one argument is the statement that women falling out of the work force reduces family standards of living. It means less money coming in, for sure, but for some their standard of living improves greatly in terms of less stress and more time to create a saner home environment.
Perhaps part of the reason the number of women in the workforce is falling is because some of them are lucky enough not to absolutely have to work. They may not be wealthy and have to scrimp, but they recognize that money isn't everything and that the material goods the income from often unsatisfying careers provides simply aren't worth the time and stress it takes to secure them, even with better social policy in place.
My one argument is the statement that women falling out of the work force reduces family standards of living. It means less money coming in, for sure, but for some their standard of living improves greatly in terms of less stress and more time to create a saner home environment.
Perhaps part of the reason the number of women in the workforce is falling is because some of them are lucky enough not to absolutely have to work. They may not be wealthy and have to scrimp, but they recognize that money isn't everything and that the material goods the income from often unsatisfying careers provides simply aren't worth the time and stress it takes to secure them, even with better social policy in place.
12
Here's the natural result of all this. American families are having fewer children due to the cost of education housing, and time lost from work. Our population is shrinking as a result. We need more immigration as a result. Our education standards suffer as a result. Our children grow up with less adult parent interaction as a result. We are less competitive as a country as a result. When women choose to leave the workforce to raise children, they fall behind in earnings as a result, and will be eligible for fewer social security benefits as a result. Not having a comprehensive and well thought out maternity and early child education policy as a nation hurts us all as a result.
37
But unfortunately, it's not about being well thought out. It's all about emotion, sexism and religious extremism.
This actually goes back to the Republican War on Women. What Republican politician supports fair pay, support for working families, or child support? One of their leading candidates - Fiorina - blithely declares there is no glass ceiling, but was quick to take advantage of the tech world's problems with sexism to bolster her own position. Romney talked about "binders full of women". The GOP's lack of support for minimum wage more or less guarantees difficulty in affording child care.
There is also something of a shaming of women still who work outside their homes in some situations. The anti-contraception and anti- women's health stances of some of the leading Republican candidates is something they boast about. Unplanned pregnancies of course upend the work situation for families.
And of course, there are always the American Taliban Supreme Court justices with their Hobby Lobby that says bosses can dictate what kind of contraception women in the work place should be able to have on their insurance (which they pay for themselves).
The American Taliban in Congress threaten to shut down the entire government, and are wasting taxpayer dollars on five different investigations of Planned Parenthood - which provides essential women's health care, cancer screenings and contraception.
Nothing like dictating about every woman's body and health decisions to control their ability to participate in the work force.
There is also something of a shaming of women still who work outside their homes in some situations. The anti-contraception and anti- women's health stances of some of the leading Republican candidates is something they boast about. Unplanned pregnancies of course upend the work situation for families.
And of course, there are always the American Taliban Supreme Court justices with their Hobby Lobby that says bosses can dictate what kind of contraception women in the work place should be able to have on their insurance (which they pay for themselves).
The American Taliban in Congress threaten to shut down the entire government, and are wasting taxpayer dollars on five different investigations of Planned Parenthood - which provides essential women's health care, cancer screenings and contraception.
Nothing like dictating about every woman's body and health decisions to control their ability to participate in the work force.
176
I need help with something here.
Since we live in a Capitalist society and labor is paid on a supply vs demand mode. Lets start with 100 men working men and 100 stay at home moms in 1950.
By 1980, 50 of the stay at home moms are either poor or divorced and need the money or tired of "Leave It To Beaver" reruns and go back to work increasing the labor supply by 50%.
That is just going to put downward pressure on wages. With the men now making less money, the remaining moms to have to go back to work to make up the difference.
I am not trying to be a pain here I am just trying to see if this "is a thing".
Since we live in a Capitalist society and labor is paid on a supply vs demand mode. Lets start with 100 men working men and 100 stay at home moms in 1950.
By 1980, 50 of the stay at home moms are either poor or divorced and need the money or tired of "Leave It To Beaver" reruns and go back to work increasing the labor supply by 50%.
That is just going to put downward pressure on wages. With the men now making less money, the remaining moms to have to go back to work to make up the difference.
I am not trying to be a pain here I am just trying to see if this "is a thing".
4
More people in the labor force means more money circulating in the economy and thus larger demand for goods and services. More consumer spending translates to more job creation.
Yes, supply AND demand once was 'a thing' in this country.
I hope this clears up your confusion.
Yes, supply AND demand once was 'a thing' in this country.
I hope this clears up your confusion.
Taking your argument a little further, whenever unemployment is high perhaps a percentage of men should drop out of the workforce and leave jobs for women. The women would take care of the stay-at-home men.
John, What your hypothetical misses is the the overall wealth of the country (e.g GNP) grows too. It is not a zero-sum game.
Nncy
Nncy
Brilliant, Gail, your piece on the conundrum of working women in America; they can choose either parenting at home (child care) or work and pay an exorbitant price for hired child-care while they work. American women are economically fragile given the draconian "war against women" waged by the Republicans. Excellent to remember that in 1971 President Nixon vetoed Congress's bipartisan bill for quality preschool education for every family in the US, scaled to family's ability to pay tuition, plus after-school programs for older children. Small wonder that we are hard ahead of Turkey and Papua New Guinea with our wretchedly unacceptable unguaranteed paid maternity leave. Our society does not deal with this problem! The Republicans are the hobgoblins feared by all working women (either at home or in an unhealthful business cubicle). They want to defund Planned Parenthood and consider their right is to wield power over womens' bodies and decisions about their own bodies. And while the Clinton Administration gave new mothers 12 weeks of UNPAID leave, that didn't solve the problem of Republicans sticking their nose in the business of refusing sensible maternity leave and child and subteen after-school care for all the women who want to be in our working force today, but are unable to because of draconian child-care costs they cannot afford. Big Child Care joining Big Pharma, Big Food, Big Oil, Big Tobacco - all the "BIGS" - making Americans sick and fat. We are fed up.
55
It's interesting how the Republicans seem to prefer women to stay at home, refusing any government support for women to join/rejoin the workforce. For some reason, though, this only seems to apply to white, Christian families.
13
Sometimes the most unexplainable happens between a male and female couple. She gets pregnant. As one person I heard the other day say, "stuff happens..". And it does. But this article seems to say that women/mothers are the only ones who are responsible for the before/after school child-care. I have three girls and it was my responsibility for the most part because of logistics for their mother to make sure they were home in the evening.
A co-worker of mine has raised his two boys and one girl for several years without their mother involved. He had help with them from the family and some friends.
I agree that the equality pay is not the same. I just wanted it to be known that there are some males/fathers who did a lot of the child rearing and child-care programs too. Men who are involved with their children's well being.
It does take a village to raise a child. It takes all of us!
A co-worker of mine has raised his two boys and one girl for several years without their mother involved. He had help with them from the family and some friends.
I agree that the equality pay is not the same. I just wanted it to be known that there are some males/fathers who did a lot of the child rearing and child-care programs too. Men who are involved with their children's well being.
It does take a village to raise a child. It takes all of us!
32
You're so right! As progressive men recognize their role in child rearing, the children, communities and countries benefit tremendously. Good for you.
Granted. Also, I found Ms Collins' tying of the need for quality childcare to the employment prospects of (only???) women to be in itself antiquated. I must have misread this into it! How we continue to proceed as if we are competing sectors of the population amazes me -- divided on lines of gender, 'race,' age, political affiliation, wealth, you name it. So unevolved. One last thing: I couldn't keep out of my head the old 'one aircraft carrier' thing. As a country we have the wealth to be doing so much better for our children (and their parents, women AND men), but we choose not to. Very sad.
Another crackpot woman wanting to give money away. Why can't you leave me alone with my millions? Really, how can affordable child care be provided without raising taxes. And by the way why do we need more babies anyway? And why aren't these women using birth control? It's practically free.
I've observed that women get serious about life once they have a baby. So they go to college and start to really need childcare. So if childcare is a life changer why do they refuse to vote or vote for Republicans. Because they really don't want something for nothing. It's the American way.
I've observed that women get serious about life once they have a baby. So they go to college and start to really need childcare. So if childcare is a life changer why do they refuse to vote or vote for Republicans. Because they really don't want something for nothing. It's the American way.
4
I would like to think this is sarcasm, yes? There are fathers in any equation involving children.
I think it was Ms. Collins who suggested some time ago--perhaps using somewhat different language that Americans really do not care much about children. She was--and is--correct. If they did, we would hear at least something about child care during election campaigns. I think we need a deep examination on why this is not the case and what it says about us as a people. We claim to be so religious and God fearing and we proclaim that children are our future and yet we give so little thought to how children will be cared for in a world which requires parents--or a single parent--to focus on work. The hypocrisy is overwhelming.
65
Comparing the US and Japan on women's issues is like comparing navel oranges grown in Florida with Fuji apples. The cultures as well as diversity of the populations of both countries is entirely different. Historically, Japan has an almost xenophobic approach to immigration & is currently cracking down on VISA over stayers. The US, in stark contrast, has a history of opening its borders to immigrants of all nationalities & cultures. The US has a semi permeable border on the North & South including absorbing Haitians, Cubans, Mexicans, Central American refugees as well as war torn refugees after US imperialism including South East Asians, Middle Easterners, Koreans, Panamanians, Soviet Jews after the break-up of the Soviet Union, Bosnian refugees after the Yugoslavian War, Iraqi refugees after the US invasion, Myanmar refugees & displaced Northern Africans. Over one million immigrants are from the Middle East & North Africa or 2.5% of the nation’s 41.3 million immigrants.
In sharp contrast to the multicultural population of the US, Japan is largely homogeneous & has a declining population with most Japanese women choosing to delay child bearing as well as only having 1.4 children per family. Given these statistics, it makes perfect sense for the Japanese government to encourage women to have more children through government policies including maternity leave as well as tax incentives. US income inequality is tied to high childbirth out of wedlock among poor women.
In sharp contrast to the multicultural population of the US, Japan is largely homogeneous & has a declining population with most Japanese women choosing to delay child bearing as well as only having 1.4 children per family. Given these statistics, it makes perfect sense for the Japanese government to encourage women to have more children through government policies including maternity leave as well as tax incentives. US income inequality is tied to high childbirth out of wedlock among poor women.
8
Carla,
Hunh??? "US income inequality is tied to high childbirth out of wedlock among poor women."
This old chestnut completely ignores that most people in poverty are stable families with 2 parents just trying to make ends meet. It perpetuates a corrosive "blame the victim" myth about the causes of income inequality. It tars all single mothers [and their childrens' fathers] with a flimsy charge of irresponsibility. Ms. Van Rijk also forgets the tragedy and shame of men unable to contribute to the support of their families because of poor job opportunities. Wow.......
Hunh??? "US income inequality is tied to high childbirth out of wedlock among poor women."
This old chestnut completely ignores that most people in poverty are stable families with 2 parents just trying to make ends meet. It perpetuates a corrosive "blame the victim" myth about the causes of income inequality. It tars all single mothers [and their childrens' fathers] with a flimsy charge of irresponsibility. Ms. Van Rijk also forgets the tragedy and shame of men unable to contribute to the support of their families because of poor job opportunities. Wow.......
We need to acknowledge the fact that other types of family caregiving are also typically performed by women. Raising my two children did not take much of a toll on career, but caring for an elderly, disabled mother (at home) has been a significant challenge.
At present, Medicare will cover the cost of any number of needless medical tests and superfluous procedures, but not for what would really help our family -- in-home assistance with activities of daily living. If the ledger of those costs could be shifted somehow, I think it could improve the quality of life for our seniors and their families, as well help maintain women's ability to remain in the work force.
At present, Medicare will cover the cost of any number of needless medical tests and superfluous procedures, but not for what would really help our family -- in-home assistance with activities of daily living. If the ledger of those costs could be shifted somehow, I think it could improve the quality of life for our seniors and their families, as well help maintain women's ability to remain in the work force.
52
The truth is that only the government can force businesses to acknowledge that we all live in the real world, rather than in their spreadsheets. Paid family leave, day care, universal health care, minimum wages, even our physical infrastructure--all these things are criticized by Republicans as "thwarting business" & "killing jobs." The assumption is that the point of life is to grow businesses, whether or not those businesses support workers. Having children, getting sick, being unable to afford advanced education might condemn the riff-raff to lives of poverty, but we can't let that interfere with stock prices, or with the 7 & 8 figure salaries of the oligarchs. I understand why Republican politicians repeat this nonsense; that's what they're paid to do. But why working class people swallow it is a question people in the news media should be asking themselves.
49
Bill Bennett, yep that Bill Bennett, once said the Republican Party has been very good at selling the fantasy that "everyone can be rich in America." He offered this bit of truth when asked why working class voters vote Repulican and against their own economic interests. In short, he was saying that the GOP relies on the stupidity and gullibility of the voting public. I'd say that pretty much sums it up.
In 1963 I was a high school sophomore in a Mississippi public school. We were required to take a three-week study of "communism" in our civics course. Of all the information and propaganda that we were fed, the thing that sticks in my mind to this day was the claim of American superiority based on the fact that "our women" did not have to work, while in the Soviet Union, women had to leave the home to work at full-time jobs - proof positive that American capitalism was the best thing going. A funny thing happened on the way to the future.
23
Ms. Collins has it occurred to you that some mothers prefer to stay home with their children rather than have a stranger take care of them. The formative years are very important for their development and no one will teach them the values that are imperative to their well being. Love and concern from a mother towards her children are priceless and are more meaningful than an over abundance of material goods.
4
True, KMW, but for many mothers this is an unheard of luxury. I like the way the Europeans handle this, with generous paid leave and public assistance for women and children. We could easily do this, with just eliminating a few jets.
9
I'm sure it has. But this is NOT THE POINT of the column. The point is that women should have an economically viable choice in the matter. What some mothers prefer should not be what all mothers must do. She is making an economic argument as well, which your squishy and entitled perspective does not face up to. I would argue that an economically stressed mother stuck at home with a baby while facing a mountain of unpaid bills and an empty fridge is not going to be singing lullabies, reading Pat the Bunny and playing patty-cake to enhance her baby's social/emotional development.
3
For goodness sake she did not write a column That recommended requiring all young mothers to work! But if you're a single mom, or your partner is stuck in a low paying job, childcare costs are an immense burden.
4
I live in a middle class town in New Jersey. Tell me how this is fair. Property taxes in our state are the highest in the nation. The lions' shared of these taxes are spent on our school system. Our town has a number of retirees living on fixed incomes and middle aged blue collar workers whose children are grown and on their own. Many of these people have their savings invested in conservative and safe money market instruments which are yielding fractions of a percent. Now they are expected to help pick up the tab for pre-school children of young professional parents in our town whose combined incomes are over 125K a year. If you wonder why these people who are struggling to stay in the town and maintain their homes resent liberals you have to look no further than this column. The largess of the liberals falls on their backs and can result in drastic cutbacks in basic needs such as food and medication. And perhaps the most heartbreaking of all forcing them to see their homes and move away from family and friends.
5
You have it backwards. The largess is moving to the top .01%. That is why taxes are too great a burden on all of those below that percentile.
8
Not to mention that looking at this issue with liberal blinders misdiagnoses the problem. Maternity leave and early child care are issues quite separate from the dismal job creation record these past few years.
1
The now-grown children of those retirees living on fixed incomes and middle aged blue collar workers presumably went to school when they were children and their schooling was paid for, in part, by the taxes of people who at that time did not have children in school. Do you really want a system where the parents of schoolchildren have to pick up the entire tab for their children's education? As bad as the educational system is now, that would make it a lot worse. We all pay for public education because we don't want to live in a society where only the rich have access to education. I do think it would be much better if the cost of public education came from state/federal funding rather than local funding because the quality of your child's education should not depend on what zip code you live in but that is another argument.
12
Ms. Collins, did you ever stop and think that there is a huge disincentive for either gender to work in this country? It's called Government Care. 100,000,000 of our workforce choose not to work, and for a variety of reasons.
Major among them is the fact that they don't have to work any longer. If you can get by with what the government gives, there's no need to be in the workforce. There were no childcare programs when women first entered the workforce. Why stay in the workforce when the government takes more of your money to pay for so-called subsistence programs? It's easier to be among those who pay no taxes.
Remember the Greek dragon Ouroboros? He subsisted by eating his own tail, until their was not enough of him left to eat. There's a lesson for us here if we are wise enough to understand it.
Major among them is the fact that they don't have to work any longer. If you can get by with what the government gives, there's no need to be in the workforce. There were no childcare programs when women first entered the workforce. Why stay in the workforce when the government takes more of your money to pay for so-called subsistence programs? It's easier to be among those who pay no taxes.
Remember the Greek dragon Ouroboros? He subsisted by eating his own tail, until their was not enough of him left to eat. There's a lesson for us here if we are wise enough to understand it.
5
We spend 6.2 billion dollars a year "giving" government services to Walmart employees because this multi-billion dollars corporation doesn't pay its workers a living wage. Other minimum wage businesses seem to be built around the philosophy that they can pay $7.25 and hour and the taxpayers will pick up the rest of the check.Then there are old people like me who need government assistance because the corporation I worked for "lost my pension." You are pointing your finger at the wrong people. It's not the American worker who is seeking free-bees from the government. It is the American corporations which send our jobs off shore, underpay its workers and expect tax breaks for ruining our economy.
40
100,000,000 of our workforce choose not to work
The strangeness just keeps on getting stranger
Do people who watch and listen to Fox News really believe it's ok to just say anything, no matter how far from reality, and think nobody cares about facts anymore?
The strangeness just keeps on getting stranger
Do people who watch and listen to Fox News really believe it's ok to just say anything, no matter how far from reality, and think nobody cares about facts anymore?
2
This is a really nonsensical comment. There are not droves of people staying home collecting government checks, living the high life.
A major factor in the childcare discussion has to be the role of grandparents today. My perspective is based on my friends, middle and upper middle class grandparents. Everyone of them is able to be an integral part of childcare for their grandchildren. In some cases they are the sole provider. I can't extrapolate to determine how pervasive this phenomenon is but it clearly has an impact on young parents ability to stay in the workforce full time. And it is very different from my generatIons experience where grandparents were not the łynchpin in the critical childcare framework. Somehow this model is just not sustainable.
46
And this role only works if the family lives near the grandparents, and the grandparents are young enough and healthy enough to do the job. When women have children later, or when families move to where the job is, this safety net goes away.
1
"From Richard Nixon to Ben Carson and wow nothing's changed". Policies for working mothers are about the same, yes, but the times are completely different.
For many years I was a single working mother, motivated by a desire for luxuries I had become accustomed to: Food, shelter, and clothing. Finally retired to move closer to family and have time with grandson. He wasn't going to wait on me, he was changing at jet speed. The one or two annual visits that I could manage financially and time wise were not enough. I had had close relationships with my grandparents and I wanted that for my grandson and I.
Working all those years was not easy, I never expected it to be, but it was doable. I could provide. That possibility has diminished for so many in the workforce today, both for women and men. Working full time, sometimes even more than one job, does not guarantee a living wage today. Working a minimum wage job to finance further education is a relic of the past.
When I was young and struggling, I was always optimistic that the future was bright. And that made the day-to-day not only possible but enjoyable. I don't see much optimism today, understandably so. Opportunity ain't what it used to be...
Even daughter - and she and her husband have good jobs - commented that without my participation they would have crashed and burned by now, juggling parenting and work demands. What's it like for those without enough money and no family to help out?
For many years I was a single working mother, motivated by a desire for luxuries I had become accustomed to: Food, shelter, and clothing. Finally retired to move closer to family and have time with grandson. He wasn't going to wait on me, he was changing at jet speed. The one or two annual visits that I could manage financially and time wise were not enough. I had had close relationships with my grandparents and I wanted that for my grandson and I.
Working all those years was not easy, I never expected it to be, but it was doable. I could provide. That possibility has diminished for so many in the workforce today, both for women and men. Working full time, sometimes even more than one job, does not guarantee a living wage today. Working a minimum wage job to finance further education is a relic of the past.
When I was young and struggling, I was always optimistic that the future was bright. And that made the day-to-day not only possible but enjoyable. I don't see much optimism today, understandably so. Opportunity ain't what it used to be...
Even daughter - and she and her husband have good jobs - commented that without my participation they would have crashed and burned by now, juggling parenting and work demands. What's it like for those without enough money and no family to help out?
29
(Add to my other). Gail ---- although, I am all for a woman as President --- her one percent status speaks ill to many who have endured her prescriptions, only to fall farther and farther behind.
3
But Bernie Sanders was on Bill Maher and childcare was a tag on on his list of issues, and he while he made upping social security an issue he did not mention services to children at all unlike Hilary Clintion, even though the elderly already get a significantly greater chunk of the public dollar than children. Study after study says that if children don't get what they need by age 5, they will always fall behind.
Sorry, it is Sen. Sanders whose prescriptions don't look to the future.
Sorry, it is Sen. Sanders whose prescriptions don't look to the future.
2
I will remind you that the "elderly" on SS paid into that insurance program. As to children, I am all for child care but let's not forget the billions that are paid into education and other child centered programs. We need more money not less in human centered programs. We need less money flowing to corporations and wars on foreign wars that we can never win. I think you'll find Mr. Sanders has the most reliable record on all of these issues.
3
Amen.
All my student loans are in loans I took out for child care because my salary only covered rent, books, fees, and transport (I worked part time with small children while attending school full time).
To those who ask why this is a women's issue, the fact is, a number of biological and cultural factors push women towards jobs that are paid less because they are valued less because they are done by women.
So if you have one worker, it's going to be the higher paid worker.
So the woman leaves work, and the man stays in. Some men refuse to leave work even if they are the lower paid worker (I don't believe this is a majority, though I know a few cases).
" in 1971, Congress passed a bipartisan bill that would have made quality preschool education available to every family in the United States that wanted it, with tuition based on the family’s ability to pay. Also after-school programs for older children. Forty-four years ago! Richard Nixon vetoed it"
That would have been my and my children's pre-school that the representatives of the American people voted to support. My own mother worked part-time to get me into a church-subsidized pre-school, and I, more educated and well-off with an ex-husband who paid his fair share, got my children into a secular program.
Thanks a lot, Dick.
All my student loans are in loans I took out for child care because my salary only covered rent, books, fees, and transport (I worked part time with small children while attending school full time).
To those who ask why this is a women's issue, the fact is, a number of biological and cultural factors push women towards jobs that are paid less because they are valued less because they are done by women.
So if you have one worker, it's going to be the higher paid worker.
So the woman leaves work, and the man stays in. Some men refuse to leave work even if they are the lower paid worker (I don't believe this is a majority, though I know a few cases).
" in 1971, Congress passed a bipartisan bill that would have made quality preschool education available to every family in the United States that wanted it, with tuition based on the family’s ability to pay. Also after-school programs for older children. Forty-four years ago! Richard Nixon vetoed it"
That would have been my and my children's pre-school that the representatives of the American people voted to support. My own mother worked part-time to get me into a church-subsidized pre-school, and I, more educated and well-off with an ex-husband who paid his fair share, got my children into a secular program.
Thanks a lot, Dick.
9
There are many other factors involved in decreasing the percentage of women in the workforce. One is that many have decided it is not such a good deal, that butting heads at an office is, in fact, a lot less fun that it looked like from the sidelines. I favor everyone being able to engage in paid work that is satisfying and meets their personal needs, but there have been significant downsides to the massive rush of women into careers that accelerated through the 1960's and '70s:
1. More workers meant less pay for everyone, the natural law of supply and demand.
2. Since many women had not planned on being the primary support for their family, they were willing to accept lower wages, which helped to depress wages generally.
3. Women, in general, tend not to press as hard for higher wages (women's groups and many others have verified this and are trying to change it). Again, another depressing factor on wages.
4. Households with two incomes do not necessarily live a lot better than our parent's and grandparent's generations. Prices, especially for housing, go up to meet the demand, pushing lower income people farther away from amenities and good schools.
5. Minorities, especially black people, found that a lot of the good jobs were suddenly filled by white women. Why did the economy makes this accommodation to women but not to blacks?
6. More women in the workforce meant that (some) men became expendable, without jobs and, eventually, without marriages.
Think about it.
1. More workers meant less pay for everyone, the natural law of supply and demand.
2. Since many women had not planned on being the primary support for their family, they were willing to accept lower wages, which helped to depress wages generally.
3. Women, in general, tend not to press as hard for higher wages (women's groups and many others have verified this and are trying to change it). Again, another depressing factor on wages.
4. Households with two incomes do not necessarily live a lot better than our parent's and grandparent's generations. Prices, especially for housing, go up to meet the demand, pushing lower income people farther away from amenities and good schools.
5. Minorities, especially black people, found that a lot of the good jobs were suddenly filled by white women. Why did the economy makes this accommodation to women but not to blacks?
6. More women in the workforce meant that (some) men became expendable, without jobs and, eventually, without marriages.
Think about it.
3
Every thing you want us to think about is predicated upon gross sexism. Why wouldn't society accept half the population into the work force? That black men are not welcomed into the work force is racist but there is no reason to welcome black men more into the work force than white women or black women or white men. We are all equally capable.
The "Work isn't fun" argument is just stupid and demeaning. And butting heads with 2 year olds is fun to the average person? At least in the office you don't have to literally wipe their butt afterwards.
As for the idea that women should give up their financial security, not work, so that there are more jobs for everyone else (everyone now behind defined as not women) that's insane. That leaves women completely dependent, and destined for an old age of either poverty or unhapppiness unless they have the good luck of a really good marriage. But of course, if the marriage is once again a career move not a emotional move, that is unlikely.
The "Work isn't fun" argument is just stupid and demeaning. And butting heads with 2 year olds is fun to the average person? At least in the office you don't have to literally wipe their butt afterwards.
As for the idea that women should give up their financial security, not work, so that there are more jobs for everyone else (everyone now behind defined as not women) that's insane. That leaves women completely dependent, and destined for an old age of either poverty or unhapppiness unless they have the good luck of a really good marriage. But of course, if the marriage is once again a career move not a emotional move, that is unlikely.
4
Way to blame the victim, Dude, nicely played! Those women just don't like work, it's too rough and tumble! And they accepted lower pay than they should have, what idiots. Never were any good at math. Working women = unmarried men...well, you lost me on that one. And working women crowding out blacks...well, newsflash, half of the black people in this country are, wait for it, WOMEN! I know, huh? Think about it....
Doug, if you think women are only looking for a provider in a lifemate you've got a lot to learn.
1
The GOP is "pro-family," but their families, not others. So, being pro-family means being for a vision of the "Father Knows Best" or "Leave It To Beaver" family where dad works and mom stays home with the kids and house. There is nothing wrong with that life, if one can afford it (many fine volunteers are women who have such a life). Still, many families simply cannot get to a decent standard of living on one income. Single mothers (or dads) cannot stay home with the kids.
Lack of support for families in another way to foster inequality. Parents who cannot afford to save for college at all leave the next generation starting their families with massive education debt, if they manage to get through college at all (if they do not, the economic consequences are great). Additionally, those who cannot manage to save for retirement are doomed to a very difficult old age. We need affordable child care urgently so that families can bring in two incomes helping to move their families up the income ladder.
Lack of support for families in another way to foster inequality. Parents who cannot afford to save for college at all leave the next generation starting their families with massive education debt, if they manage to get through college at all (if they do not, the economic consequences are great). Additionally, those who cannot manage to save for retirement are doomed to a very difficult old age. We need affordable child care urgently so that families can bring in two incomes helping to move their families up the income ladder.
24
"Our current government policy requires that employers give new mothers 12 weeks of unpaid leave". To clarify this sad point - 12 weeks of unpaid leave is only available under the FMLA if the employer has more than 50 employees. Smaller businesses have no such obligation.
23
It is absurd that Republicans are opposed to child-care programs, since they claim to be pro-family. This just shows their values. They are OK with spending Trillions for stupid military interventions in the civil wars of other nations, but are not willing to spend one federal dollar on helping working mothers.
There is also one tangential reason why we lag behind Japan on the proportion of working age women: there are far more jobs (per capita) in Japan. Why? Because of our stupid policy of "free trade". In fact, the US has had a trade deficit with Japan for several decades.
Unfortunately, the one thing that never happens is politicians (plus economists and pundits) admitting they were wrong about something for their entire careers.
There is also one tangential reason why we lag behind Japan on the proportion of working age women: there are far more jobs (per capita) in Japan. Why? Because of our stupid policy of "free trade". In fact, the US has had a trade deficit with Japan for several decades.
Unfortunately, the one thing that never happens is politicians (plus economists and pundits) admitting they were wrong about something for their entire careers.
25
I can hardly wait until the Dems control all three houses - then we'll see universal daycare and paid leave....
Wait... didn't they control all three houses... wait... we didn't see any of the above...
Face it - people are tired of paying for other people's life choices.
Wait... didn't they control all three houses... wait... we didn't see any of the above...
Face it - people are tired of paying for other people's life choices.
Gail, aren't you expecting too much from Republicans? After all, if they refuse to do anything about climate change which is ravaging many of the states they live in, why oh why would they be concerned about the needs of working women?
This topic just gets added to the growing pile of anti-everything positions that GOP candidates favor in their zest for continuing to build a protective wall around the rich. And women, of course get a special treatment as a reflection of their second-class status. As Hillary said, if women can't even get paid family leave to have the children that religious elders insist they pour out in abundance--or get any kind of policy support to keep them in the workforce--it's proof positive that "pro-life" starts, and ends, with childbirth.
I take particular offense to Carson's line about 'indoctrination." You would think the man stepped out of the 30s, when anti-fascist, and anti-communist sentiment was raging. We never hear much about Carson's family or how he developed his oddball and often offensive statements. Yes, he excelled in saving infants, but his positions on social services to aid families after birth are anti-deluvian.
Hillary long ago remarked it takes a village to raise a child. And she wasn't refer to communism, or hippy single mothers having kids out of wedlock, but to providing resources to working mothers to help that child grow into a fine, productive and contributing citizen of our nation.
This topic just gets added to the growing pile of anti-everything positions that GOP candidates favor in their zest for continuing to build a protective wall around the rich. And women, of course get a special treatment as a reflection of their second-class status. As Hillary said, if women can't even get paid family leave to have the children that religious elders insist they pour out in abundance--or get any kind of policy support to keep them in the workforce--it's proof positive that "pro-life" starts, and ends, with childbirth.
I take particular offense to Carson's line about 'indoctrination." You would think the man stepped out of the 30s, when anti-fascist, and anti-communist sentiment was raging. We never hear much about Carson's family or how he developed his oddball and often offensive statements. Yes, he excelled in saving infants, but his positions on social services to aid families after birth are anti-deluvian.
Hillary long ago remarked it takes a village to raise a child. And she wasn't refer to communism, or hippy single mothers having kids out of wedlock, but to providing resources to working mothers to help that child grow into a fine, productive and contributing citizen of our nation.
104
Christine -- the climate doesn't vote. Women do. As I guy however I must say I am utterly mystified why any woman votes for the current Republicans. The Republican party will keep doing what it is doing as long as women keep enabling them to do it.
2
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there will be nearly 3 million more women in colleges and universities than men for the fall semester of 2015, and yet the number of women in the workforce continues to decline. The U.S. workforce is not operating at its highest potential since a number of its most qualified workers are not participating. The loss of women from the workforce reduces the quality of America's productivity. If higher education better prepares people for professional careers, then its men that should be decreasing in the workforce, not women.
35
Many if not most of those women have substantial college debt. They must, of course pay off that debt which allows for only one choice; work. My son and daughter-in-law have $100,000 of combined college debt. Where they live, the annual cost of day care is over $14,000. They wonder how they can afford to have a child and save for his or her's college. Then they wonder how they can save for their own retirement. Something has to change. I'm pretty sure that most older folks are still living with the memory of working Summer's to pay for school and aren't aware of the "new reality" facing young people today.
As always, it's easy to see where this is going. More free services! Nothing is ever enough when it comes to demanding additional benefits and services. And just where is the money supposed to come to pay for this?
Life is full of choices. If a family chooses to have children and also two working parents, there are realities that must be dealt with like child care expense. If a family chooses to have a parent stay home with children, there are also realities such as reduced income. Society has no obligation to pay for negative consequences resulting from free choices. The stay at home family isn't asking for its income to be made whole compared to a two career family. Why then should the two career family expect help with child care?
Life is full of choices. If a family chooses to have children and also two working parents, there are realities that must be dealt with like child care expense. If a family chooses to have a parent stay home with children, there are also realities such as reduced income. Society has no obligation to pay for negative consequences resulting from free choices. The stay at home family isn't asking for its income to be made whole compared to a two career family. Why then should the two career family expect help with child care?
7
Wow Steve! Did you miss the whole point or what? Society providing services to make the economy more efficient and productive is something that benefits everyone. Society decided that public education was a good thing and having an educated workforce certainly has been a boon to the U.S. economy. You are right, life is full of choices. And I for one, am happy that you are not in a position to make those choice for the rest of society.
52
It i you that missed the point. Why must we compensate someone because of the result of their free will choices?
As Steve noted people decide to have children after considering all the consequences of that action. My wife and I made that decision after 5.5 years of marriage and did not expect the rest of the country to pay for that decision. Nor did we expect them to pay for his care and education through college. In fact he graduated debt free because we made the decision to budget for it.
There are for too many people any more who want someone else to pay their way.
As Steve noted people decide to have children after considering all the consequences of that action. My wife and I made that decision after 5.5 years of marriage and did not expect the rest of the country to pay for that decision. Nor did we expect them to pay for his care and education through college. In fact he graduated debt free because we made the decision to budget for it.
There are for too many people any more who want someone else to pay their way.
1
This is an interesting point of view: "Society has no obligation to pay for negative consequences resulting from free choices." It posits 'society' as a separate entity apart from the individuals making their free choices. Yet society is only the sum of the free choices of the individuals, combined with the policy choices of their elected leaders. Society itself is a choice, and we get to collectively choose the shape of the society we want. Society pays every time their is another shooting in a school, by an alienated youth who didn't fit in. Perhaps if he had been adequately socialized by exposure to other toddlers and children in a day care center as a youth he wouldn't have been such a loner. Society pays every time a returning vet takes their own life. Perhaps if they felt part of a caring, empathetic society when they returned, that would not have happened. I enjoy the use of the term "two career family". Many Americans don't have careers - they have jobs, often low wage jobs, because that is what is available, or what is available as the sum of their choices and capabilities. How do we, as a very wealthy society, develop healthy families and individuals in a setting of general prosperity? That is the real choice, and the real problem to solve. At the moment, we are not solving it.
27
It is striking how little has changed since the advent of feminism. Even in a field like psychology which is presumably more sensitive to needs than the financial or corporate world, it is still extremely difficult for PhD students who are mothers to satisfy their internship requirement with a part time placement rather than work the 50 or 60 hours that most internships require.
This article is a bit confusing because it refers to "working women", not "working mothers". My understanding is that in Japan many women are choosing not to have children because it is so difficult to work and be a mother and thus the larger percentage of women in the workforce may reflect this trend.
This article is a bit confusing because it refers to "working women", not "working mothers". My understanding is that in Japan many women are choosing not to have children because it is so difficult to work and be a mother and thus the larger percentage of women in the workforce may reflect this trend.
86
Traveling in South Asia recently, what stood out was the number of women waiting at bus stops and curb sides for buses, autos, cabs etc to get to work. Just like the US, more girls are graduating from high school and colleges than ever before, and put performing the boys too. The difference there is that moms and moms in law, pitch in with infant care, child care. It's not unusual to see dads and fathers in law chipping in as well, at least when it comes to tutoring the school kids, helping them with home work. Families are still strong, inter generational living has its up side. Here in the US, since the recession, more young families have moved in with their folks. Grandma, if she herself isn't employed, helps out with after school activities, pet sitting, kids pick up, drop off etc. These hard times are opportunities for families to bond, to help one another with child care, elderly care. Completely agree with Bernie, we GOT to do more with child care. Here in MA we are fortunate to have good social services, like the time elderly mom broke her hip and the Council on Aging rented her all the equipment she needed for rehab and mobility.
36
Much more is involved with respect to women choosing to enter the work force, despite the failure of our culture to value child rearing and education for the masses as European countries do. Beyond the costs of child care, there is the quality of life choice to be made in two parent families concerning whether the mother will expend considerable efforts in spending time throughout the day with her children vs the value of the additional income. For single parent families, it's obviously difficult indeed to make it all work, if not impossible.
If the woman's job only offers the family a supplemental income, many couples consciously choose to not have the woman work, for her to be available to expand the horizons of their children, including shepherding them around, helping with homework, enjoying time with them, and loving them like no one else can. So the stats are going to be hurt by that, though the quality and probably the intelligence of kids whose mothers are available is helped mightily.
As most who have ever had to put a family budget together know, it now takes a significant income jump or other windfall to affect a family's socio-economic status, and the bar for that possibility is virtually out of sight. The impact of that reality makes a strong case for the choice to have the woman stay home. I suspect that the percentage of women in the workforce will continue to drop as a result.
If the woman's job only offers the family a supplemental income, many couples consciously choose to not have the woman work, for her to be available to expand the horizons of their children, including shepherding them around, helping with homework, enjoying time with them, and loving them like no one else can. So the stats are going to be hurt by that, though the quality and probably the intelligence of kids whose mothers are available is helped mightily.
As most who have ever had to put a family budget together know, it now takes a significant income jump or other windfall to affect a family's socio-economic status, and the bar for that possibility is virtually out of sight. The impact of that reality makes a strong case for the choice to have the woman stay home. I suspect that the percentage of women in the workforce will continue to drop as a result.
7
But of course that begs the question, with women more educated than men, and entering the workforce in the same numbers as young women, why are mother's incomes only "supplementing" the family income?
Why are their wages and careers so inferior before they even become mothers?
Why are their wages and careers so inferior before they even become mothers?
Immigration programs, like the H- 1B have harmed the American workforce. Of course a number of women are affected each year. Illegal immigration has hurt less skilled women. Labor has become a cheap and cheaper commodity. For many women the choice boils down to- leave my child for peanuts per hour, or why bother!
New age desire for smaller families, increased mobility and relocation, the growing zeitgeist of independence and high levels of divorce have caused decline in nuclear and extended family structures. With extended families a mother can leave her children with their gramps, or one of her, or her husbands siblings.
Some mothers become so absorbed in their work, their children suffer from neglect. Other woman handle it with the great ease. Overall it's a complex issue. For some families difficult choices must be made. Unfortunately some families don't have a choice- mom better get a job!
New age desire for smaller families, increased mobility and relocation, the growing zeitgeist of independence and high levels of divorce have caused decline in nuclear and extended family structures. With extended families a mother can leave her children with their gramps, or one of her, or her husbands siblings.
Some mothers become so absorbed in their work, their children suffer from neglect. Other woman handle it with the great ease. Overall it's a complex issue. For some families difficult choices must be made. Unfortunately some families don't have a choice- mom better get a job!
5
I guess men are allowed to be absorbed in their work. Which in turn lets them climb the ladder of what our society considers success.
An element not mentioned... out tax system.
Because a married couple with similar incomes pay substantially more tax than the same couple living together but unmarried, there is a strong disincentive for both to work.
The answer is to give all couples the right to pay taxes as if both were single. This is an easy solution.
Because a married couple with similar incomes pay substantially more tax than the same couple living together but unmarried, there is a strong disincentive for both to work.
The answer is to give all couples the right to pay taxes as if both were single. This is an easy solution.
2
how about having the childfree pay the same share of income in taxes as the childed, too?
1
The Republican "clowns" running for president and those posing as legislators in Congress are advocates of "social darwinism" and an individualism that has no interest in our social responsibility to one another and advancing the "common good," which Pope Francis reminded Congress is "the chief aim of all politics."
Carly Fiorina and her ilk do not believe the so-called "private sector" has any responsibility to anyone other than making money. Pope Francis, in his Apostolic Exhortation of 2013, paragraph #55, correctly identified the issue that afflicts society and is not on Florina's radar screen: "The worship of the ancient golden calf (cf. Ex 32:1-35) has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an IMPERSONAL ECONOMY LACKING A TRULY HUMAN PURPOSE" (emphasis added).
Carly Fiorina and her ilk do not believe the so-called "private sector" has any responsibility to anyone other than making money. Pope Francis, in his Apostolic Exhortation of 2013, paragraph #55, correctly identified the issue that afflicts society and is not on Florina's radar screen: "The worship of the ancient golden calf (cf. Ex 32:1-35) has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an IMPERSONAL ECONOMY LACKING A TRULY HUMAN PURPOSE" (emphasis added).
29
All counties have their myths. America's is the myth of the rugged individual. The welfare of the entire community takes second place. I really think that is why the Republicans get away with their disastrous policies like fighting Obamacare, and refusing to even discuss parental leave and daycare. The common good has no place in their thinking. The Cleavers are fiction. John Wayne characters are fiction. Clint Eastwood characters are fiction. Self-made billionaires are fiction. Real families need help for the whole community to succeed.
Paul Ryan + Ayn Rand = social Darwinism.
More women would work if there were more jobs available, jobs paying significantly more than child care, that is.
Paging Mr Boehner (where are those jobs, sir?)
Paging Mr Boehner (where are those jobs, sir?)
17
Since when did Mr. Boehner become President?
Or control all three houses?
Your vitriol is misdirected.
Or control all three houses?
Your vitriol is misdirected.
Why does childcare cost a fortune when the childcare workers are usually paid minimum wage?
Is it because the childcare workers are mostly women? And, like teachers, who are also mostly women, their work is not valued as much as a man working in a traditional corporate setting?
Someone down thread said that patriarchy is a key foundation of conservatism. And men don't like to give up the authority they've achieved throughout the millennia.
Is it because the childcare workers are mostly women? And, like teachers, who are also mostly women, their work is not valued as much as a man working in a traditional corporate setting?
Someone down thread said that patriarchy is a key foundation of conservatism. And men don't like to give up the authority they've achieved throughout the millennia.
65
That's because so many daycare centers are private and seek the highest profit they can get. I live near a WMCA that has a daycare program, and I suspect that it's lower cost than other more commercial enterprises. Let's face it: a working mother really can't shop around that much--it's a question of location in a day staggered with deadlines. Based on where her family lives, she is sort of forced to go to the nearest, not the most economical, choice.
Families of means with two high-wage professional earners have the means to afford nannies. My own nephew is in this position, and he's lucky but rare. You have to command a pretty high salary to use a live-in nanny cleared by legitimate agencies.
Once again, wealthy determines not only quality of life, but the future of children.
Families of means with two high-wage professional earners have the means to afford nannies. My own nephew is in this position, and he's lucky but rare. You have to command a pretty high salary to use a live-in nanny cleared by legitimate agencies.
Once again, wealthy determines not only quality of life, but the future of children.
16
"Why does childcare cost a fortune when the childcare workers are usually paid minimum wage?"
Building rent or mortgage. Real estate taxes. Business licenses. Food. Utilities. Transportation. Extremely high cost liability insurance. FICA, FUTA and SUTA.
I'm sure I missed a few costs.
Building rent or mortgage. Real estate taxes. Business licenses. Food. Utilities. Transportation. Extremely high cost liability insurance. FICA, FUTA and SUTA.
I'm sure I missed a few costs.
Oh well, there's still Saudi Arabia. HA!
The U.S. was one of the first countries to begin adding women to the work force. Over time, however, the lack of free, or reasonably low-cost, day care was a major reason why other countries got the jump on us. And in the Big Cities, where oftentimes a large proportion of the jobs are, worker-funded day care can cost more than state universities.
In many countries where women are going to work, they have free day care, generous vacation and sick days, and paid parental leave. Just try to get those past our GOP-"led" Congress!
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
The U.S. was one of the first countries to begin adding women to the work force. Over time, however, the lack of free, or reasonably low-cost, day care was a major reason why other countries got the jump on us. And in the Big Cities, where oftentimes a large proportion of the jobs are, worker-funded day care can cost more than state universities.
In many countries where women are going to work, they have free day care, generous vacation and sick days, and paid parental leave. Just try to get those past our GOP-"led" Congress!
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
12
During World War 2, when my dad was serving in the army, I attended a free nursery school so that my mother could work outside the home. We had a national need as a country to support women who were "doing their part" and the solution was as obvious as it could be now. I loved nursery school - the snacks, the games, the arts and crafts, the nap time, the other children, the whole package.
30
Wouldn't we all benefit if someone could stay home and raise the children, rather than turning them over to day care?
12
Day care provides children with playmates and has the potential to create a much more natural environment for children, who have traditionally been raised within large families and villages where much of their time is spent interacting with lots of other children.
Constricting children to an environment entirely controlled by adults is probably a form a child abuse and prevents children from developing the social skills that can only be learned by way of free interaction with their piers.
If daycare supplies this it can be as important for the children as for the mothers that want the opportunity to sustain their careers.
Constricting children to an environment entirely controlled by adults is probably a form a child abuse and prevents children from developing the social skills that can only be learned by way of free interaction with their piers.
If daycare supplies this it can be as important for the children as for the mothers that want the opportunity to sustain their careers.
13
If you are happy with a single income, that's absolutely fine. But if you have a spouse who is motivated to have a career, who is able to contribute greatly to the productivity of the nation, it would help to know there is wonderful trained child care available. It's peace of mind.
OK, that' really ridiculous calling stay at home parenting a form of abuse, (even more so since you haven't bothered to look up any actual facts). You seem to assume that children of stay at home parents are kept isolated from all other children their entire life or refuse preschool. Stay at home parents tend to get together with other stay at home parents for playdates with the children so that there is plenty of socializing.
Whereas daycare quality varies greatly. Some of it is good, nurturing and help children (though children under 18 months don't really need to work on their social skills yet). Other kinds are chaos, permissive to abuse and can do the very opposite of helping teach positive social skills. Some use the screen to calm children. Some are unhygenic.
So it is reasonable of parents who can not afford high end daycare (nearly everyone) to be more comfortable with one parent staying home, quite the opposite of abuse. I think there are pros and cons of both and a rational person wouldn't villify one over the other.
Daycare does not
Whereas daycare quality varies greatly. Some of it is good, nurturing and help children (though children under 18 months don't really need to work on their social skills yet). Other kinds are chaos, permissive to abuse and can do the very opposite of helping teach positive social skills. Some use the screen to calm children. Some are unhygenic.
So it is reasonable of parents who can not afford high end daycare (nearly everyone) to be more comfortable with one parent staying home, quite the opposite of abuse. I think there are pros and cons of both and a rational person wouldn't villify one over the other.
Daycare does not
I was struck by Gail's mention of Ben Carson's belief that preschool is "indoctrination." So, for him as other Rep(robates), one rule for him, but no schooling for the under-classes of the 21st century. Bet the Koch bros are looking fondly at him.
29
I don't know about indoctrination in preschools but the level of it in public schools is why so many of us are home schooling or sending our children to private schools. Charlotte Mecklenburg schools is complaining about re-segregation of the public schools and looking at restarting busing to combat it.
The problem is that those who can afford to have pulled out of public schools because much of the indoctrination on sexual issues and climate issues have overwhelmed the schools basic function, teaching children to read and write.
The problem is that those who can afford to have pulled out of public schools because much of the indoctrination on sexual issues and climate issues have overwhelmed the schools basic function, teaching children to read and write.
The lack of child care options and paid family leave is just a measure of the high esteem we hold for women and workers in general. They are being asked to work for ridiculously low wages and then spend all of them and more for the profit of the one percent and their Congressional toadies.
40
The big problem is equating women's issues with having children, period. For the sake of this planet we desperately need to evolve a new image of a strong, independent, educated woman...without babies in tow.
Notice that for a long time now--centuries--when you think of prominent male images: Descartes, Lincoln, Einstein, Clark Gable, Mick Jagger, etc etfc, you never include or think of children being part of that image. This is decidedly not the case with women. As soon as a woman has a child it's all over, she's inextricably tied up with the destiny of that other person: for the next 20 years that child will dominate a woman's life, and for the rest of that child's life the mother will think about that person every day for the rest of her own life. That's just the way things are, and I don't think a woman who has children would want it differently.
Notice that for a long time now--centuries--when you think of prominent male images: Descartes, Lincoln, Einstein, Clark Gable, Mick Jagger, etc etfc, you never include or think of children being part of that image. This is decidedly not the case with women. As soon as a woman has a child it's all over, she's inextricably tied up with the destiny of that other person: for the next 20 years that child will dominate a woman's life, and for the rest of that child's life the mother will think about that person every day for the rest of her own life. That's just the way things are, and I don't think a woman who has children would want it differently.
6
Thank you, Renaldo.
Encouraging perpetual population expansion is a passé idea that has already doomed many wonderful species and maybe our own, as well. The last thing we should be doing is making it more comfortable for humans to breed. We should be rewarding those who abstain.
Encouraging perpetual population expansion is a passé idea that has already doomed many wonderful species and maybe our own, as well. The last thing we should be doing is making it more comfortable for humans to breed. We should be rewarding those who abstain.
1
I think what we need to do in contrast is top thinking that because you use your uterus it compromises the use of your mind.
I have two children. I care for them. I think about them. Yes our destinies our tied. It does not negatively effect in any way the quality or quantity of my thinking. In fact, it permits me to understand things about the world I did not understand before. It expands my mind and clarifies my thoughts. (Granted they are no longer toddlers.)
And no we don't need to associate women away from children. And if the human race is to continue, women will still have to have children, fewer children, but because you have one to three children not 6 -8 does not mean the children you have don't need daycare, food, shelter, etc.
Our association of children with lesser intellectual ability is all about sexism pure an and simple.Enough all ready.
I have two children. I care for them. I think about them. Yes our destinies our tied. It does not negatively effect in any way the quality or quantity of my thinking. In fact, it permits me to understand things about the world I did not understand before. It expands my mind and clarifies my thoughts. (Granted they are no longer toddlers.)
And no we don't need to associate women away from children. And if the human race is to continue, women will still have to have children, fewer children, but because you have one to three children not 6 -8 does not mean the children you have don't need daycare, food, shelter, etc.
Our association of children with lesser intellectual ability is all about sexism pure an and simple.Enough all ready.
Best comment so far is from Susan in France writing about her experience there where so much is taken care of by the government!! from generous maternity leave to an array of child care solutions. If this is socialism then I am all for it. The creepy white guys, with the exception of Ben Carson, who is also creepy, from the GOP want nothing to do with the economic well-being of women except to control their bodies before birth.
Go Bernie!!
Go Bernie!!
60
The GOP platform is for new moms to put down that little distraction and make tomorrow's deadline! So much for being the party of "family values."
6
Participation in labor force alone can be a misleading basis for cross-national comparisons. Japan's population is shrinking (the only other country is Russia). One also needs to look at the still lower rates of divorce and single mothers with young children. Japan's child custody favor fathers over mothers. They have a homogeneous and better educated population. They are notoriously xenophobic, restricting immigration to the extreme. In short, put the point of comparison in context. Otherwise, it would be like deciding what type of nose is more beautiful without information about the whole face.
1
It is frustrating to see people argue against good parenting and family life in favor of endless work and exploitation by a corrupt economic elite.
21
A lot of them semi-retired and gave the job to Andrew Rosenthal.
Some of us on the right but not embedded in the right wall look at these darlings of the left as distinct initiatives and see a lot of sense in them. Indeed, if we ever get this economy booming again so that competition for labor becomes intense, we might even get BUSINESS to foot the bill for child care for working mothers. In the meantime, if all we were considering was that one program, it would be a good one to put serious funding behind.
The problem, of course, is that progressives don’t stop with a few programs: they want to solve EVERY ill to which flesh is heir NOW, and they see no reason why ALL these solutions can’t be funded concurrently. After all, isn’t it all really free? Or just as good, all available from Wall Street and the 1%?
Here are just a few of the initiatives the left is pushing, each one of them arguably a good idea, but laughably unaffordable in their entirety:
1. Universal free health care
2. Universal free post-secondary education
3. Universal free or highly subsidized child care for working families
4. Universal free Pre-K education
5. Dramatic expansion of Social Security benefits
6. Infrastructure program to put Americans to work for the government
7. Huge new youth jobs initiative.
These are just the major ones. Some estimate that taken together, they’d require increasing federal outlays by one-third over ten years.
Fat chance. It was cheaper to give Andrew your old job.
Some of us on the right but not embedded in the right wall look at these darlings of the left as distinct initiatives and see a lot of sense in them. Indeed, if we ever get this economy booming again so that competition for labor becomes intense, we might even get BUSINESS to foot the bill for child care for working mothers. In the meantime, if all we were considering was that one program, it would be a good one to put serious funding behind.
The problem, of course, is that progressives don’t stop with a few programs: they want to solve EVERY ill to which flesh is heir NOW, and they see no reason why ALL these solutions can’t be funded concurrently. After all, isn’t it all really free? Or just as good, all available from Wall Street and the 1%?
Here are just a few of the initiatives the left is pushing, each one of them arguably a good idea, but laughably unaffordable in their entirety:
1. Universal free health care
2. Universal free post-secondary education
3. Universal free or highly subsidized child care for working families
4. Universal free Pre-K education
5. Dramatic expansion of Social Security benefits
6. Infrastructure program to put Americans to work for the government
7. Huge new youth jobs initiative.
These are just the major ones. Some estimate that taken together, they’d require increasing federal outlays by one-third over ten years.
Fat chance. It was cheaper to give Andrew your old job.
5
The problem with progressives is supposedly that they want government to fund everything--though even your laundry list hardly seems like much, given that other governments of comparably strong economies fund all these things and often save money by doing it..
The problem with conservatives is that they turn the progressive bogeyman into a reason for government to do nothing that doesn't directly benefit the elite.
You should consider these proposals, as your human side tells you, one at a time. Ideology is the enemy of governing.
The problem with conservatives is that they turn the progressive bogeyman into a reason for government to do nothing that doesn't directly benefit the elite.
You should consider these proposals, as your human side tells you, one at a time. Ideology is the enemy of governing.
22
These are perfectly legitimate and reasonable functions of government in a democracy. The 1% earned their way to the top by the sweat of brow of the 99%, combined with consumerism by the 99% that a capitalist system requires. Logic would seem to dictate that nurturing through support the 99% who deliver the 1%ers' luxurious lifestyles would be viewed as a reasonable cost of doing business. In fact, it is viewed that way by many of the most stable and productive throughout the world.
Martin and Kat:
If all those other societies that embrace some of these initiatives had needed to defend themselves against the barbarians without, instead of depending on us to do that for them these past 70 years, we could have afforded to do more. But the economies of almost all of them suffer from high structural unemployment, particularly among their young, and their economies are creaking with the sheer weight of maintaining all the largesse -- and may not be able to maintain it short of actually confiscating the production of their people. They already don't measure up to us in innovation as measured by patents, despite having a larger cumulative population -- and the most socialist among them are those that contribute least to the world but depend the most on the more inventive among societies.If they dramatically increase their taxation to better afford their social safety-nets, they'll contribute nothing to the world but the consumptions and excretions of their peoples.
This comparison of the U.S. to more socialist societies of the West has been absurdly invalid yet it's what progressives keep returning to. The comparison is quite invalid and, as we see them need to buy their own guns to stave off Putin and to maintain domestic order against a rising Islam within their societies, we'll see how strategically successful socialism has been for them.
If all those other societies that embrace some of these initiatives had needed to defend themselves against the barbarians without, instead of depending on us to do that for them these past 70 years, we could have afforded to do more. But the economies of almost all of them suffer from high structural unemployment, particularly among their young, and their economies are creaking with the sheer weight of maintaining all the largesse -- and may not be able to maintain it short of actually confiscating the production of their people. They already don't measure up to us in innovation as measured by patents, despite having a larger cumulative population -- and the most socialist among them are those that contribute least to the world but depend the most on the more inventive among societies.If they dramatically increase their taxation to better afford their social safety-nets, they'll contribute nothing to the world but the consumptions and excretions of their peoples.
This comparison of the U.S. to more socialist societies of the West has been absurdly invalid yet it's what progressives keep returning to. The comparison is quite invalid and, as we see them need to buy their own guns to stave off Putin and to maintain domestic order against a rising Islam within their societies, we'll see how strategically successful socialism has been for them.
Pew Research has a truly fascinating analysis of working and non-working mothers (link below).
The vast majority (85%) of married stay at home mothers say they are not working because they are caring for their families. Only 41% of single stay at home mothers say providing care is their primary reason for not working. They are more likely to stay at home because they are ill or disabled, cannot find a job, or are in school.
Most mothers say they would like to work, full or part time.
When marital status is not considered, stay at home mothers are younger and less educated than those who work. 41% have a high school diploma or less compared with 30% of working mothers.
34% of working mothers overall live in poverty compared with 12% of working mothers. But stay at home mothers who are married are better educated, and better off financially, than the overall group; only 15% live in poverty.
There are also demographic differences. The group least likely to be stay at home mothers are black women. Only 23% of black children have a stay at home mother, 26% of white children, 36% of Hispanic children, and 37% of Asian children.
I encourage anybody interested in this to read the full report:
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/04/08/after-decades-of-decline-a-ris...
The vast majority (85%) of married stay at home mothers say they are not working because they are caring for their families. Only 41% of single stay at home mothers say providing care is their primary reason for not working. They are more likely to stay at home because they are ill or disabled, cannot find a job, or are in school.
Most mothers say they would like to work, full or part time.
When marital status is not considered, stay at home mothers are younger and less educated than those who work. 41% have a high school diploma or less compared with 30% of working mothers.
34% of working mothers overall live in poverty compared with 12% of working mothers. But stay at home mothers who are married are better educated, and better off financially, than the overall group; only 15% live in poverty.
There are also demographic differences. The group least likely to be stay at home mothers are black women. Only 23% of black children have a stay at home mother, 26% of white children, 36% of Hispanic children, and 37% of Asian children.
I encourage anybody interested in this to read the full report:
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/04/08/after-decades-of-decline-a-ris...
4
Not to be too literal-minded, Gail, but stay-at-home moms are working women, too. They may be unsalaried, but caregivers work their fingers to the bone! It should be a real choice, not a necessity, to be employed or a stay-at-home parent, but both paths are important.
197
Agreed. And why is it fair to subsidize child care but not the choice to care for your own children? Raising children is a public service and is deserving of government support. But that support should be neutral as to whether the family decides to use outside child care or not. Why should the taxes of a family which doesn't use child care help to pay for the child care of other families.
I'm all for mothers, and fathers, having the opportunity to work outside the home if they choose to do so. But provide the same level of support to all families raising children and let them decide whether they will use outside child care.
And let's remember that child care should be expensive. What work is more important and consequential? The wages of child care workers are ridiculous.
I'm all for mothers, and fathers, having the opportunity to work outside the home if they choose to do so. But provide the same level of support to all families raising children and let them decide whether they will use outside child care.
And let's remember that child care should be expensive. What work is more important and consequential? The wages of child care workers are ridiculous.
1
In my opinion, Gale addresses working in businesses, not to ignore the value or intensity of work at home. A true choice it is; lucky for those mothers to work at home to create a heartfelt bountiful environment of attention, education and care in the home for their children and families. I, as ‘a too young' mother who, with great magnitude as most parents care for their families, thankfully educated myself and supported my family with institutional support of university loans (fully repaid). When I had applied for childcare or food stamp support, I would have had to give up my car! Rurally situated, this would have made us ‘quite a family’ with no access to resources i.e., food – no garden - or in essentials such as education. Keen to the merits of education, my three children attended preschool, - two are university graduates. I dedicated myself to volunteer in services and to direct programmes to support American society to implement its commitments to 'family values' into social policies. E.g., job training and employment services; 'Manpower - CETA' and asset-based community development as in Sierra Health Foundation's Initiative for Healthy Children and Families at county jurisdictions, to state-wide arenas developing and implementing CA legislative policy. I remember well those years of intense determination. I’ve relocated. And, I sincerely am so sorry to hear this:
"From Richard Nixon to Ben Carson, and wow, nothing’s changed."
"From Richard Nixon to Ben Carson, and wow, nothing’s changed."
1
Can we give up the mommy wars in this instance? It IS hard to take care of children, but women who wish to work for pay instead of satisfaction should not HAVE to stay at home with their children because there is no affordable child care available.
By the way, I was a stay at home mother...it isn't as hard as being a working mother with inadequate child care, and I was fortunate that I could afford to stay home without a disastrous impact on our family's finances.
Women should have a choice in this matter and not be forced by lack of childcare and family leave policies to lose status at work and the possibility of a good paying job.
That is what I want for my daughter anyway. The one I worked so hard to raise.
By the way, I was a stay at home mother...it isn't as hard as being a working mother with inadequate child care, and I was fortunate that I could afford to stay home without a disastrous impact on our family's finances.
Women should have a choice in this matter and not be forced by lack of childcare and family leave policies to lose status at work and the possibility of a good paying job.
That is what I want for my daughter anyway. The one I worked so hard to raise.
54
"From Richard Nixon to Ben Carson, and wow, nothing’s changed." Republicans are the party of tired old -- and ineffective -- ideas, such as tax breaks for the rich improve investment. (Didn't happen under Reagan, didn't happen under GW Bush, still advocated by Jeb! etc.) And health insurance can be left to the private sector. They are also the party of loathsome old ideas, such as make it difficult for poor and minorities to vote.
48
Whether early childhood education in fact improves the ability of children to be educated or to adjust better in any way is very much an issue, and not in fact decided in favor of pre-K , Head Start, or other such efforts: see Brookings studies, for example. Hardly a hotbed of right-wing propaganda.
Rather than hide behind the subterfuge of better preparing kids for ife, we should be truthful and assert the fact: Head Start, pre-K and similar programs are simply a way to enable women to return to the workforce more quickly. There is nothing shameful about this, and there should be no hesitation in making this the basis for legislation.
Rather than hide behind the subterfuge of better preparing kids for ife, we should be truthful and assert the fact: Head Start, pre-K and similar programs are simply a way to enable women to return to the workforce more quickly. There is nothing shameful about this, and there should be no hesitation in making this the basis for legislation.
6
Papua New Guinea? My memory is fuzzy but I recall reading about another major indicator of "quality of life," putting the United States roughly on a par with Burkina Faso, dropping quickly toward Zimbabwe. Thank God the bar is set so high.
Aside from the economic benefits of promoting women's participation in the national workforce, doing so also makes families more stable, with more viable budgets that presumably, in turn, make for better fed, better housed, better educated, happier and healthier children.
What's not to love about this for an authentic, dedicated conservative? Here in America, everything it seems.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Aside from the economic benefits of promoting women's participation in the national workforce, doing so also makes families more stable, with more viable budgets that presumably, in turn, make for better fed, better housed, better educated, happier and healthier children.
What's not to love about this for an authentic, dedicated conservative? Here in America, everything it seems.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
32
Actually, the government doesn't guarantee women 12 weeks of unpaid leave. In order to be eligible for UNPAID FMLA leave, an employee must have been at the business at least 12 months, and worked at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, and work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles. The majority of parents are not eligible.
57
People like the author of this article do not know anything about other nations' hidden social secrets.
It is a totally false notion that in Asian nations females are weak. Gender based weakness is only there in specific relationships. However, in any social or official situation, anyone can have the upper hand. There are specific codes in the native languages that secures a place of 'respect' and disparagement. If these codes are worked securely, anyone can work in any position, in Asian nations.
However, if these codes are not arranged in perfection, not only women, but even men will not move out of their households.
In English nations, not only women, but even men are now entering into a social scene in which there is no proper securing of these codes, in a social ambiance wherein the spoken language is not pristine-ENGLISH, but feudal languages.
Without having an iota of information on these aspects, it is total nonsense to find solutions in such unconnected things like maternity leave etc.
An un-English US, is just a greater South America. Please be forewarned!
It is a totally false notion that in Asian nations females are weak. Gender based weakness is only there in specific relationships. However, in any social or official situation, anyone can have the upper hand. There are specific codes in the native languages that secures a place of 'respect' and disparagement. If these codes are worked securely, anyone can work in any position, in Asian nations.
However, if these codes are not arranged in perfection, not only women, but even men will not move out of their households.
In English nations, not only women, but even men are now entering into a social scene in which there is no proper securing of these codes, in a social ambiance wherein the spoken language is not pristine-ENGLISH, but feudal languages.
Without having an iota of information on these aspects, it is total nonsense to find solutions in such unconnected things like maternity leave etc.
An un-English US, is just a greater South America. Please be forewarned!
2
So who takes care of the babies?
White middle-class and wealthy women always viewed work as a choice, not a necessity. They would never, ever align themselves with working-class women of color or low-wage working women over something as gauche as day care. (These mothers are the same ones to yank their kids out of suburban schools that have reached a racial tipping point and flee to the hinterlands.) In our culture, staying at home or paying nannies is a sign of success. Day care? That's for poor single women. Change the culture that looks down on working women of color or low-income working women and the policies and politics will follow.
57
When I was expecting my first child 35 years ago in France, not only was there generous paid maternity leave before and after the birth, but an array of child care solutions to choose from. There were income indexed municipal "crêches" which would care for infants and toddlers at the end of maternity leave until they moved on to nursery school/kindergarten, there were lists of child carers with mandatory certification from your local town hall who would either come to your home or take care of your child with one or two other children at their homes, there were well regulated parent organized co-op nurseries, and there was even a municipal system which would take your child one or two times a week if that was all you needed,or you could make a reservation for a day of child care when you needed it. As children moved into school ( the school day here generally ends at 4:30 pm ) there were after school programs which would take care of children and help with homework until parents picked them up at 6 pm. They seemed to think of everything to help women stay in the workplace, and I never had a friend give up work because of lack of child care. I also never heard anybody grouse about the portion of their high taxes that went to providing these services. Now 35 years on the US still hasn't figured out ,given priority to, or been willing to pay for providing the decent, affordable childcare parents (and the economy) need and children deserve. Such a shame!
244
I'm interested in the authors framing of this issue, her use of the word "disturbing" for example. She seems to want the readers to take for granted that women working long hours for corporations is somehow the natural order of things, the " good" state of the world, while stay at home moms looking after their children is a "bad" state of the world. But why is this the case? I see nothing in this piece acknowledging women's choices, rather the author seems to want to dictate what the "right" choice should be. I hope the readers are discerning enough to question this bias.
19
Women working long hours used to be the natural order of things, and stay-at-home moms looking after their children is, for most income levels, a recipe for money hurts, which is generally a "bad" state of the family if not of the world. Economic factors dictate the right choice, as is usually the case except for the wealthy.
13
I'm discerning. I see Republicans want to ban abortion entirely, religious bosses don't want to provide their employees with birth control, and people who want to kill Planned Parenthood. . Yet when these children are born, these same groups turn their backs, because they don't want to pay higher taxes for child care. Funny how that works out.
3
caezar: I think you misread what is happening here - in this country most families
need a two income situation because of the cost of living - the fact that a woman
may have a career and want to work is apart from that. There was no "good" or
"bad" reference made. Most women find working a necessity to help out and
in some cases "bring home the bacon" for their families. And many single women
opt for a career and may delay marriage , etc. Stay at home moms surely exist
but let's face it they are in a high income family that allows them to have that choice. That's the point - we have choice now - it's not the 50's when marriage
and the family were de rigeur for women.
need a two income situation because of the cost of living - the fact that a woman
may have a career and want to work is apart from that. There was no "good" or
"bad" reference made. Most women find working a necessity to help out and
in some cases "bring home the bacon" for their families. And many single women
opt for a career and may delay marriage , etc. Stay at home moms surely exist
but let's face it they are in a high income family that allows them to have that choice. That's the point - we have choice now - it's not the 50's when marriage
and the family were de rigeur for women.
1
This should be discussed with your Tim Eagan, who wrote that female parents are somehow more sensitive or responsible for the children and their interaction with firearms: "But it’s the mothers, in most cases, who know the names of their children’s teachers, who understand their deepest fears, who have a unique relationship."
What is this sexist nonsense? Dads get a pass- because why? I believed that we as a modern society had gotten over discrimination based on gender in the 1970's. Yet this is what one must expect when it is forced down our throats that Women are from Venus and Men are from Mars. Employers will exploit any factor possible to cut employee costs to raise their profits, and women are more than ever the easiest targets.
What is this sexist nonsense? Dads get a pass- because why? I believed that we as a modern society had gotten over discrimination based on gender in the 1970's. Yet this is what one must expect when it is forced down our throats that Women are from Venus and Men are from Mars. Employers will exploit any factor possible to cut employee costs to raise their profits, and women are more than ever the easiest targets.
12
Yet, the party that claims to be all about families consistently legislates against families. They're undoing protections for workers state by state, rejecting Medicaid, and now they want to roll back funding for Planned Parenthood--which is in many places is the only family-friendly affordable health provider people have. Shredding the safety net/
163
In their heart and of hearts, I think the Republicans prefer families where Mom stays home with the kids. The Christian Democrats in Germany basically do, too.
It is amazing to me how in America, parents are completely unable to get their voices heard and votes across on this issue. It there are no affordable childcare options, if work flexibility arrangements are non-existent, you cannot talk about "choices". Of course it is a valid choice to be a stay-at-home parent, but if nothing else is possible, than it's not a choice anymore.
We live far away from our families, and still are managing a two-worker family with two kids under 5 without any hired help. The secret:
- 4 months paid maternity leave (not terribly long, but gets you through the really tough first months)
- affordable creches (not free - but state-owned ones use a sliding scale to help low income families. Even private ones are affordable)
- free nursery school from 2 and half years, with cheap onsite surveillance from 7 am to 6 pm
- widespread flexible hours and work from home arrangements
- unpaid parental leave that can be combined with part-time work arrangements without fear of being fired from work
- health insurance includes a given number of days of cheap care for sick child
All of these little things add up so two-working parent families with little kids can manage their lives. And these are used by both mums and dads - so workplace acceptance is growing. In this day and age in most office environments "presentee-ism" does not raise productivity and decreases employee morale.
We live far away from our families, and still are managing a two-worker family with two kids under 5 without any hired help. The secret:
- 4 months paid maternity leave (not terribly long, but gets you through the really tough first months)
- affordable creches (not free - but state-owned ones use a sliding scale to help low income families. Even private ones are affordable)
- free nursery school from 2 and half years, with cheap onsite surveillance from 7 am to 6 pm
- widespread flexible hours and work from home arrangements
- unpaid parental leave that can be combined with part-time work arrangements without fear of being fired from work
- health insurance includes a given number of days of cheap care for sick child
All of these little things add up so two-working parent families with little kids can manage their lives. And these are used by both mums and dads - so workplace acceptance is growing. In this day and age in most office environments "presentee-ism" does not raise productivity and decreases employee morale.
79
I get the sense that there are two great polarized forces gradually gaining steam in this country, one arguing for small government, decentralization and low regulation while other argues for bigger government and increased social spending. Each side is gradually coming to the conclusion that there's no compromising with the other. It's a battle fought on many fronts and this is yet another.
I hope to god the big government guys win.
I hope to god the big government guys win.
60
Kevin in New York writes: "I hope to god the big government guys win". While the idea of a small, weak government does not appeal to me (the corporations would then make us all into serfs), I think the right approach is somewhere in the middle. A government that becomes too big and too powerful is difficult to control even by liberals like ourselves, you know.
1
In response to Rima Regas:
"But the candidate whose prescriptions for righting women's issues are the strongest is actually Bernie Sanders."
In research so far which dates back to 2009, there is only one commendable bill that Sen.Sanders introduced to help women. That bill was to help stop domestic abuse in the military.
No other bill to further Women's Liberation or Child Care.
"But the candidate whose prescriptions for righting women's issues are the strongest is actually Bernie Sanders."
In research so far which dates back to 2009, there is only one commendable bill that Sen.Sanders introduced to help women. That bill was to help stop domestic abuse in the military.
No other bill to further Women's Liberation or Child Care.
18
First hit on Google:
https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders/68/women#...
http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/08/feminists-case-for-bernie-sanders.html
There is also his Senate website and the campaign website.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/fighting-for-womens-rights/
FeelTheBern.org put together quite the list of accomplishments over the last 16 years.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-womens-rights/
I've only done a superficial search. Remember that bills require sponsors and a lot of bills are written and submitted by more than one Senator or member of the House.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders/68/women#...
http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/08/feminists-case-for-bernie-sanders.html
There is also his Senate website and the campaign website.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/fighting-for-womens-rights/
FeelTheBern.org put together quite the list of accomplishments over the last 16 years.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-womens-rights/
I've only done a superficial search. Remember that bills require sponsors and a lot of bills are written and submitted by more than one Senator or member of the House.
17
@ Laura Quickfoot - Laura, if Bernie is a strong supporter of Universal Health Care - you know the countries that have that - then on that count alone he is way out front ahead of Hilary Clinton who did not do so well inthat field.
I do not have the time to pursue Rima's links but instead state that what we need are real debates where Clinton and Sanders address specific issues, many of which can best be identified by "looking at Denmark" for starters.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - USA-SE
I do not have the time to pursue Rima's links but instead state that what we need are real debates where Clinton and Sanders address specific issues, many of which can best be identified by "looking at Denmark" for starters.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - USA-SE
.
.
This is a very important column6. But with all the economic data, we can easily forget that having a job can mean more than economics.
For single mothers in some circumstances, an independent income can be the way out of a cycle of depending for sustenance on an abusive partner; and can help teach the next generation to expect that women in the workplace is part of the natural order of things in our nation.
.
This is a very important column6. But with all the economic data, we can easily forget that having a job can mean more than economics.
For single mothers in some circumstances, an independent income can be the way out of a cycle of depending for sustenance on an abusive partner; and can help teach the next generation to expect that women in the workplace is part of the natural order of things in our nation.
39
The huge scandal is that one can deduct things like a car or a computer as business expenses, yet somehow day care, which is what enables a woman to work, cannot be deducted. This is an unfairness created by a male-oriented society that had "male-type" business expenses in mind when drafting the regulations. This should be a primary goal of any feminist or egalitarian-minded movement.
507
You're wrong. Daycare IS deductible. The childcare credit rates run from 20% - 35% depending on your income.
1
In most of Europe education starts at age three with abundant free or near-free care for toddlers of two and creches for infants. Parents get extensive paid parental leave and the minimal paid vacation is five weeks rising to ten weeks with time worked. As well, there are far more holidays.
The U.S. is a plutocracy with the ruling class demanding constant tax cuts and the sacrifice of the bottom 80 per cent of serfs to the 0.1 per cent.
In most of Europe education is free or near-free at all levels.
Bernie 2016 to begin the political revolution!
Feel the Bern.
The U.S. is a plutocracy with the ruling class demanding constant tax cuts and the sacrifice of the bottom 80 per cent of serfs to the 0.1 per cent.
In most of Europe education is free or near-free at all levels.
Bernie 2016 to begin the political revolution!
Feel the Bern.
240
@ Doug Broome - Doug you make an important point at the end, a point that should be the subject of a future real debae Clinton-Sanders head to head.
Resolved that the United States institute free university education with models to be chosen from more advanced western countries.
Since we three in the dual citizen family over here have extensive experience at all levels with college-university education on both sides of the Atlantic we believe that the absolutely best experiences for an elite subset can be opened on the US side.
But since we have also seen how young refugees we have known were able to get an education in Sweden that probably never could have been available if they had had to pay US prices, then I vote for major reform in the USA. Since only Sanders will even mention the subject, he is my man.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen USA-SE
Resolved that the United States institute free university education with models to be chosen from more advanced western countries.
Since we three in the dual citizen family over here have extensive experience at all levels with college-university education on both sides of the Atlantic we believe that the absolutely best experiences for an elite subset can be opened on the US side.
But since we have also seen how young refugees we have known were able to get an education in Sweden that probably never could have been available if they had had to pay US prices, then I vote for major reform in the USA. Since only Sanders will even mention the subject, he is my man.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen USA-SE
8
I agree that child-care costs borne by working parents should be tax deductible -- and so should be, I think, the costs of hiring house help. Working families are always strapped for time (and usually money too), which makes life stressful. Their home life is their "business". Why should an employer be able to deduct the cost of hiring a cleaning person, but wage earners can't?
Collins column ignores several important realities. For one, America's fertility rate is much higher (1.9 versus 1.4) than that of Japan. For another, there is no real breakdown of the relative pay of Japanese women to that of Japanese men compared to the equivalent American ratio. Lastly, relevant would be the change in the ratio of American women's pay to that of American men, not just the ratio of those working.
9
There are relevant factors not considered in this discussion. Among them, family mobility and its effect on the nuclear family. In times past here in the good old USA, it was not that usual for children to pick up and move across the country when they reached adulthood. It's still not in many countries.
I don't know if a country should consider itself that "advanced" when it can't accommodate intact, extended families, which largely render the problem of child (and elderly) care moot.
I don't know if a country should consider itself that "advanced" when it can't accommodate intact, extended families, which largely render the problem of child (and elderly) care moot.
3
"...extended families, which largely render the problem of child (and elderly) care moot." This statement, if true, depends on the older women in these extended families to care for children (and elderly) while the younger women go off to work. Even if I had stayed near home when I had my own son, my own 52 year-old mother was far too busy with her own life to have been able to provide full-time child care (even if she had wanted to). The answer is NOT in expecting older women to stay home and be responsible for (free) caregiving, but in society's providing affordable quality child care for all working parents.
69
Can't you just hear Hillary exclaiming "I love Japan - but we are not Japan!" If the US is not Denmark it is even further from being Japan. Start with birth rates in which Japan's is among the world's very lowest while the US is top among first world nations - so lack of government supplied child care - when there are no children - is not even an issue preventing women from the workforce in Japan.
Then there is immigration - of which Japan has virtually none - and women immigrants are by every measure - our most fertile mothers, and so distort measurements. Then add in our grossly unfair marriage tax penalty - which really penalizes higher earning professional and often makes the earnings from a working mother superfluous - as a great discouraging factor from her seeking employment.
Top it all off with the complicated tax and benefit requirements one must deal with should a family desire to hire a child care worker - an issue that has sunk potential Supreme Court justices - and it's clear why women choose to not work.
But leave it to the left which rather than deal with the negative issues created by an intrusive and overbearing government would instead force economy stifling penalties on businesses. Way to go, Gail.
Then there is immigration - of which Japan has virtually none - and women immigrants are by every measure - our most fertile mothers, and so distort measurements. Then add in our grossly unfair marriage tax penalty - which really penalizes higher earning professional and often makes the earnings from a working mother superfluous - as a great discouraging factor from her seeking employment.
Top it all off with the complicated tax and benefit requirements one must deal with should a family desire to hire a child care worker - an issue that has sunk potential Supreme Court justices - and it's clear why women choose to not work.
But leave it to the left which rather than deal with the negative issues created by an intrusive and overbearing government would instead force economy stifling penalties on businesses. Way to go, Gail.
7
Intrusive and overbearing government? I am 79 and I thank our government for social security and Medicare and my Air Force pension which includes fantastic healthcare. Note: if you have more than 20 years of service, you are covered by Tricare, not the VA. Tricare is partnered with Medicare and my wife and I each have $105/month subtracted from our social security pensions, but virtually no other healthcare costs.
The government has also given us the Internet and communication, weather and GPS satellites. I wish our government was more intrusive and overbearing when it comes to gun control. Our exceptionalism is our obesity and huge rate of firearm deaths, plus our intrusive and overbearing religious fundamentalism that guides us to hate education and science and labor unions and immigrants.
I love big government when it is in liberal hands.
The government has also given us the Internet and communication, weather and GPS satellites. I wish our government was more intrusive and overbearing when it comes to gun control. Our exceptionalism is our obesity and huge rate of firearm deaths, plus our intrusive and overbearing religious fundamentalism that guides us to hate education and science and labor unions and immigrants.
I love big government when it is in liberal hands.
513
And leave it to the right, comprised of angry old white men, to write off entire groups of people who produce massive economic power for the US and raise the future generation, all while the fascist old men spend all their time whining incessantly that they have to pay taxes.
116
And please do not forget our intrusive religious zealots who want to govern a woman's ovaries and uterus for her, getting rid of the pittance of funding that our government spends on poor women's healthcare so that she is regulated to bearing unwanted children who are more likely to fill our private sector controlled prisons.
Why is a woman's body okay to subject to Christians morality gauge? I find vaginal ultrasounds with no medical necessity pretty intrusive. How about we make prescriptions for viagra come with a rectal ultrasound mandate? Not needed, but I personally want to know that they are willing to pay for the right to have sex after God made them impotent.
Why is a woman's body okay to subject to Christians morality gauge? I find vaginal ultrasounds with no medical necessity pretty intrusive. How about we make prescriptions for viagra come with a rectal ultrasound mandate? Not needed, but I personally want to know that they are willing to pay for the right to have sex after God made them impotent.
92
As usual, the word "immigration" isn't mentioned in the article. Japan has a strongly restrictionist policy on immigration, so it finds it needs more of its own women to work. It's like how American women used to be computer programmers in large numbers until American employers got H-1B visas and could replace American women with foreign men.
34
And thank goodness for that. Good old US of A, protecting its gentle womenfolk from the need to work by importing immigrants. Everyone knows women don't like working - it's a needless distraction from being a wife / mother / daughter / community volunteer. Japan has its priorities all wrong.
2
Tell me about it. I live a half block away from the main and huge Microsoft campus in Redmond WA. If I ever encounter Bill Gates (very unlikely) I would ask him if he ever considered hiring Americans.
1
And funny, they probably paid the foreign men the same, but I suppose the corporation executives must believe that a woman's place is in the home. Better to hire foreign males and make sure the American working men have all their needs taken care of at home, in the restaurants, and in other service industry, low pay jobs.
1
I watched a graduate student get a Ph.D. and her biggest accomplishment, was successfully getting her child, borne of "whatever" in her teens, also at her side when she graduated (great child btw).
There are lots of excesses, and downright thefts, with many childcare programs, but I learned, early on, never get between a momma bear and her cub - same applies to people.
K-20, and earlier, with allowances for Uber like irregulars...and that is the crux of this comment.
I'm in a College town and so many moms choose their child-care, irregular as it most often always is, based on language. If they want their child to speak Korean, they will choose Korean. Regularize, meaning, control, it too much, and the explant Korean, that is great with kids in the less than perfect situation, won't make the grade.
Yes it can be expensive, but it can also be "Uber-ized" and reasonable, but if regulated, firmly, it dies - some regulation, more like guides, is fine - mom will know and win - the gov't doesn't have to be deeply involved.
Just my two cents.
There are lots of excesses, and downright thefts, with many childcare programs, but I learned, early on, never get between a momma bear and her cub - same applies to people.
K-20, and earlier, with allowances for Uber like irregulars...and that is the crux of this comment.
I'm in a College town and so many moms choose their child-care, irregular as it most often always is, based on language. If they want their child to speak Korean, they will choose Korean. Regularize, meaning, control, it too much, and the explant Korean, that is great with kids in the less than perfect situation, won't make the grade.
Yes it can be expensive, but it can also be "Uber-ized" and reasonable, but if regulated, firmly, it dies - some regulation, more like guides, is fine - mom will know and win - the gov't doesn't have to be deeply involved.
Just my two cents.
1
I'm an older woman who has over 30 years of high level work experience and is now attempting to transition from self-employment to the corporate world. I don't require child care support, not do I require family leave. Yet I have found it very difficult to catch the eye of employers. Ageism affects women as well as men. I've been sadly observing, more and more frequently, that middle-aged or older women become invisible, even if they offer excellent credentials. It's not always about child care requirements.
445
Sadly this is so. However, there is a field that needs excellent professionals and it's one that pays well and that we can gray into. It's gerontology.
8
Yes, I can name at least three friends in their late 40s and 50s whose long, successful work lives have suddenly become insecure, with multiple layoffs.
40
Yes! Invisible older women. That's a fact and it's also a crime.
Just when we've figured out what the world's about, we're - old!
I've read an awful lot of nasty comments about the Democratic debate focusing on the age of the wise, smart, gifted people on that stage.
When did America become the land of the cute and shallow.
Just when we've figured out what the world's about, we're - old!
I've read an awful lot of nasty comments about the Democratic debate focusing on the age of the wise, smart, gifted people on that stage.
When did America become the land of the cute and shallow.
19
Back when I was on the corporate career track many years ago, it was all great until I got pregnant. Not only was I treated differently by my male and single women team, but after our daughter was born, it was worse. My colleagues, who would step on their own mother's neck to get ahead, would look at me with disdain, checking their watches when I announced that I had to leave at 5 to pick up my daughter. They made my life hell. I did eventually quit to stay home. I was lucky to be able to do that and I know it. But sometimes it is not only about the dollar cost of daycare, which is prohibitive, but also the professional cost of trying to compete in the marketplace when you are a mom.
Fast forward a few years after that, and I was a part time nurse liaison for a hospice at a major Boston hospital. I worked with nurses and many, many low end hospital staff who worked hard, but were paid low, who had several children. They peicemealed their child care. These women worked not only one or two jobs, but sometimes three. Daycare and preschool was so expensive for them. But they had to work. I cannot imagine how they did it. I cannot imagine how they keep doing it. And when they apply for subsidies, they are told they make too much! Our government is backwards that way it seems. The conservatives think people are trying to game the system, but the system is set up wrong. They should be helping working moms, not working against them.
Fast forward a few years after that, and I was a part time nurse liaison for a hospice at a major Boston hospital. I worked with nurses and many, many low end hospital staff who worked hard, but were paid low, who had several children. They peicemealed their child care. These women worked not only one or two jobs, but sometimes three. Daycare and preschool was so expensive for them. But they had to work. I cannot imagine how they did it. I cannot imagine how they keep doing it. And when they apply for subsidies, they are told they make too much! Our government is backwards that way it seems. The conservatives think people are trying to game the system, but the system is set up wrong. They should be helping working moms, not working against them.
869
It seems that Mother Nature could teach humans some important social skills. As all are familiar with, geese work in teams while in flight as well as on the ground. When geese fly together, each goose provides additional lift and reduces air resistance for the goose flying behind it creating a v-formation, which allows the whole flock to fly 70% farther with the same amount of energy than if each goose flew all by itself. Similarly, when a goose drops out of the formation, or working team in human dynamics, they eventually miss the synergy & energy of being a part of a group focused on similar outcomes instead of independent goals & quickly return to the group flying together in unison. Further, geese rotate leadership roles depending on the needs of the whole rather than independent egos. This allows all of the team to experience both leadership as well as being a follower, important in group dynamics. Geese both honk at each other frequently during the flight as well as help since great communication as well as a concern for the well fare of the whole is more important than one single goose's needs. When one goose falls out of formation due to giving birth, illness, being shot down or injury, a minimum of two geese will follow it & protect it against predators until it can fly again or eventually dies Likewise, human teams work best when they do more than just work together, but care for the well being of each other. Honk - honk!
6
I'm convinced that the U.S. would have more policies benefitting parents of young children if we had less immigration.
1
Bless you Janice. Boston is a better place because of people like you.
5
Yes, I wish we had a year off with pay for couples with children, free child care, health care, college, retirement income and a guaranteed apartment in our last years on the planet. Something the socialist world comes fairly close to providing now (they have higher taxes but worth it in my view).
But clearly, the world changes slowly (especially in the US). It doesn't seem designed to give us what we want.
It seems we as individuals have to decide what we value, what our priorities are, and make that happen ourselves to the best of our abilities. And hopefully we have a supportive partner in agreement with the means and goals. On a practical realistic level, what else can one do. US policies and norms are unlikely to change for decades.
But clearly, the world changes slowly (especially in the US). It doesn't seem designed to give us what we want.
It seems we as individuals have to decide what we value, what our priorities are, and make that happen ourselves to the best of our abilities. And hopefully we have a supportive partner in agreement with the means and goals. On a practical realistic level, what else can one do. US policies and norms are unlikely to change for decades.
20
In many important ways, we are not the greatest country on earth. Slavery, segregation, massacre of native Americans, overturning elected government (Iran in 1953, Chile in 1973 are not the only examples), plus using torture have shamed us,
13
But change does come: internet flow spreads ideas. Look at gay marriage, from "NO" to "Yes" in about 15 years. I believe as folks understand our demographic, developmental, and economic challenges they will change their minds.
Senator Sanders could not have run for the Democratic Party nomination for President in 2008. Just 8 years and he has a real following.
Look at the huge changes in understanding of mental illness (see Van der Kolk's book "The Body Keeps the Score" pub 2014). Look at our enormously increasing understanding of genetics. It's true the plutocrats are organized and have been pushing their agenda since l964, and have recruited racists since public school integration. However there is still a huge change in the last 15 years. Americans are beginning to understand that the 0.1% and their corporations are treating the rest of us like colonial populations were treated by predatory nations. (And like Europeans, including my ancestors, treated Native Americans) Americans will do the right thing as Churchill said, after they've tried everything else.
Senator Sanders could not have run for the Democratic Party nomination for President in 2008. Just 8 years and he has a real following.
Look at the huge changes in understanding of mental illness (see Van der Kolk's book "The Body Keeps the Score" pub 2014). Look at our enormously increasing understanding of genetics. It's true the plutocrats are organized and have been pushing their agenda since l964, and have recruited racists since public school integration. However there is still a huge change in the last 15 years. Americans are beginning to understand that the 0.1% and their corporations are treating the rest of us like colonial populations were treated by predatory nations. (And like Europeans, including my ancestors, treated Native Americans) Americans will do the right thing as Churchill said, after they've tried everything else.
8
Which is why Bernie Sanders calls for a political revolution.
2
I have all the sympathy in the world for parents, but it's not just a childcare problem. It's a taking care of a developmentally disabled sibling. It's taking care of a child who's been injured in combat. It's elder care for our parents, aunts, uncles. Group homes, assisted living and daycare are not that available or affordable for these populations, either. If we don't tackle care of *everyone* in the family, the kids will have the same issues when they grow up. Everyone in the family needs watching after.
565
We found group homes--they are called different things in the various states--to be a wonderful, caring, and affordable alternative for our elderly parents when they began to need more care.
8
Thanks for writing this. I hope more parents realize that if they push for policies and programs that are more inclusive, they will get more support from those of us who are non-parents or past their parenting years.
32
Don't forget the third cousin with the broken ankle and the sick cat. We can all find someone who needs our attention and then no one has to go to work!
Snark aside, is there a line drawn anywhere? If not, then we have chaos. If so, where? It's not so easy...
Snark aside, is there a line drawn anywhere? If not, then we have chaos. If so, where? It's not so easy...
1
Thank you for your seriousness here (and this comes from someone who cherishes your wit and ability to find humor in almost anything, no matter how seemingly dire.)
I am appalled at the cost of child care for children below Grade School age, and am ashamed that we treat our new mothers and fathers so shabbily. Our family has been spared the brunt of this, but I see it all over with the vast majority who are less fortunate.
There are many valiant efforts to cope with this problem, from co-op arrangements to on job care sharing. But the vast majority of young parents need a national program to solve this, and so does our nation.
I am appalled at the cost of child care for children below Grade School age, and am ashamed that we treat our new mothers and fathers so shabbily. Our family has been spared the brunt of this, but I see it all over with the vast majority who are less fortunate.
There are many valiant efforts to cope with this problem, from co-op arrangements to on job care sharing. But the vast majority of young parents need a national program to solve this, and so does our nation.
400
We can stand here and blame problems like this and others - homelessness, job insecurity - on government inaction, but the fact is that in what remains of the US economy the high cost of the services sector (the provision of child care, of education, of health care, of housing and all the trades that go with it) are what's propping up the standard of living for those that are still making it. The "good parts" of the cities are still livable because these costs keep edging up, but as you can see lots of people are getting left behind and government is not coming back to fill the gaps - not for a long time anyway.
Your news organization, Ms. Collins, has pledged to double its income by - what year is that again? - and each year my online bill to read your words and the rest of the Times inches up, along with the rest of what the US economy has to offer its citizens.
Your news organization, Ms. Collins, has pledged to double its income by - what year is that again? - and each year my online bill to read your words and the rest of the Times inches up, along with the rest of what the US economy has to offer its citizens.
8
Republicans have a tin ear on this issue but the best thing we can do as a nation is to replicate a program that is gaining ground in many urban areas: High school girls who also happen to be mothers can attend school while leaving their children in a day-care area of the school. That same approach can be implemented in the work place. It would reduce the number of young mothers on public assistance, give them status as productive contributors to society, and promote economic wellness. Of course, there would be a hue and cry over "who's going to fund that program?" but it beats having young mothers stay home and receive public assistance.
191
I worked in a place that had an on site day care. I didn't have children at the time but the parents who did (moms and dads) really loved it. They could see the kids at breaks and were quickly available if there was an upset of some kind. I recall some parents saying they loved having the kids with them on the commute to and from work too.
16
Is there any issue on which Republicans are not tin-eared?
7
During WWII large employers established on-site child care for all those women who were so desperately needed to produce war materiel. No reason why that couldn't be done now.
1
One of my colleagues in the corporate world describes her employer's culture as: "Welcome to America! Just shut up and get back to work!" It seems this is what we have come to....for women and men alike. And, no, she doesn't work for amazon.com.
264
I agree with what Gail says (as always!) and of course we need more and better and cheaper daycare.
But the real question is: why is childcare always framed as a women's issue? Last I checked, lots of men are parents too.
But the real question is: why is childcare always framed as a women's issue? Last I checked, lots of men are parents too.
798
Right! And kids come in both sexes also.
34
One out of three children live in a single parent household semicolon the overwhelming majority headed by women. The number of children who are not supported by their father is economically much less emotionally is staggering.
Many men are not interested in children. Many women talk past men who state this or clearly demonstrate this in their behavior. Often is expressed that the man's mind will change once the baby is born. Clearly that is not the case, given the number of women who are raising children on their own.
I am all for affordable good daycare for kids. And I totally agree that every child in this world has been the result of a father and a mother. But we have to recognize that many children are born in this world because of a woman's desire to be a mom disregarding a man's desire not to be a father.
Men who do not wish to become a father should probably get a vasectomy and we should encourage it. But in addition we should really take off the table idea that a woman is not complete until she's the mother - it's not good for the children.
Many men are not interested in children. Many women talk past men who state this or clearly demonstrate this in their behavior. Often is expressed that the man's mind will change once the baby is born. Clearly that is not the case, given the number of women who are raising children on their own.
I am all for affordable good daycare for kids. And I totally agree that every child in this world has been the result of a father and a mother. But we have to recognize that many children are born in this world because of a woman's desire to be a mom disregarding a man's desire not to be a father.
Men who do not wish to become a father should probably get a vasectomy and we should encourage it. But in addition we should really take off the table idea that a woman is not complete until she's the mother - it's not good for the children.
5
Patriarchy - men's entitlement to dominance - is pernicious, insidious, resilient, and ancient. It's a key foundation of conservatism and lies behind every conflict on the planet. It must become extinct.
640
Please consider the possibility that an arrangement like patriarchy, which is dominant across time (history) and space (the world) has an evolutionarily advantage. For example, practically all societies have evolved taboos against incest or sexual activity with children or avoiding contact with human waste, for very good evolutionary reasons.
There do exist matriarchal societies like the Khasi in Northeast India or Mosuo in China, and it is entirely no coincidence that these are restricted to remote, inaccessible areas of the world, and in decline, because this is a suboptimal model compared to patriarchy.
There do exist matriarchal societies like the Khasi in Northeast India or Mosuo in China, and it is entirely no coincidence that these are restricted to remote, inaccessible areas of the world, and in decline, because this is a suboptimal model compared to patriarchy.
Please also keep in mind that it was patriarchal morals which allowed third class women on the Titanic to out survive first class men. One wonders if the same our hold true today.
Patriarchy has also only sent men to the most dangerous (soldiering, firefighting) and dirty work (garbage collection, sewage work).
Simply put, patriarchy has succeeded while egalitarian or matriarchal societies have shrunk because patriarchy is a much more evolutionarily competitive system due to its optimal allocation of duties.
Patriarchy has also only sent men to the most dangerous (soldiering, firefighting) and dirty work (garbage collection, sewage work).
Simply put, patriarchy has succeeded while egalitarian or matriarchal societies have shrunk because patriarchy is a much more evolutionarily competitive system due to its optimal allocation of duties.
1
Males are merely physically more dominant in almost all species, being physically larger. This comment suggests that women as leader is as abnormal as incest or sexual activity with children or avoiding contact with human waste.
5
You're certainly right that Republicans have no interest in spending money to help working families or single working women. Remember the recent demonization of "waitress moms".
As for the Japanese, when it comes to universal preschool, they have an additional reason to support it: they have a serious problem with an aging population with fewer people to support them.They want women to have more children, and so they provide incentives.
The Japanese are a relatively homogeneous population; they don't have an immigration issue that right wingers can easily turn into an "us against them" scenario.
Here in the US it seems fairly easy for the GOP to convince certain fearful people that benefits should not go to "those people".
As for the Japanese, when it comes to universal preschool, they have an additional reason to support it: they have a serious problem with an aging population with fewer people to support them.They want women to have more children, and so they provide incentives.
The Japanese are a relatively homogeneous population; they don't have an immigration issue that right wingers can easily turn into an "us against them" scenario.
Here in the US it seems fairly easy for the GOP to convince certain fearful people that benefits should not go to "those people".
69
To start with Gail, you are writing about single mothers, most of whom do not have the education to get the better paying jobs.
That leaves low wage jobs, many of which have gone away. Clothing factories employed mostly women, production lines like small appliances, or electronic circuit boards have gone to other countries.
Then there are what were the traditional women's jobs, such as payroll clerks, and well paying work such as nursing,which has been invaded by males. Lower grade teaching is still mostly women, but it takes and education, and single mothers who have to support young children, and pay for child care, can not afford a four year degree plus another year of teacher training.
When it comes to work that is mostly male the competition can be fierce. Men are more aggressive in pursuing and keeping those line. of work. You can argue the nature nurser cause of such, but male assertiveness is a fact. Women who exhibit the same affection are regarded with concern, and suspicion.
Government paid child care and education would be a good start, but not a panacea for all of the issues facing these women.
That leaves low wage jobs, many of which have gone away. Clothing factories employed mostly women, production lines like small appliances, or electronic circuit boards have gone to other countries.
Then there are what were the traditional women's jobs, such as payroll clerks, and well paying work such as nursing,which has been invaded by males. Lower grade teaching is still mostly women, but it takes and education, and single mothers who have to support young children, and pay for child care, can not afford a four year degree plus another year of teacher training.
When it comes to work that is mostly male the competition can be fierce. Men are more aggressive in pursuing and keeping those line. of work. You can argue the nature nurser cause of such, but male assertiveness is a fact. Women who exhibit the same affection are regarded with concern, and suspicion.
Government paid child care and education would be a good start, but not a panacea for all of the issues facing these women.
67
You sound nostalgic for those old times, Mr. Underwood and a proponent of the status quo. More than half of all college students are now women. Someone has to bear the babies and it appears that women are those someones. Females should not be punished for doing their part in keeping the human race going by being denied workplace opportunities and real support of society, including the impregnators. This means sharing childcare expenses and all responsibilities of parenthood. Babies don't get made by women alone. My point? This is not an issue "facing women." It is an issue everyone must face because everyone is involved and responsible.
87
Do you think it's just single women who need help with child care?
Guess again - I also don't think those are the only women Gail's writing about.
She's talking about a huge trend - we've built an economy that depends upon working women - not just working SINGLE women - and we haven't provided for family leave (with pay) OR affordable child care.
Many young COUPLES are struggling to make ends meet. It isn't just those women you know.
Guess again - I also don't think those are the only women Gail's writing about.
She's talking about a huge trend - we've built an economy that depends upon working women - not just working SINGLE women - and we haven't provided for family leave (with pay) OR affordable child care.
Many young COUPLES are struggling to make ends meet. It isn't just those women you know.
344
And here I'd thought those years marching for women's rights had maybe accomplished something.....
32
Gail, you're focusing on another one of those things that Gillens and Page tell us can't be fixed unless it's a focus of the donor class:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/is-america-an-oligarchy
and
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/small-pool-of-rich-donors-dominates...
If we'll all just quit worrying our little heads about getting anything changed before we can alter the balance at SCOTUS and then get decisions handed down that reverse Citizens United, McCutcheon and Hobby Lobby, our blood pressure will be lower and overall frustration will decline - bet you probably also hold to the quaint notion that an economy should be run for the benefit of the most people instead of at the pleasure of the donor class, don't you ?
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/is-america-an-oligarchy
and
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/small-pool-of-rich-donors-dominates...
If we'll all just quit worrying our little heads about getting anything changed before we can alter the balance at SCOTUS and then get decisions handed down that reverse Citizens United, McCutcheon and Hobby Lobby, our blood pressure will be lower and overall frustration will decline - bet you probably also hold to the quaint notion that an economy should be run for the benefit of the most people instead of at the pleasure of the donor class, don't you ?
38
Remember too that there is a shortage of jobs, and an even greater shortage of good jobs.
A woman can't pay for child care from the income of a part time minimum wage job. So if she gets married and they decide to have children, what are they going to do?
Often enough, he'll do whatever job he can get, and she'll make do without child care options. Of course if she can get a better job than him, maybe he'll stay home. But we are assuming a typical young couple here with two marginal jobs and facing a child care problem and lack of parental leave.
Their choices are limited. It will push women more than men out of the work force.
A woman can't pay for child care from the income of a part time minimum wage job. So if she gets married and they decide to have children, what are they going to do?
Often enough, he'll do whatever job he can get, and she'll make do without child care options. Of course if she can get a better job than him, maybe he'll stay home. But we are assuming a typical young couple here with two marginal jobs and facing a child care problem and lack of parental leave.
Their choices are limited. It will push women more than men out of the work force.
53
In our current age of vulture capitalism you'd think "they" would welcome women into the workforce as they usually get paid far less than men, meaning more money in their pockets. It's a cynical point of view, but one I'm certain hasn't escaped the attention of those pulling the strings.
6
EricR -- True, but the women in question could not do it for what they'd get paid. After child care and the expenses of working, they'd be behind. Remember that working adds child care, but it also adds transportation, specialized clothing, food at the office, and much else. Working isn't free. Many women with children too can't afford working. Hence they don't. It isn't about making them welcome, it is paying them.
A World disgrace is USA
Won't set a fair minimum pay
Paid maternity leave
Makes the Tea Party grieve
Paid pre-School? My God, there's no way!
Won't set a fair minimum pay
Paid maternity leave
Makes the Tea Party grieve
Paid pre-School? My God, there's no way!
119
During the debate Hillary not only lanced Fiorina, but also Bernie Sanders via the nation of Denmark.
But the candidate whose prescriptions for righting women's issues are the strongest is actually Bernie Sanders. He was a feminist before it was cool for a man to be one and before most guys understood what women's liberation was about. The prescriptions he proposes, in alignment with the norm in Scandinavia (all of Europe, really) is precisely what American women need, from extended family leave not only for mom, but dad, too, to a woman's right to choose, birth control, free childcare, a solid education, equal pay, a living wage, affordable housing, and hiring practices that don't discriminate against women overall, and women of color in particular.
The cost of childcare is indeed keeping many two-parent households from being two parent working households, but one must also consider the living wage part of this equation. It isn't just the cost of childcare but also what a low-wage job affords someone. Sanders' prescription for pre-K for all would do much to alleviate the burdens of childcare on all families.
What's needed is the whole package, from fixing the economy and the policies underlying it that not only ruined it but brought our very Democracy to its knees to finally addressing gender and race in a holistic way, across our institutions.
---
Hillary and Denmark: http://tinyurl.com/qh72g4y
Deray McKesson on meeting Sanders & Clinton http://tinyurl.com/ozyjtkq
But the candidate whose prescriptions for righting women's issues are the strongest is actually Bernie Sanders. He was a feminist before it was cool for a man to be one and before most guys understood what women's liberation was about. The prescriptions he proposes, in alignment with the norm in Scandinavia (all of Europe, really) is precisely what American women need, from extended family leave not only for mom, but dad, too, to a woman's right to choose, birth control, free childcare, a solid education, equal pay, a living wage, affordable housing, and hiring practices that don't discriminate against women overall, and women of color in particular.
The cost of childcare is indeed keeping many two-parent households from being two parent working households, but one must also consider the living wage part of this equation. It isn't just the cost of childcare but also what a low-wage job affords someone. Sanders' prescription for pre-K for all would do much to alleviate the burdens of childcare on all families.
What's needed is the whole package, from fixing the economy and the policies underlying it that not only ruined it but brought our very Democracy to its knees to finally addressing gender and race in a holistic way, across our institutions.
---
Hillary and Denmark: http://tinyurl.com/qh72g4y
Deray McKesson on meeting Sanders & Clinton http://tinyurl.com/ozyjtkq
256
To Rima
Like you I'm a strong Bernieite,
I think he'd set many things right!
Like you I'm a strong Bernieite,
I think he'd set many things right!
79
Hi, Larry!
Thank you.
That and he's open to seeing things differently or considering issues he wasn't aware of and adopting them. Deray McKesson's observations (linked above) provide very valuable insights into issues too many Americans know very little about.
Thank you.
That and he's open to seeing things differently or considering issues he wasn't aware of and adopting them. Deray McKesson's observations (linked above) provide very valuable insights into issues too many Americans know very little about.
25
I wish the "media" i.e. Big money donors, would stop telling us that Bernie Sanders is unelectable. We want what we want. And we want him!
184
Working is wonderful if it really fulfills one's lifelong ambition and satisfies one's passions. Most people work at jobs that are less than enjoyable, however, and because they have to support themselves and their families. Whether exchanging the lion's share of one's "free" time with family, and, in particular, one's young children, for time with entities increasingly devaluing workers really improves the quality of life/standard of living for the average person depends upon what the definition of quality of life is. One problem is that when women entered the work force in more roles than ever before, wages for just about everyone, including blue-collar men, went down. That was not women's fault, but just a function of supply and demand in the workforce, plus the effects of globalization. And as many "working" mothers know, the cost of childcare can be prohibitive, and our system of taxation is such that the parent making the lesser of the two incomes often pays disproportionately higher taxes than others making the same individual gross income pay. In the meantime, the income of some single "working" parents is grossed-up by the EITC, which is effectively a negative tax. Now that more people of both genders, and, in most families, both parents are working outside of the home, what have we really gained? The two-income trap is just that, hence so many mothers leaving the paid workforce. When they try to return, however, the pathetic Ledbetter Act offers them no protection.
32
Women began entering the workforce in greater numbers partly because of low wages--a second income was needed to support a family.
When various phenomena occur more or less simultaneously, we have correlation, not causation--more research needed to untangle cause and effect.
When various phenomena occur more or less simultaneously, we have correlation, not causation--more research needed to untangle cause and effect.
4
It seems to me that we don't talk enough about whether the participation of extended family is a significant factor in many successful child care situations -- I want to know to what extent women who stay in the labor force make use of arrangements that depend on that sort of resource. That would impact an assessment of how adequate our more formal childcare options are, if it turns out that many families are depending at least in part on such arrangements in order to have both parents working outside the home. It might also imply that we should reconsider our modern abandonment of an emphasis on the extended family in favor of a nuclear one (a nuclear one plus trying to hire professionals to fill in the gaps). Young people starting out in the careers and creating families might want to take it into account when thinking about where to live, for example, if turns out to be a significant factor, so I think it would be helpful to know, in terms of setting realistic expectations and planning, what role such arrangements play. And I would love to see whether conservatives would be as enthusiastic about promoting family values if they don't involve controlling sexuality but are more about staying close to grandparents and grandchildren, for example.
32
Hate to say it, but grandma and grandpa are generally working themselves and not providing child care during the work day. That just isn't a great solution as we raise the expected age of retirement and leave many seniors unable to retire at all because of lack of resources.
523
Unfortunately. not everyone has access to extended family to help out. If the only viable job in your industry is in another state--or if you're in the military, going where you're ordered. If your family is in another country. If you are an only child of only children. If you have older parents who need care themselves. If you're a survivor of an abusive or addicted family, you also probably don't want them to interact with your kids. I've seen people struggle with all these scenarios, and do the best they can, with grace.
249
People live so far apart these days. Plus grandparents who may live close by either work or need care themselves. It is the sandwich generation and it is hard to navigate and there is little help available unless you can pay.
97