Unique contributions to society

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Unique contributions to society
1504
Thu, 10-19-2006 - 4:12pm

In another thread, the "unique" contributions of SAHM's were alluded to but it wasn't stated what they are. Let's play a game and find out what they are. First, pretend that as of tomorrow, all moms SAH and detail what will be missing from society then pretend that all moms go to work and detail what will be missing from society. I'm really curious as to what people think a world without SAHM's orWOHM's would look like.

If all the moms who SAH went to work then the library would move story hour to the evening and summer vacation bible school would be held in the evenings so that all kids can attend and not just the kids of SAHM's. Banks would likely shift their hours to later in the day and you'd see more 24 hour stores. I think there would be more home cooking style restaurants too. I think day care centers would improve because of increased demand.

If all moms who WOH suddenly SAH, you'd see fewer service industries around because moms could do things themselves instead of paying for them. The nursing shortage would be more of a shortage. We'd probably have a shortage of teachers too. There'd be fewer government services because there'd be less tax dollars to pay for them. I can't think of anything else right now.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2006
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 11:54am
I actually agreed with your post... I wasn't directing that post of mine to yours... sorry :) Sometimes it's hard to make a general statement without the person you responded to thinking its directed at them.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-14-2003
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 11:57am
obviously *i'm* the one not getting it.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2006
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 11:57am

"the question isn't whether caring for kids has social value. it does. the question is whether sah has a *unique* social value—and it doesn't."

Wanted to point out that working people are not providing something unique... while doctors and teachers or other people serving the public are providing something *valuable*... they are not unique. As someone else pointed out, any millions of people work in north america... I dont think a working mother deserves a cookie just for simply working.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-12-2005
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 11:58am
What exactly are you trying to imply I am not getting here?
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2006
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 12:00pm

If all the parents who are staying at home rejoined the workforce, i think there would be a rise in unemployement. There would be many people competing for jobs... and maybe not enough to fill them...

Most stay at home parents, I would bet, are not actively searching for employment, until they are prepared to go back to work. With so many people that would be looking for work at once many of them might not find a job at all... The others might have to take whatever they can get, maybe for less pay than they deserve.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-14-2003
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 12:04pm
i don't understand your post. *unique* here refers to whether/how sah and woh are different; working (for income) is something that wohps do and sahps don't (well, certain people's definitions of being a saph because one "feels like" one aside)--thus it is unique to wohps (compared to sahps).
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2006
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 12:07pm

I agree that comparing a stay at home mom to a working mom, the unique thing to the working mom is paid work... but the original poster and all her subsequent posts almost sounded like she was unique as a person... or special because of her status... but that's just how the posts sounded to me.

When i was at home, i was not getting paid, but I don't see it as 'not work'. The only difference is the paycheck part of it.

Avatar for mom34101
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 12:08pm

Arggh--I have to go, and I just typed a longer post that seemed to disappear.

Quickly--we aren't talking about whether working is unique to wohps (of course it is, sahps don't work by definition), but whether someone who works is making a unique contribution simply by holding a job.

I agree with you that the nature of childcare (assuming it's of similar quality) doesn't change based on who is providing it, and that's exactly my point. If the dcp is making a "unique contribution" to society by providing childcare, then so is the sahp who does the same. Either good childcare is a benefit to society or it isn't--a paycheck can't convert something into a "unique" social benefit, or even a social benefit.

There is nothing unique in holding a job (or in being a sahp).

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-14-2003
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 12:18pm

you are saying that by staying out of the workforce, sahps don't compete for jobs and daycare, and thus they don't suppress wages and overtax daycare options.

i am saying that this isn't *unique* to sahps--people stay out of the workforce for reasons other than caring for their children.

i am also saying that considering the factors i listed in my first post, if all the sahps re-entered the workforce today, they wouldn't necessarily suppress wages. they would first run out the illegal workforce; they would just as likely help pay down the national trade deficit, which itself suppresses wages; they would no doubt help support the disproportionate number of retirees just now edging into the workforce mix, which itself will otherwise trigger inflation (which has a similar effect to suppressing wages). and, no doubt, one or two would do the jobs that their re-entry created, among them, provide childcare, which would, in theory, prevent the shortage.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-14-2003
Wed, 10-25-2006 - 12:22pm

the question is, once someone says something radical or offensive, can anyone else answer the same question without being held accountable for what that poster said? read someone else's argument into mine if you must, but i said what i said--not what another poster did.

<<>>

i had hoped i was heading this off by modifying "working" with "(for income)," or something of the sort. what i said was that working for an income is a difference between sah and woh, which seems to be what you are saying, too.

Pages