working moms
Dia Garland
Some moms or dads *need* to work in order to eat and provide shelter, most
*need* to work in order to pay their bills. Bills that they have because
they *wanted* to have a bigger house, newer car, name brand clothes, and
gadgets that were bought on credit cards. My point is that those purchases
are *choices*, choices they made knowing that two incomes would be needed in
order to keep up that lifestyle. One can also choose to live below their
income level so that one parent could stay home with children when they
arrive.
We have a very low standard of living, if you go by government levels, but
we never want for anything. We choose not to eat out, go to movies, buy
expensive clothes, or give expensive gifts, among other things. We *do*
have plenty of healthful food, clothes on our bodies, and lots of free
things to do. There is nothing wrong with having a low standard of living,
so I really don't feel too sorry for the people you mentioned. I know one
can live quite fine at poverty level!
In addition, with the increased computer industry, it is becoming easier
for parents to find a job that allows them to be at home most or all of the
time. It might not be easy, but it is possible.
I do not have a "harsh, judgemental attitude" towards working moms. I am
calling a wrong a wrong. It is wrong to leave babies and children in the
care of others in order to pursue ones own desires.
Is there anything you would call wrong? Murder? Thievery? Pollution?
Anything? Are you being judgemental when you call a behavior wrong? Think
about that before you start throwing labels around.
Dia
*need* to work in order to pay their bills. Bills that they have because
they *wanted* to have a bigger house, newer car, name brand clothes, and
gadgets that were bought on credit cards. My point is that those purchases
are *choices*, choices they made knowing that two incomes would be needed in
order to keep up that lifestyle. One can also choose to live below their
income level so that one parent could stay home with children when they
arrive.
We have a very low standard of living, if you go by government levels, but
we never want for anything. We choose not to eat out, go to movies, buy
expensive clothes, or give expensive gifts, among other things. We *do*
have plenty of healthful food, clothes on our bodies, and lots of free
things to do. There is nothing wrong with having a low standard of living,
so I really don't feel too sorry for the people you mentioned. I know one
can live quite fine at poverty level!
In addition, with the increased computer industry, it is becoming easier
for parents to find a job that allows them to be at home most or all of the
time. It might not be easy, but it is possible.
I do not have a "harsh, judgemental attitude" towards working moms. I am
calling a wrong a wrong. It is wrong to leave babies and children in the
care of others in order to pursue ones own desires.
Is there anything you would call wrong? Murder? Thievery? Pollution?
Anything? Are you being judgemental when you call a behavior wrong? Think
about that before you start throwing labels around.
Dia
metta
on 6/25/00 5:53 PM, "Dia Garland" <moocow@...> wrote:
working?
Or can you think of another way to solve the problem? I can envision changes
in the workplace to allow families to be together. :-)
--
Thea
metta@...
> I do not have a "harsh, judgemental attitude" towards working moms. I amSo, Dia... do you want a law preventing mothers of young children from
> calling a wrong a wrong. It is wrong to leave babies and children in the
> care of others in order to pursue ones own desires.
working?
Or can you think of another way to solve the problem? I can envision changes
in the workplace to allow families to be together. :-)
--
Thea
metta@...
[email protected]
> > I do not have a "harsh, judgemental attitude" towards working moms. I amBetter social security and removing the stigma atached to it may
> > calling a wrong a wrong. It is wrong to leave babies and children in the
> > care of others in order to pursue ones own desires.
>
> So, Dia... do you want a law preventing mothers of young children from
> working?
>
> Or can you think of another way to solve the problem? I can envision changes
> in the workplace to allow families to be together. :-)
> --
> Thea
> metta@...
help a little. It will at least enable Mom's who would normally
HAVE to work to keep food on the table to stay home and raise
their children.
In Australia there is what is called "Supporting Parents Benefit",
any single parent male or female with the sole care of a
child/children under 16 years of age is entitled to it, along with free
health and dental care. It is sometimes abused by girls wanting a
meal ticket, but it is mostly a good thing. Also for low income
families with only one parent working there are other benefits which
enable the Mother [or Father] to stay home and parent their
children.
There will always be money hungry people who put their children
last and often regard them as an inconvenience to be tolerated until
the can get rid of them, but at least if Moms who wanted to be
home were able to it would make a huge difference.
Sue
The Winona Farm in Minnesota Welcomes Unschoolers All Year Round
My website: http://members.xoom.com/sue_m_e
Farm website: http://members.xoom.com/winfarm/
Farm newsletter: http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/Winonafarm
"To believe in something, and not to live it,
is to be dishonest." -Mahatma Gandhi