http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/news/economy/us-middle-class-basics-study/index.html
"Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone, according to a study released Thursday by the United Way ALICE Project. That's 43% of households in the United States."
The figure includes the 16.1 million households living in poverty, as well as the 34.7 million families that the United Way has dubbed ALICE -- Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed. This group makes less than what's needed "to survive in the modern economy."
"Despite seemingly positive economic signs, the ALICE data shows that financial hardship is still a pervasive problem," said Stephanie Hoopes, the project's director.
California, New Mexico and Hawaii have the largest share of struggling families, at 49% each. North Dakota has the lowest at 32%.
Many of these folks are the nation's child care workers, home health aides, office assistants and store clerks, who work low-paying jobs and have little savings, the study noted. Some 66% of jobs in the US pay less than $20 an hour.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday May 21 2018, @08:28AM (24 children)
There are a lot of causes that feed into this...
An earlier poster blames the "boomers", but that's true only in the sense that the boomer generation is the one that brought women full-scale into the work force. In addition to feminism, this was also just practical: two incomes raises your standard of living. Only...prices adapt to available income, and so do people's expectations of what they can afford. So now, two incomes is nearly essential, meaning that single parents have no chance to make ends meet.
The you have health care the "Affordable Care Act", has massively increased the price of health care. Either single payer or free market would be better. Obamacare manages to combine the worst aspects of both: massive regulation, no consumer choice and hence no competition - and yet all the middlemen are still in the picture, with their own massive bureaucracies and rake-offs.
Finally, one shouldn't forget the source of this study. United Way isn't a bad charity, but it is a huge organization with an interest in keeping the money flowing. Studies like this help them drive their funding campaigns, help them stay in the news. You would hardly expect them to pushing a paper saying "we aren't needed anymore, please stop sending us money", would you?
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 3, Touché) by PiMuNu on Monday May 21 2018, @08:56AM (19 children)
> In addition to feminism
What you say may be true - but it's worth pointing out that equality is a good aim.
> Finally, one shouldn't forget the source of this study.
Any better source?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21 2018, @10:11AM (5 children)
Can you look at the suicide statistics amongst males and the depression statistics amongst females and tell us if that is a "good aim"?
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Monday May 21 2018, @10:21AM (4 children)
Good news, everyone! We're equalizing!
Suicide Rates Climb In U.S., Especially Among Adolescent Girls [npr.org]
Youth Suicidal Behavior Is on the Rise, Especially Among Girls [wsj.com]
bonus [bbc.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21 2018, @10:44AM
A resounding "success" for the equality crew, if they keep going this way they'll put Stalin to shame. Do you have any statistics showing increases in equality between the sexes wrt workplace fatalities?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Monday May 21 2018, @11:20AM (2 children)
I understand that there is a correlation, but what's your evidence that equality (esp employment equality) causes suicide among teenage girls?
Let me make a counter-argument, adolescent girls have not entered employment so the suggestion that female employment is causing suicide is very hard to support. There is a weak argument for increased academic stress. It's a bit weak though.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday May 21 2018, @02:12PM
"Equality" is just a remark for AC. My only point is that the suicide gap between young males and females may be on track to disappear.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by DECbot on Monday May 21 2018, @06:53PM
I believe the gp is diverging from suicide studies to workplace fatalities to illustrate how gender equality is progressing. He is assuming that (1) work place fatalities are dominated by men, (2) you're more likely to be a victim of a workplace fatality if you work a dangerous job, and therefore (3) men doing the majority of the dangerous jobs. I'm not going to bother google to ferret out the studies to prove or disprove these assumptions, but since I believe in gender equality at the workplace, more women should become victims of workplace fatalities. Perhaps the receptionist's desk phone could be wired to run 40A, 3-phase 460V to the headset?
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 21 2018, @01:49PM (10 children)
Equality is a good aim. However, feminism isn't aiming for equality. Who, precisely, decided that "housewife" or "professional homemaker", or "stay-at-home mom" is a "bad thing"?
Things could have gone very differently. We could have taken a cue from that stupid "Mr. Mom" movie. More men could have opted to stay at home with the kids, while Mom brought home the bacon for Dad to cook. We could have just given Mom more respect, and allowed her to stay at home. Instead, we've pretty much forced women out of their traditional roles. and pushed them into the work force.
Equality. Hell of a concept, isn't it? To bad that we don't actually practice it. I'll never forget Obama's speech: http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/video-obama-slams-stay-at-home-moms/ [wnd.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 21 2018, @02:55PM (6 children)
"Feminism" is not a monolithic entity, anymore than "conservatism" or "liberalism" or whatever. Yes, there are feminists who seem to view staying at home with kids as an inferior choice. But I also know many self-proclaimed "feminists" who think that's also a perfectly valid and valued choice. And by the way, it's not only feminists who make statements like Obama did there -- in fact, that position traditionally has more in line with bigoted careerist men.
I'll never forget the day my pregnant wife showed up to a professional conference, and a senior member of her field took one look at her and said, "Ah, I see you've chosen to go a different way." That is, to a certain generation of men, it was assumed that a young woman who got pregnant before enough career success wasn't "serious" about the profession, regardless of whether she stayed home with the kids for several years or not. Similarly, a couple years later my wife admitted to me that she would never admit when she was taking a day off because our kid was sick... That would be viewed by some.colleagues as less committed or whatever, even though she was perfectly entitled to the personal days herself and never abused anything.
That is the attitude that creates statements like Obama's. Losing a few years of experience in work may happen if a woman decides to take time off with her kids. And that's fair and expected if someone makes that choice. What rankles a lot of women is that devotion to kids or family -- even aside from being a full-time parent -- may be viewed as "insufficiently committed to your job." I've also personally heard the stereotyping: a male colleague who requested to move a meeting because he needed to leave early to deal with a sick kid was met with "oh, what a devoted father!" but a female colleague who had a similar request was met with grumbling..Even though this woman never created issues around her personal life and honestly worked more hours than average.
And yes, I'll agree with you that some of the worst critics of women in those situations can be other careerist women -- often self-proclaimed "feminists" themselves. But that doesn't mean all women or all "feminists" agree with that attitude.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday May 21 2018, @04:31PM (5 children)
Don't waste your time. Runaway is an ancestral Red-piller, one of the ones who got old and fat and lazy (and somehow, MARRIED...*shudder*) before the bile and anger and disdain he has for women could make him truly dangerous, but he still thinks of us all as inherently confused and irrational.
He doesn't actually understand any of the things you said, will not read your post to make the effort to anyway, and would rather sit there with his fingers in his ears going "Hurrr, bitches, amirite?" than change his thinking, such as it is, the smallest little bit.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21 2018, @11:07PM (4 children)
Quit pretending that you know anything about the typical female experience.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday May 22 2018, @04:07AM (3 children)
How the fuck does that follow from what I just said? And I know a damn sight more than you do, on account of BEING ONE, if nothing else.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22 2018, @06:22PM (2 children)
A real girl on SN? Hey babe wanna go get some corn flakes upstairs sometime?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday May 22 2018, @06:49PM (1 child)
First of all, I haven't been a "girl" for 14+ years. Second, cut it out. I'm already taken and no one but my girlfriend calls me "babe."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22 2018, @09:14PM
Sheesh fine then sweet cheeks :P No joke goes unpunished! I thought the "upstairs cornflakes" would sell it but then again you probably are imagining that I'm a TMB wannabe trying to mess with you. Just a joke I thought you'd chuckle at :(
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Monday May 21 2018, @02:56PM
I agree, more-or-less. I was just reacting to a post somewhere up the chain which didn't make this clear.
> Who, precisely, decided that "housewife" or "professional homemaker", or "stay-at-home mom" is a "bad thing"?
and just to be clear, neither is "house husband", or "stay-at-home dad"
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21 2018, @11:10PM (1 child)
I did, you male chauvanist pig! The dishes had better be washed by the time I get off work today, or there won't be no "domestic tranquity"!
Mrs. Runaway1963
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 21 2018, @11:27PM
Ya stupid heifer, it's "domestic tranquility". And, you spelled your name wrong too.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Tuesday May 22 2018, @06:21AM (1 child)
Why? Like Communism, Feminism and equalism in general have zero success stories after running the experiment almost as long.
I'm down with "shit Jefferson said" as much as the next guy but you do have to read "All Men are Created Equal, they are endowed by their Creator..." in the correct context. He certainly wasn't talking about "Equal" like the word is used today. Equal before the law is an acceptable practice to strive for (so long as everyone understands it won't ever actually be attained) simply because any other proposed basis for a society has pretty horrible and obvious flaws that have also been tried and the flaws found to really exist in practice. Equality of outcome was certainly not a concept any of the Founders would have entertained as the thoughts of a sane mind. Pretending men and women are interchangeable would have gotten you locked away in an institution.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday May 23 2018, @11:04AM
> Why?
I think I would argue from an a priori ethical standpoint, i.e. some people (women in this case) tend to be suppressed without doing anything wrong, and rinse in some argument about natural justice.
From a pragmatic point of view, enabling a larger proportion of the potential work force to work does not seem like a bad idea. House work and child care does not take up a full time adult's efforts.
I take your point about "equalism in general have zero success stories". I draw your attention to the fact that we live in unprecedented times, so appealing to historical precedent is not a valid argument. E.g:
* Rapid, worldwide communication has never existed until about 20-30 years ago.
* Universal education (in the West) has never existed until about 100 years ago.
* Universal suffrage (in the West) has never existed until about 100 years ago.
Doesn't mean I am right of course, but just points out that your argument is flawed.
> Equality of outcome [is not sane]
I agree, I think equality of opportunity is worth striving for however. Maybe we agree?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21 2018, @10:17AM (3 children)
I'll certainly agree with "various causes", but can't agree with this one:
> the boomer generation is the one that brought women full-scale into the work force.
In terms of bringing women into industry (factory work) in the USA, that goes back at least to WWII and "Rosie the Riveter" -- the parents and grandparents of the boomers. I'm a boomer (nearing retirement age now), my single-parent grandmother worked in WWII sewing parachute harnesses. While there may have been more stay-at-home moms in the 1950s, many had either worked themselves, or had mothers who worked in the war effort.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 21 2018, @11:08AM
You're talking short-term employment vs. a long-term career though. Filling in temporarily for guys who aren't there doesn't impact the economy nearly as much as doubling the workforce.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 21 2018, @02:12PM (1 child)
Sorry, but I've got to disagree with your comments about WW2.
My mother was typical of the Rosy the Riveter generation. She worked men's jobs, because there were no men to work those jobs. She wrote letters to her sweetheart in the Pacific, pretty regularly I guess. She was horrified to learn that her sweetheart had been wounded, and was in fact, a basket case in California. She waited for months, for him to be released from the Navy, so that he could come home. And, almost immediately, she quit her job to care for him. My mama's generation didn't "want" to do those men's jobs. They were forced by necessity to do them.
Please note that I said my mama was typical of her generation. There were exceptions, of course. Many women refused to weld, rivet, drive trucks, carry trusses, dig ditches, and all the other things that men "should" have been doing. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there were many other women who refused to go back to the kitchen, or the office, or wherever.
My whole point is, the boomer generation did indeed accept women in the workforce, in places where women were never accepted in the past. That was part and parcel with the "sexual revolution" of the 1960's, all wrapped up with feminism.
(Score: 1, Troll) by jmorris on Tuesday May 22 2018, @06:34AM
You are missing the point I think. After women had been actually doing those jobs for several years it was impossible to maintain the position that they couldn't do them. Everybody knew they COULD do them and too many were afraid to do the right thing and tell them "Yes, many of you can do these jobs but you shouldn't because it would be bad for civilization to take large numbers of mothers out of that more important job." Like the original women's rights movement, it was yet another "shit test" that our fathers and grandfathers failed.
The correct solution, the one that had held for centuries, was to accept that for various reasons a few women would seek work in (mostly) white collar positions and allow them to do so, but keep enough stigma to discourage it becoming widespread while celebrating motherhood. Then we should have quietly sent death squads around to the (((Commies))) in the mass media inculcating the message that working outside the home was more fulfilling than motherhood. But we didn't have the balls and now we live in the decaying ruins of a once great civilization.