<p>The average employed mother in this country is disadvantaged compared to her counterpart here or in Europe, unless she has a partner contributing to the family. I don’t need to look up any links to understand this. I agree with you some of this has to do with racism.</p>
<p>I am fine with young women deciding not to have children because they just don’t want them, but not if the choice is because there are no societal supports for mothers.</p>
<p>Yes, and look at who is living in the lowest US quintile. Single women and their children. Odd for a country which continually claims to value our children so highly. </p>
<p>Average income in France (using GDP PPP) = 40,445
Average income in the US (using GDP PPP) = 53,001
US/France ratio = 1.31
Adjustment for gender pay gap = .82*1.31/.88 = 1.22 (Note, I am using the assumption without looking it up that the same proportion of women to men constitute the workforce in the US and France, if this is not true then the numbers would have another slight adjustment)
Inverse being .82
Do women in the US spend 18% of their income during their lifetimes (keeping in mind that the portion of your life where you need to have child care is relatively small compared to the portion where you work) on child care? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Okay, we’re really narrowing the population down now…</p>
<p>So not just a woman, but a mother, poor, and single. Unfortunately I don’t have any data to say anything about this. I’ll say I’m definitely skeptical that a bottom quartile single mother is better off in France than the US (and I’m certain that if we’re talking Europe as a whole that statement is completely wrong - 2 of the 3 most populated countries in Europe are Russia and Turkey) but I can’t say for sure.</p>
<p>This is a really smart analysis of why it is so important to invest in childcare in the US. But we do not do it. </p>
<p>The fact is, no matter what level of economic status a mother is, she will likely be impeded by motherhood in her career. This is not acceptable. And unless we address it, we will begin to see, as we are, a lower birth rate at the higher SES levels. This is not a positive outcome for any society.</p>
<p>You can’t look at income over lifetime because if a woman can’t afford childcare at the start of their career then the would never be able to have a career, so there is no point in talking about life time earnings. A lot of women decide not to work because what they are making is not enough to pay for childcare.</p>
<p>vladenschlutte: Do you intend to be a father? If so, how many kids do you want? What proportion of your income would you feel appropriate to set aside for childcare, primary & secondary schooling, college? What happens if you live in France? Adjust for salary. What do you come up with? Are you better or worse off?</p>
<p>also, Vladenschlutte, how do you see these poor women in the U.S. Paying for healthcare for themselves and their kids? France’s system is socialized.</p>
<p>And why is child care a women’s issue anyway? Why isn’t it a family issue? That’s why we still need feminism.
That’s why I’m a feminist. And my two sons.</p>
<p>My DH on the other hand, thinks the problem is Men are put down by society - not Women. His answer to child care questions is that the problem is that Men don;t have the same opportunities as women to raise their families, dont get custody of children. etc. Not sure what to call that.</p>
<p>“I am pretty sure we don’t think anyone should have kids who can’t afford them. Which is pretty classist. imo”</p>
<p>OTOH, I’m not sure why children are any different from anything else – if you can’t afford them, maybe you shouldn’t have them. It was different for our foremothers who didn’t have choices, birth control, etc. </p>
<p>“Do women in the US spend 18% of their income during their lifetimes (keeping in mind that the portion of your life where you need to have child care is relatively small compared to the portion where you work) on child care”</p>
<p>Seriously? Do you think that child care is only needed for children under, say, age 3?</p>
<p>And you have to take into account lifetime benefits. A woman who stops working when her kids are small isn’t just losing the income in the moment. She’s losing out on fully maxing a 401K plan, stock options, etc. that would just grow and grow over the years. And when she comes back, she’s likely to come back either the same or lower than where she left.</p>
<p>Birth control is not as easy to get as many people believe it is and options are constantly under attack and purposely confusing. Plus, the sex ed in this country is deplorable. </p>
<p>It’s not just a matter of “if you can’t afford them, don’t have them.” </p>
<p>PG: If we limit procreation to those who can afford to raise children and the income gap keeps widening, only the rich will have children. I’m not really okay with that scenario, for a variety of reasons.</p>
<p>Childcare should not be a “woman’s issue.” Half of the childcare used in this country is for male children. Just that. Childcare is no more rationally a woman’s issue than a military is a men’s issue. It’s interesting to see how that works out, though, in terms of spending and support.</p>
<p>My wife stayed home to take care of our daughter and I was glad she was willing and able to do that. It clearly had an positive impact on our D and a negative impact on my wife’s career. While we would make the same choice it is not the choice we would recommend our D make. My wife and I are hopeful that when the time comes we will be able to provide help with childcare so that our D can continue to work.</p>
<p>Should only be expensive before kindergarten, because that takes care of weekdays. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was my understanding that WIC covered that.</p>
<p>The argument that lifetime income isn’t the appropriate measure because women who cannot afford to pay for child care right then can’t work makes sense.</p>
<p>Kindergarten doesn’t take care of weekdays if you work more than 2 hours per day or a swing shift. School runs from about 9-12 for half day. Full day is tuition based if it is offered at all in most districts. That still requires before and after school care and care for those holidays and “teacher work days”. </p>
<p>In my area housing is less expensive the farther you get north and south of the urban/suburban core so commute times increase significantly as one gets out into the semi-affordable housing zones.</p>
<p>Where I went to elementary school I remember there was after school care. I thought it was free but it might have been some slight fee. But it was basically just like recess until 6. I thought Kindergarten was full day, so make it first grade instead.</p>