Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Women want to have it all... even if they can't afford it.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Women want to have it all... even if they can't afford it.

    As I have not posted in a while, I want to break ice back with a cute little piece of journalism form my yahoo recommendations... LOL Why Work Has Failed Us: Because It’s Making It Impossible to Start a Family

    https://getpocket.com/explore/item/w...start-a-family

    I will not break down the whole thing just a few notes here and there...

    Julia Smith, a public defender in a major city in the northeast, has made every major life decision over the last few years based on the cost of childcare.
    No idea what a public defender does, but lest move on...

    When she and her husband, who works as a carpenter, decided to have a baby, they realized that their salaries would not cover the cost of daycare, which came to more than a thousand dollars a month. So Smith quit her job in state government to work at a corporate law firm, where she would earn more money even though the work was less fulfilling to her. (She’s asked to use a pseudonym to speak openly without any fear of career repercussions.) “Getting a higher-paying job was absolutely part of my family planning process,” she tells me. “I had to quit a job that I loved to have enough money to pay for my daughter’s daycare.”
    OK so she have to quit her government job and get a real job to have enough money to pay someone else to take care for their baby... I think I am following so far...

    Now that her daughter is three years old, she’s decided to go back to her dream job as a public servant. These days, after paying off their mortgage, student loans, and daycare, the family is left with $250 a month in savings. “There’s no doubt in my mind that if we made more money I would already have another baby by now,” she says. “But we just can’t afford it. We’re looking for any opportunity to cut down on costs so that we can put more towards our savings.”
    After baby got to certain age she quit the real job and go back to the government job but now they can't afford another baby... I think I still following so far...

    In most industrialized nations, an attorney and a carpenter would not feel crippled by the cost of childcare. But in America, the skyrocketing cost of childcare is just one of the harsh realities of parenthood.
    OK what she wants is to have her fake job, don't need to actually take care of her children herself, but to hire someone else to do that for her and have the taxpayers to pay for all this life decisions of hers, or else... oppression...

    Basically she wants it all but can't afford it...

    Between 1985 and 2011 alone, the cost of childcare went up by 70 percent, even though wages barely grew.
    No my fault. Women are the ones that started to complain and got the regulations for child care centers to be so high it takes a lot of money to fulfill the requirements... want cheaper then be OK with your kid eating dirt on the back back yard sometime... also health benefits to the immune system when they eat some dirt.

    Pew Research suggests that the rising cost of childcare is likely responsible for the increase in stay-at-home moms over the last decades.
    Great... kids need contact with real parents... good for their development.

    Entering the workforce was an important tool of empowerment to women, giving them access to independence and wealth, but the rising cost of childcare has undermined this progress.
    Well... nobody is going to take care of your little brats for free... so work and pay... welcome to equality.

    Patagonia is an exception. The company has offered childcare to employees at its Ventura, California, head offices since it launched 35 years ago, but it has recently extended the same service to employees at its Reno, Nevada, distribution center as well.
    Then quit your fake job and go to work there... you said all your decisions are based on what is the best for the kids, and after that all I hear is me me me.... move to Reno and be happy.

    It’s not entirely clear why childcare costs keep increasing.
    Why don't you try to open a childcare facility and find out how much it cost to run one of those places? specially with all the crazy government regulations that mother have push politicians into passing...

    This means having highly qualified caregivers watching their children around the clock, to accommodate their work schedules, and allow them to thrive in their careers.
    Nothing of that is cheap.

    Public policy experts believe that in the past, many low-income mothers would run home-based childcare centers where they would look after their own children along with others, to make a little money and save on their own childcare costs. However, in the early 1990s, the government launched a range of childcare programs to help the very poorest Americans, such as the state-administered program Head Start or the Child Care and Development Fund which offers subsidies for daycare. As a result, poor women who would otherwise provide childcare facilities in their homes began seeking higher paying work outside the home.
    The real reason those neighbors that watched your kids while work stopped doing it is because this 3 factors:

    1. Your kid is a spoiled piece of shit, it behaves bad, it talks wore, it is not pleasant to have it around and you don't care to help to fix, and also you will attack anyone that tries to correct them.

    2. You are an entitle delusional parent that thinks your kid is royalty and you go around treating people that serves you like crap, and threatening to sue them and put them on jail if your "little treasure" have a bruise, or a scratch or wet the bed.

    3. You made the government pass a bunch of laws that make illegal for people to watch out kids in their homes, so if that old lady takes in your kid, for the $5 an hour you want to pay, and the government finds out, just for that she will go to jail, loose her house and a kidney.

    There are many families who earn too much to qualify for subsidized care, but find it very expensive to send their children to more expensive daycare centers.
    When earning too much money is a problem... welcome to socialism.

    Maybe your husband can stop doing overtime, and you can go your fake job down to 30 hours so can get the government program???

    Or do what everybody else do, divorce the guy, cash in child support and find another guy for the second kid.

    Everybody loses when childcare is unaffordable to many families...
    No everybody... no me... LOL.

    This means that many mothers are running themselves ragged, trying to earn money to support their families while also spending a lot of their time changing diapers, sterilizing milk bottles, waking up at night to feed their babies, and many other labor-intensive tasks.
    You want to have it all, you need to do it all.

    Poor parents who can’t afford to send their kids to licensed childcare facilities, and don’t have family members who can step in, may have to rely on the thousands of illegal, unlicensed daycare centers across the country. While some of these centers certainly provide good care, many are death traps for children. The infant death rate is seven times higher in home-care settings than in regulated daycare facilities.
    3 paragraphs ago you was resenting this was not available to you... now you call it dead traps.. make up your mind for gods sake, woman!

    And to make things worse, there’s a shortage of licensed childcare throughout the country. Researchers from the Center for American Progress have found that in 22 states, 51 percent of the population live in what has been called “childcare deserts,” neighborhoods where the number of children under the age of five outnumbers available daycare slots by more than three to one.
    It really is a crappy business to own... I am guessing those poor people have their money stuck in that place and are trying to sell it before it bankrupts...

    This reality drives many women to leave the workforce to look after their children.
    Oh the tragedy... LOL.

    Other countries use taxes to fund or subsidize the cost of childcare under the assumption that societies benefit when children have access to high-quality, low-cost care and parents–particularly mothers–should be able to return to the workforce without worrying about their children.
    Then move to there... take that ship and sail to Denmark...

    In France, the government has made daycare available to citizens since 1848. These days, when a new mother returns to work after her 16 weeks of paid maternity leave, the family can apply to send their infant to a state-run crèche in their neighborhood, where they will pay only what they can afford based on a sliding scale.
    Have you seeing those facilities??? they are state run deathtraps!!! LOL

    Trained childcare professionals will feed, diaper, and cuddle these infants while their parents are at work, and introduce them to developmentally appropriate activities as they grow into toddlers.
    You are dreaming... here something from the news:

    "During visits to Giraffe Childcare at Central Park in Leopardstown, inspectors found the basic needs of children were so poorly met, some went without food for hours, while others resorted to taking food from other children's plates because their own portions were so small."
    https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1018/1084309-tusla-creche/

    These countries have been continually evolving their childcare policies to keep up with changing gender norms, as more women began to work outside of the home.
    So why they prefer nannies so much over this wonderful places?

    Progressive lawmakers have proposed policies that do this. In 2011, for instance, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders created the Foundations for Success Act to that would provide all children from six weeks old until kindergarten access to full-time, high-quality early care and education, solving the means-testing problem of earlier programs that squeeze lower-income parents. But its chances of passing in the current Congress are slim.
    Trust the education and well-been of your kid to Bernie... sure nothing will go wrong with that...

    Until America finds a way to make childcare more affordable, the prospect of having children will become increasingly more unpalatable to young people who are getting married and thinking about starting families.
    Well.. yeah....

    But even with one child, Smith finds herself feeling crushed by the burden of childcare costs most days. “It’s a constant source of stress for our family,” Smith tells me. “I can’t even imagine what it is like for families with even fewer resources.”
    Oh, I have a family like that living just next door. something like half a dozen kids...

    Beans are cheap, Tortillas are cheaper... The dollar store have a whole are for toys... kids have survive so far.

  • #2
    I suppose it would be herasy to say, the old small govt no tax, man earning enough for the wife to be at home system worked well for everyone...........except govt and feminists.

    A man can gain no more respect than by, laying down his life for a woman. And a woman, no more than by, beating down a man. For a man to ask, what is fair and good and true and just, is to offend.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by menrppl2 View Post
      I suppose it would be herasy to say, the old small govt no tax, man earning enough for the wife to be at home system worked well for everyone...........except govt and feminists.
      Well that traditional deal worked well for women for sure... not sure it worked well for men...

      Guys had to do like 70+ hours of hard work a week to pay for the whole deal... included government.

      Looks like women though they can control more money if they earn it... I don't see what is the government angle.

      I honestly do no care if women work or not... that is pretty much their problem... still, kind of irritating that their go to solution for all their problems is tax money... taking money out from other working people that might need and have their plans for that money.

      Comment


      • #4
        ya I know the mra line

        seems to me, traditional roles, family and community over big government, served the most satisfactorily

        in the end women generally want home and family, and man wants appreciated protector provider

        im divorced twice mgtow, stopped empire building, dating, and being community active, only had one kid......soured by injustice and misandry and socialist anti capitalist

        I see my uncle married 64 years big family, wife at home, lots of kids, involved in the community, built businesses fed a lot of ppl

        I can see the satisfaction of being appreciated protector provider with wife at home


        maybe its not the male sacrifice for women and society that's so bad, but, the getting fucked over and treated like shit for it, that sucks.


        must be some reason guys still cling to the blue pill route against all odds, and red pill are mostly guys who got a swift kick in the teeth for it

        I gotta ask myself is it my male sacrifice for women and society I had a problem with, or the lack of respect reward and fairness I got for it.
        Last edited by menrppl2; 11-10-2019, 06:24 AM.
        A man can gain no more respect than by, laying down his life for a woman. And a woman, no more than by, beating down a man. For a man to ask, what is fair and good and true and just, is to offend.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by simpleman View Post
          No idea what a public defender does, but lest move on...
          Public defenders are the attorney that's appointed by the court if you can't afford to hire one yourself.

          Their job is supposed to be to provide legal advice, up to and including an adequate legal defense if so desired.

          In practice this usually means they instruct you to take a plea deal even if you're not guilty. George Gordon of "George Gordon's School of Law" used to say that if the public defender does their job well, then you will be convicted and the process will have been adhered to so adequately that you'll have no grounds to appeal the conviction.

          "...but when she goes off you, she will not just walk away, she will walk away with your fucking skin in a jar." ~~ DoctorRandomercam
          "The laws of man, they don't apply when blood gets in a woman's eye" - The Black Keys

          Comment


          • #6
            I don't feel like rereading this entire story, but it seems that the majority of her complaints could be alleviated by staying at the more lucrative job until the second child is old enough to go pre-school and then going back to the more rewarding one.

            It's very much "I want what I want and I want it now". God forbid someone have to make sacrifices.
            "...but when she goes off you, she will not just walk away, she will walk away with your fucking skin in a jar." ~~ DoctorRandomercam
            "The laws of man, they don't apply when blood gets in a woman's eye" - The Black Keys

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mifune View Post
              I don't feel like rereading this entire story, but it seems that the majority of her complaints could be alleviated by staying at the more lucrative job until the second child is old enough to go pre-school and then going back to the more rewarding one.

              It's very much "I want what I want and I want it now". God forbid someone have to make sacrifices.
              I get the same conclusion too... she is capable of having a better paid job, she just don't feel like it... hence taxpayers have to foot the bill.

              Thanks for explaining what a Public defender is... I was thinking it was something more like a social activist or some like that... so this is a bit more than social activism, but still they seem to prefer to no do their actual job and just go by collecting paycheck while giving bad legal service to their clients...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by menrppl2 View Post
                ya I know the mra line

                seems to me, traditional roles, family and community over big government, served the most satisfactorily

                in the end women generally want home and family, and man wants appreciated protector provider

                im divorced twice mgtow, stopped empire building, dating, and being community active, only had one kid......soured by injustice and misandry and socialist anti capitalist

                I see my uncle married 64 years big family, wife at home, lots of kids, involved in the community, built businesses fed a lot of ppl

                I can see the satisfaction of being appreciated protector provider with wife at home


                maybe its not the male sacrifice for women and society that's so bad, but, the getting fucked over and treated like shit for it, that sucks.


                must be some reason guys still cling to the blue pill route against all odds, and red pill are mostly guys who got a swift kick in the teeth for it

                I gotta ask myself is it my male sacrifice for women and society I had a problem with, or the lack of respect reward and fairness I got for it.
                Maybe it is a different mindset between generations?

                I do find offensive the whole thing about me having to be the "provider".

                No doubt that men that assumed the traditional roles, provider included, got treated like shit. While in the old times they where respected... but then again... what "respect" means here? I ask, because every time I look into it, all I see is some few perks that do not really add up to the money they put in... as in... a 3 stars hotel would have treated them with a lot more "respect" for the same money.

                Comment


                • #9
                  You don't have to look too far in 2019 to see legions of women who have bought into this Feminist "pipe dream" that every woman should be entitled to have it all. You know, "The best man for the job is a wo-man".(presumably just because she's a wo-man) And if that doesn't work one way, then she can resort to hypergamy in order to have things both ways to achieve her agenda.

                  In 1950 there were about 2.5 billion people on this earth. it may have made sense for men to be chauvinistic and protective of women to keep the human species viable in those times. "Women and children into the life boats first." etc. But it is almost 2020 now with a world population of 8 billion, So is the "feminist women's prerogative" to "have it all" when they can't achieve it or afford it, something logical men should believe they are compelled to shoulder the burden of ?

                  Feminist began calling off Chivalry in the late 1970's in those things that they felt were pejorative to them . Still they would break over and exploit male chivalry when it would benefit them (hypergamy) like hypocrites and playing the better qualities of men as their stupidity to be exploited..
                  Last edited by NO MA'AM; 11-13-2019, 08:15 PM.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In a Universe far away and long ago.....the early 1960's........ there lived "The Rocky & Bullwinkle Cartoon Show". There were several features in the show but the "Fractured Fairy Tales" tended to be priceless. One of those which would fit this thread very well was titled, "The Fisherman and his Wife".




                    This tale reminds me of Feminism itself. I just wish the fisherman had requested the mermaid to make his wife his submissive bitch on the second wish.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      LOL that cartoon.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X