… everywhere. No, no, that’s just what happens when you’re poor and have no choice. Except actually, that’s what happens to all but the very very rich when you encourage women to work and have children but don’t change any other part of the world they live in.
It’s not encouragement, Amy.
It’s the unfortunate result of 40 years of increasing real estate costs combined with a stagnant trickle-down economy. The dual income family is a matter of survival, not choice.
Edit 1: A few people have made the comment that if people simplify their lifestyles, it’s possible to have a stay-at-home parent. It is possible, if you live in a smaller city or a rural area in housing built prior to the 1970’s. But the trend toward building larger houses with luxury amenities has transformed many parts of this country into income sucking traps that became ghost towns after the financial meltdown.
It’s true that we need to reject the obsessions of our consumer driven society, but we can’t ignore how supply side economics, the invention of the leveraged buyout and Wall Street derivatives have damaged our economy almost beyond repair.
Today, the system is stacked against families with kids, as pointed out by “The Two Income Trap.” The American dream of one parent being able to buy a house, college education for the children and save for retirement is out of the reach for probably 90% of our population*.
Our economic system has been stagnant for over 40 years, and there is a reason for it — them damn socialists:
*Given the crisis with massive student debt, the fact that 36% of the population does not own a home, and the incredibly national low savings rate, how many people outside the highest income brackets are able to accomplish all three of these goals?