ECON: Working women almost certainly caused the credit crunch

Originally posted by rizla
Yeah, I basically agree. It would be good idea to make one parent (male or female) a full-time carer to children at any one time.

40-50 years ago, women did not work once they had children. Can we seriously say we are better off now that both parents *have to* work? Or do we just have to work harder to be secure?

yep, and then when the two decide that they just can't get along, and well, decide to go their separate ways, the one that's been the full time caregiver will be given custody of the kids, with no means to support them, and the full time paycheck earner will be zapped with a huge child support bill...........
sound familiar???

as far as the 40-50 years ago, women did not work bit....
ummm....yes, they did.....many of them HAD TO!! for one reason or another, husband didn't earn enough, husband chose not to share enough of his earnings, husband decided to split on them, husband DIED!!
matter of fact, many of these women grew up in households where the women were working, and well, those women grew up in households where the women were busy doing all kinds of things inside their homes, and in their gardens and fields to earn a little extra income.

frankly, I think maybe it is time to make both the women, and the men equally responsible for both the caregiving and the bread winning! after all, women are usually chosen to care for the children, it's she that has to come up with the food to feed them, it's her who has to tuck them into beds at night, it's her who has to care for them when they are sick!! when the father, for whatever reason, fails to deliver the money for all this stuff, well, it's her who has to contend with the hungry, cold, sick kids!! and, well, the first thing she is gonna do is find a way to come up with the money that is needed to get those kids what they need!!! and write whatever laws you want, come up with whatever social taboos you desire!! SHE WILL BE EARNING MONEY!!!

the only thing you way will be ensuring is that she will be working harder, for longer hours to earn less of it!

I think the evidence of the world speaks for itself.
Who holds the wealth?
Who has the power?
Who are the elite?
Who has stolen, cheated and squandered the money?
Who not only allows but creates situations where children starve to death?
Who rapes?
Who are the vast majority of paedophiles?
Who practises the vast majority of domestic violence?
Who devised and practices grotesque and sick torture methods?
Who creates all wars?
Who commits genocide?
Who would toss a baby in the air to land on a bayonet or behead someone?
Who would believe people should be killed as they are not of benefit to society?

Who therefore has even a hope of having the empathy and emotional maturity required to lead and administer a country or its finances….and who should be entrusted with the power to do so?
Seems that for all time those that have forcibly placed themselves in power in every sphere have failed so utterly dismally that now they threaten the safety of the entire world.

as a single mother I would like to speak to the word "choice". I have never had a choice in rather I should work or not. My children required food and shelter. I believe if the men stayed in their marriages, and supported their families, there would be a "choice". Please do not blame the woman who did their best to raise their kids, be responsible, instead of running off to support their fading egos.

reply to post by Dragonelle


Much of the time, if not most, women in your situation become pregnant out of wedlock .. if you get pregnant without both parties being fully aware of the potential consequences and accepting that, then you can hardly blame one side for leaving? If your not married or engaged, the man is prrooobably not going to be to excited about you having a child, be it his or not. And it's hardly "without choice" ... you had the choice not to sleep with a dirt bag, but you slept with the dirt bag anyways. But I am sure your suffering should not be downplayed.. and us men who DO stick by their wives/girlfriends/children can go on living with the reputation of every moronic man out there. Just so happens, women tend to sleep with the morons. What can ya do eh?

It pains me to say this, but yes, working women are causing the problems.

They need to be home looking after the kids.

Actually, I am serious here - the kids suffer and the economy suffers - and I am a women's lib member - but I see that this is true.

reply to post by learningtofly


Of course.. the Father could do this too, however, the stigma of society would dictate that father ignorant, lazy, stupid (there has to be a reason he can't get a job, right?) and by all means, far less a man if the female is making the money. Which, it's ironic that since posting this thread I don't know a single man whom I am close to that makes more than their female counterparts.. we have all lost our jobs, or had to take time/pay cuts.. while the government is expanding all kinds of medical, clerical admin jobs that females are taking.

I think it will be an interesting decade..

reply to post by Rockpuck


Actually, Rock, I think it will be a turning point.

Yes, fathers can be wonderful. And yes, fathers can do all that.

But society has been turned on its head and I wonder if we are going to recover or go under.

reply to post by learningtofly

I recently found a nice site (then lost it), that consisted mainly of old pictures and postcards of my hometown and spent hours one night looking through them. Well there were alot of photos of the employees of the old companies that were in the town. I'm telling ya, there were women working in these place back in the late 1800's to early 1900's!! Far too many for them to be just old maids and young unmarried! I'd bet if you did a little research, you'd find about the same thing!
My family history tells me the same thing.....I've worked, my mom worked, my grandmother worked, and her mom worked!! Albiet, the further back you go, the more likely that the women were making their income from producing products in their home....but the industrial revolution kind of killed that one off a bit!

I think the differences are more like, hey, back then, extended families were more common, when my grandmother worked, outside the home, during the depression, her mother was living in the same home, and available to watch over my father. and well....gee...what a shame!! laws were passed that eliminated child labor and required equal pay for women.....so, well, first we eliminated the cheap labor force that we now call slavery, then we eliminated the other cheap labor force, the women and children.....and well.....we've been experimenting with illegal immigration as a replacement!

but, I assure you, there are alot of group pictures of employees of different companies on line if you chose to look for them, showing lots of female workers dating that far back!

en.wikipedia.org...

here's a great example! oh, and by the way,
ya know how horrified we all are when we hear of these islamic girls schools burning down, and their doors are locked to keep the girls from getting into trouble....
guess what??
many of the doors at this factory were locked also! I've heard different reasons given, to keep them from wondering off during their shift, to keep theft down, ect...but still over 100 people were left to either burn to death, or jumped from windows....simply because the factory didn't trust their employees and the laws were lacking when it came to protecting them!

but, it's a perfect example of women (and girls) working, way back in 1911!!!

more examples.

historytogo.utah.gov...

Women during the Industrial Revolution

Women faced different demands during the industrial age to those that they face today. Women of the working classes would usually be expected to go out to work, often in the mills or mines. As with the children and men the hours were long and conditions were hard. Some examples of work specifically done by Women can be found amongst the links at the foot of this page.

Those who were fortunate may have become maids for wealthier families, others may have worked as governesses for rich children. The less fortunate may have been forced to work in shocking conditions during the day and then have to return home to conduct the households domestic needs (Washing, Cookng and looking after children etc.)

Women also faced the added burden of societies demand for children. The industrial age led to a rapid increase in birth rates which clearly has an impact upon the physical strength of the mothers. It was not uncommon for families to have more than 10 children as a result of this demand: and the woman would often have to work right up to and straight after the day of the childs birth for finanical reasons, leaving the care of the new born child to older relatives.

www.schoolshistory.org.uk...

I wrote an essay about this actually. There are specific roles that need to be played, but which gender plays which role can be switched more easily now than ever.
I heard a plebeian in one of my classes suggest that women always vote for the tallest candidate. Which made me wonder if candidates who appear to be better suited genetically for mating get more votes from the opposite gender. Seems plausable enough.

Originally posted by jackalope_hunter
I wrote an essay about this actually. There are specific roles that need to be played, but which gender plays which role can be switched more easily now than ever.
I heard a plebeian in one of my classes suggest that women always vote for the tallest candidate. Which made me wonder if candidates who appear to be better suited genetically for mating get more votes from the opposite gender. Seems plausable enough.

I don't know if I agree with this one Jackalope. As a matter of fact I don't agree with it. Most of the women I know prefer to work in certain corridors..to have options in how and where and when they work. They as a rule do not want to work in a job which entails alot of traveling. Or shift work....working nights. Away from their families. It is ok if the men do it..but generally it is not for the women...and they will usually get more leeway in this than will the men...by default.

Most women I have ever known prefer to work in jobs which more suit their personalities...certain kinds of work. Certain
conditions..environments. You do not see most women trying out for jobs which can get them quickly and violently killed or maimed for life ..since this would lower substantially their value in the marketplace..and amongst other women..the competition. Also among men.

Now what was that you were saying about...

but which gender plays which role can be switched more easily now than ever.

This looks good on paper...jackalope..but I don't see women building shopping malls or grocery stores..or hooking up the electrical..or commercial/industrial refrigeration systems....which keep all these goods at their fingertips.

The women on these sites who are doing most of the complaining about how unfair the system is are to me the women who have the least "options" from the system in operation.

I do agree with one of the posters early on in this thread.. In line with the textbook "Victim Dictum " so popular today ..even among politicians...when the economy goes big time into the trash can...the women of this nation will be bailed out by one government program after another...while the men will get little or nothing since they are obviously and by default.."oppressors." Textbook of politics to do this.

The real motivation is that the women can be more easily cultivated for predictable, malleable, guaranteed votes at election time than can men. The women must be subsidized and the men who still have jobs must be put in a position to work by default to support this.
Government itself in this is very female and feminine..in that they are so often want to give away someone else's production or monies...give away someone else's RISKS. And they use this to keep and maintain power and control in a manner not seen and not known by most peoples.

Sound familiar to some of you?? Think it through it works.

Most of the government jobs which are being created...whom do you think will get the bulk of them?? Males or females. They are buying votes.

By the way..I don't know if it has been mentioned..in this thread...I hear alot of what I have taken to call the "Burka Dictum"

That women in this country are but one step away from all wearing Burkas..now...they are almost "Victims."

Sometimes when I want to be properly entertained..I watch this HGTV program ..or is it some other channel where they flip a house or hunt up a new house or a second home..et al. I notice that all the women in these programs wear "Burkas" and are totally silent when the decisions and input are made into what goodies go into the home under consideration. These women are all downtrodden and brow beaten...they have no input or decision making potential in the purchase or outfitting of these homes.
They are for all purposes unknown and unheard.

Women in this country..America ..are the prime decision makers of almost every big ticket item sold. It is they who decide what appliances go into what house.....what schools ..how the children are dressed..what kind of vehicle is purchased...etc etc...these are all items usually bought on credit.

And this is true whether she has a man or not. You do not usually see a woman in these programs allowing the man to decide these issues for the house while she makes the purchase on her credit. The entire process is primarily up to her..and every house or auto sales persons know this.

This makes a total laughing stock out of the Burka Dictum as well as the "Victim Dictum" so popular among so many including the body politic.
You just have to be able to think past sports conditioning to see it for the joke that it is.

And the Joke is on you males out here... Because this is true whether the woman works or does not.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 15-4-2010 by orangetom1999]