| ▲ | Forgeties79 an hour ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
We managed to have a society with a significant number of families living on one income for quite some time. 2 incomes shouldn’t be a requirement to keep a roof over a family’s head. The goal shouldn’t be “2 incomes,” it should be “1 income is sustainable and families can actually be a family.” | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | nemomarx an hour ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
making housing affordable also sounds like a pretty hard problem in most of the developed West, yeah? like if you have a good idea definitely pursue it though | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bluGill an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Really? What society? The 1950s got close in the US (I'm not sure about elsewhere, but I doubt it), but even then there were a lot of women working. If you go back to 1800 you will discover that saying families had only one income was because history is generally blind to "women's work" and so you have no idea what women did. (for that matter what most men did is something history only barely mentions). In 1850 a lot of people were more self sufficient - the whole family was growing their own food and making their own cloth - and so saying there was even one income is false - there mostly was no income but they only bought a few things and so only need a small income rarely. (historians can give you a much longer and more complex answer - mine is a gross simplification) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||