logoalt Hacker News

philipallstaryesterday at 7:51 PM3 repliesview on HN

This is the outcome of everyone working. There's no alternate, complementary system (mostly women) of interesting, society-strengthening activities. Everyone works because they have to, because otherwise they won't afford a house when competing against two-income households, so everyone's busy, so everything's a rush and far more activities that used to be done are now monetised.

No time for baking treats; just buy some perma-plastic-wrapped ultra processed sugary snack. No time for being a governor at the local school or taking turns looking after each others' kids. No time to look after aging parents. Just don't do it or buy it in.

No way to teach the next generation how to run a home on a budget or cook healthy for for their kids, the boss needs coffee.

The only winners are boomers and banks, for whom the second person works half their lives to pay back for the inflated house price.


Replies

Aurornisyesterday at 11:47 PM

> No time for baking treats

> No time for being a governor at the local school

The way the internet talks about employment is so foreign compared to real life.

Does anyone really believe that having a job precludes baking treats? Or volunteering at a school? My kids' school and all of my friends' kids' schools have parent-run boards and other organizations where most of the participants also have jobs.

Outside of the accounts I read on the internet, the many people I know in person have lives outside of their jobs. Having a job is the default state for most people, yet we're out here doing things and interacting with each other.

> No way to teach the next generation how to run a home on a budget or cook healthy for for their kids, the boss needs coffee.

You people know that kids go to school during the workday, right? And that people teach their kids how to cook while also having jobs during the day?

This is all so weird to read as a parent. Like I'm reading about a different world where everyone is working 100 hours per week

WarmWashyesterday at 8:06 PM

But it's all just work, all the ways down.

What you are describing is working for someone else, but the alternative, working for yourself, is definitely not the dreamy image all the people working for someone else thinks it is. Working for yourself is work + risk, albeit you get to chose (read: try to correctly identify) the work.

So no matter what, unless you want blob on the states dime, you are going to spend most of your life doing work.

show 4 replies
jltsirenyesterday at 9:17 PM

It's an outcome of the expectation that people earn their living. People work less today than they used to, but a larger fraction of that work is paid.

And it's a consequence of making divorce legal and socially acceptable. Traditional marriage was primarily an economic contract. The wife assumed the responsibility for running the household, and the husband had a lifetime obligation to support her.

But if you stay away from paid work long enough, your ability to get a decent job diminishes. If you want to make being a stay-at-home partner a viable choice in a society, where divorce is available, you need a safety net of some kind. Maybe the working partner has to continue supporting their ex after divorce, regardless of what led to it. Or maybe we socialize the responsibility, meaning higher taxes and welfare benefits.

show 1 reply