(10-12-2021 07:50 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-12-2021 07:29 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-12-2021 07:01 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-12-2021 06:28 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-12-2021 04:47 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Two things:

1) why does it matter if child care has been an issue forever? Do have unemployment benefits. So have threats of communicable disease. Just because something has been around doesn’t mean it’s gotten worse.

Plus, with the growing number of households being dual income (among other things), childcare has become a growing problem - again, presence before doesn’t mean it can’t be a bigger problem now.

2) Labor numbers show more women left the workforce than men during the pandemic and have been slower to rejoin. That’s why it’s a particular concern with respect to the pandemic.

It matters because of your emphasis on "CURRENTLY". I see no significant difference in this respect between now and 1999 and 1975 and 1950. Feel free to show me.

I think the growing number of dual income households is because there are expanded childcare options available, compared to 25/50/75 years ago.

Wow, you don’t live in reality if you think dual income households is because of expanded childcare options. Yowza.

I see you are insistent that the chicken preceded the egg, and that is the only order in which that could happen.

More women can entertain the idea of going (back) to work because they have the child care options their grandmothers didn't. Not hard to see for an open mind.

I think that is a drop in the bucket that isn’t worth mentioning compared to societal changes that have expanded opportunities to women and the financial reality of being a one-income household.

I think it is way more than a drop. But then, I don't live in reality. Glad we stayed civil.