Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tbirdny's commentslogin

The exchange of value between men and women has changed. Women used to have time but no money. Men had money but no time. Men and women exchanged these with each other. Now everyone has to have a job to even support themselves, and no time to raise a family.


Because it's not just money. It's time and money. You can have lots of money and nice things, but if you don't have time to raise your kids, you can't do it. And if you had the time, you wouldn't have the money.


If you have the money you hire help like a nanny. I know plenty of families who have a nannies to help with their children.


First, that’s a LOT of money. Very few people can afford that at all and those that can are definitely counting down the days until their last child goes to school.

Second, it’s hard to find a good nanny. Parents live in fear of not getting a good one, having something go wrong and need to scramble for a replacement without missing too much work, etc.

It’s possible but it’s not going to move the mainstream averages because only like 5% of the population does that. If we want to materially change national averages, we should be talking about government daycare filling in the gap before public schooling starts around the country.


I couldn't even ask ChatGPT what dose of nutmeg was toxic.


I agree. I would like to buy a new Mac but that would mean I'm forced to use macOS 26. It may be years before I buy a new Mac.


"The recommendation to limit dietary saturated fatty acid (SFA) intake has persisted despite mounting evidence to the contrary. Most recent meta-analyses of randomized trials and observational studies found no beneficial effects of reducing SFA intake on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and total mortality, and instead found protective effects against stroke." PMID 32562735 - Jun 2020, Journal of the American College of Cardiology


I wish it took 2 hours. For me it's spend 2 hours shopping for the right part, finding it for a good price, and ordering it. Then spend an hour watching youtube videos for how to do it. Then spend 4 hours gathering the right tools, getting the car jacked, tires off, etc., then put everything away, and clean up. That's the best case. I could get the wrong part, my car looks different than the videos, I do it wrong, or break something. I recently replaced my front brakes. I maybe saved $400. I'm proud of myself. I kind of enjoyed it, but it's hard to justify.


A lot of people here are probably equally proud that they built a a DIY PC from scratch which I did many times. But just don't have an interest in doing any longer and screwed up a bunch along the way.

I also choose not to mow my lawn at this point. I'm perfectly capable of doing so but just prefer not to do so,


Before WWII, middle-class married women were strongly discouraged from working for pay outside the home. If their husbands could provide, "respectable" women were expected to stay home as homemakers.


Claudia Goldin won a Nobel Prize for showing this isn't true.

See page 3 on https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/12/goldin-lecture-sl... for an illustration.


>middle-class

right here is the problem


One could argue the opposite: that the mass entry of women into the paid workforce expanded the labor supply, contributing to wage stagnation and, eventually, the erosion of the middle class. But that wasn’t the only cause. Globalization, declining unions, automation, and regressive taxes were also factors.


Expanding the labor supply does not decrease wages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

More people = more economy = higher wages. Otherwise killing people and stopping other people from having children would increase your pay.

As for the middle class, most of the reason for the decline is people moving into the upper class.

https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2024/05/31/th...


> As for the middle class, most of the reason for the decline is people moving into the upper class.

Thats not what I get from the source you provided.

It shows that middle (and lower class) are massively losing income share: Ine 1971, you have 88% of population in middle class or below, with 72% of total income.

81% of population remain in that bracket, but now they only get 51% of total income. That is massive, and also bad for the economy as a trend because rich people spend less of their income.

The conclusion I draw from this is that middle-class (and below) is in decline because the rich "upper-class" is soaking up much of their income.


I didn't know Charlie Krik before. After watching these videos, I don't believe he was such a hateful person: Amir Odom: https://youtu.be/N14ywRyTWVI Bill Maher: https://youtu.be/OblCcO7-Alg Jordan Peterson: https://youtu.be/dP0TagcNvCg


He clearly feels he is superior to everyone else, including the interviewers. He feigns humility but interrupts repeatedly.


Did you watch all the videos where he says all the hateful things? Why wouldn't you link to all those videos? Cause for being such a supposedly kind man he sure did say a lot of hateful stuff. We have 10 years of backlog to go though.

Like how he dehumanized women by saying they should submit to their husbands. Or when he said Joe Biden should be killed. Or all the times he used slurs for lgbt. Or the time he joked that it would be funny if the Pelosi attacker would be let loose. Or all the many times he called women and black people dumb. He can't help himself, he goes on and on with his explicit hate and racism. I've had they misfortune of watching the full length videos of these clips, and they just make it clear that he really means these things. He just keeps speaking his hateful heart.

He wished death on his political opponents. That alone should make him someone you wouldn't want to associate with for fear of how it reflects on you.


No one does because everyone needs to have a job to survive in the US today. It used to be that many couples could survive on a single income. Not only did that allow them to better care for their kids, it also allowed them to help their siblings, parents, other family members, friends, neighbors, and community.


> It used to be that many couples could survive on a single income

Historically, this is not true - women have always taken in work. Living on someone else's dime was for the wealthy only. The post-war years were a historical anomaly.


The reason we need this is because both parents need to work because wages are so low families cannot live on a single income. I wish we could fix that rather than allowing even more people to work putting more downward pressure on wages.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: