So nothing has happened in my life which mens there's nothing to blog about. Will I resort to a political rant? I think I'll spare you.
So we'll resort to stupid stuff in the news...
US mothers deserve $134,121 per year
Mom's are sweet and all, but this study makes so many faulty assumptions, it's crazy. I wrote a long rebuttal, but I realized after the fact that it comes down to two things. 1) Mothers benefit directly from the services they provide, which should factor into this figure but doesn't. 2) People act because they value the ends more than the inputs. Therefore this figure is utterly meaningless.
Or is it?
This study should remind people of something it doens't mention. household services do have value, whether or not there is money paid for them. Women have been participating in the traditional job market in ever increasing numbers, boosting GDP. However, this is done at the expense of their time, which was generally speaking spent doing valued activities in the home. Therefore GDP figures are inflated by women moving into the marketplace because they're going from a unpaid to paid occupation.
Which leads us to something else. GDP is a b.s. statistic. It doesn't include household services, the black market, child labor services, charity work and basically any service done off the record. Most noteably that includes construction done for cash. GDP does include government expenditures, which aren't as beneficial as private expenditures. I can back that opinion up with theory if you want. Government expenditures have skyrocketed in the past 4 years because of heavy deficity spending, further boosting GDP, but few argue this is a good thing.
Other GDP b.s. Natural disasters are great for GDP. Tons of rebuilding, etc. While a few people may benefit from a natural disaster, it doesn't take to much time to demonstrate how tsunamis adversely affect people and the economy.
so there you go. not a political rant.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
1) Mothers benefit directly from the services they provide, which should factor into this figure but doesn't.
Response #1: Ah, yes, I can hardly wait until I change that next diaper. I get such joy and benefit from it. Plus, doesn't everyone that works somehow benefit from the services they provide? The difference is that some people get paid, some don't.
2) People act because they value the ends more than the inputs.
Response #2: Your mommy is benefitting so much raising you. I'm sure your paycheck is going straight to her. OK, it's not about the money, but would mom say our love and affection is payback for all the work she put into us? Maybe, but I would fancy to say that moms and dads can never be repaid. Maybe the payback is seeing us go through it with our own children. :) Just wait, Jono!
1) Mother do benefit directly. Would you do all the stuff you did for Nathan for someone else for free? Diapers, pay for food, wake up in the middle of the night? Probably not, unless you had some form of emotional attachment.
To put it another way, their dumb figure is like saying men should get X amount of dollars for stuff they do, like building decks, washing cars, mowing lawns, etc.
You just can't assign values to these things because values are subjective and exist independent of means of exchange.
2) Mom and Dad have no excuse. After they had Janine, they knew the hell they were in for and kept going. You could say the first child is a case of "entrepreneurial error," but with each subsequent child you're communicating through your actions that you value having more family members than all the resources you sink into them.
I agree that this study was elementary and subjective. However, the point is to show the value that a stay at home mom adds to her household. Plus, although for many staying home is probably a good decision (if it is affordable), it is tough for a woman to abandon a career that she has worked very hard for and be out of the workforce for years at a time. I think it I were home with children it would make me feel better to know that my sacrifice had some value.
bare foot and pregnant. How sexy. I love when I look like this.
Once again Jon, you put your foot deeply down your throat by carelessly treading into an area where you are clearly out numbered on this blog!
Actually, the numbers are not subjective. There are many people out there who do watch children for a fee-therefore, while it is not their child there is a value that has been quantified. I don't think they do it nearly as well or with the love that the mother would do it. There are people who mow lawns for a living, so that too would have a value that has been quantified. While there is an emotional payback for the role of being a mother, that is not the primary mitigating factor in why we chose to do it. There are many times when I would love to RUN away from that obligation. I'm thinking of times like when Kent drew on the car, etc. etc. But God has placed in us the moral guide that tells us right and wrong and we morally know we are obligated to take care of our children to the best of our ability and more importantly prepare them to do the same. I did give up a career and the future of that career. That has a value. The daily "chores" that I do have a value-if I didn't do them,you would have to pay someone else to do them. I think many of us, if we had the money, would be more than happy to pass those chores on to someone else and never look back i.e. lawn mowing, house cleaning, meals, changing diapers etc. I think it would be great to be a spiritual and moral guide to my children. To play and eat with them but not have to do the yuck stuff like changing diapers and actually cooking the food. I do those chores primarily out of necessity, not joy of emotional payback.
By the way, Jon, maybe you were the error. I noticed they stopped after you and not the rest of us!
Post a Comment