We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Nevertheless, there surely seem to be a lot more two-income households today than there were in the 50s (even though many women did work outside the home then). However, in the 50s there were almost no single moms other than widows. It was considered shameful.
Women married to functional men take jobs not as a matter of economic necessity usually, or as a matter of personal fulfillment. It's usually a matter of people wanting an economically-higher standard of living, better financial security, or the ability to pay escalating tuitions and housing costs.
Dr. Joy Bliss: Women are now the primary breadwinners in 40 percent of households with children in the US. I'm not sure what that means because I don't know whether that includes the single moms or not.
A record 40% of all households with children under the age of 18 include mothers who are either the sole or primary source of income for the family, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The share was just 11% in 1960.
These “breadwinner moms” are made up of two very different groups: 5.1 million (37%) are married mothers who have a higher income than their husbands, and 8.6 million (63%) are single mothers.
Yeah, the terrible choice for both spouses to work is a real upper middle class burden. Down in the working classes, women worked usually just as much as her functional man since there was always something the kid's needed or the car fixed, or the appliance replaced.
Not to mention, dual breadwinners is economically sound planning. If both work, hopefully in different fields, then one job loss may not be catastrophic. True, with young children, paying for childcare can eat up most of a salary for the lesser skilled.
Alimony is a sham and an embarrassment to women. Kind of puts the test to the myth of equality doesn't it?
Child support as it stands today is undoubtedly illegal and immoral. A better system would require that both parents co-parent and co-support. The courts should never be involved in this deeply personal matter. And taking away a parents children can only cause deep resentment and create the very problem they then feel authorized to "fix" Equal custody and equal responsibility.
So, let me get this straight - when men were the primary breadwinners, lifetime alimony was OK, but now that women are the primary breadwinners in 40% of households, lifetime alimony isn't such a good idea. What was fair for the gander should be fair for the goose!