Government is a really great entity for coming up with ideas. Government believes that they are the answer to every problem, and most of the time (or so it seems) they think more about today’s problem then what will happen tomorrow, or the unintended consequences of their solution.
I mean, who else plans to spend their great grandchildren’s money today?
Rewarding Single Motherhood
One such problem is the problem of single moms. Government looked around and saw that there were single moms around, and no one likes it that these people (and their children) were not being cared for, so government decided to propose a solution: Give aid to unwed and single moms.
The unintended consequence was that the women could get money, just so long as they were unwed. So it told women that they could live with a man, and not marry him, and continue to get funding.
Better yet, they can get money from the dad, who may not be the guy that they’re living with, and they could possibly make it so that they don’t have to work.
Women in the Workplace
Then, add to that, the idea that the government created programs to help keep mom away from her kids. First, they encouraged mom to get in the workplace. Then they guaranteed they could take enough time off to have them and still come back. Finally, they provided a pre-tax benefit for sending a child to day care instead of watching them yourselves.
If it wasn’t obvious before, it should be now: Though government claims to be pro-family, it has been anti-family for at least a generation. This is also evident in domestic partner benefits and the stance of being pro-civil unions.
If we taxed day cares more and took away the pre-tax advantage of paying for child care, then we’d encourage parents taking responsibility for their own children, have fewer parents in the workplace (probably women) and therefore have more jobs open up—therefore unemployment would drop.
But We Can’t Make it On One Income
Well, first of all, I’m not saying that we should turn it off immediately, but gradually. Second, you only believe this to be the case for two reasons:
- Most Americans are living way too extravagant lives. It has been proven that families can survive on one income, even moreso because…
- With that many fewer women (or men, depending on if dad stayed at home) there would be a trickle effect:
- Fewer women in the workforce would mean more jobs would open up (thus lowering unemployment).
- With more jobs available, the money that would be offered to fill a position would increase (basic laws of supply and demand).
- The level of care and education of the next generation would go up because parents would get more involved in their children’s life, they would be more involved in their education, and both of those are factors in how well children do.
But Women Are Fulfilled In Working
Not any more than they are raising the next generation. The impact one woman can have on future generations is bigger when she devotes her lives to working with them than when she spends her time in the workforce answering phones or any other work she finds herself in. The impact that we have on future generations is always overlooked and undervalued, when in reality, when a parent gets involved in a life they help shape and direct their entire lives.