 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Forum
-> Chinuch, Education & Schooling
amother
|
 Yesterday at 11:34 am
I only noticed the thread on tuition now, so I'm late to the discussion.
But I want to point out something that hasn't been said, and that is that this financial crisis we find ourselves in is not limited to the frum world. Yes, tuition is a frum problem, but it's only one expense out of many. .
This is actually a problem in the greater society as well. We are on a terrible trajectory which is leading towards disaster.
I found it frustrating that some posters (such as Raspberry on the other thread) think that the solution is to have less kids. It's extremely obtuse and dillusional to think that that would solve anything.
I recently heard a fascinating analysis by Jordan Peterson, on how we have arrived at this situation.
I will post the link here, but the relevant part is where he says the following:
Because women have access to birth control, they can now compete in the same domains, roughly, as men- and this creates a huge economic problem.
Years ago, it was still possible for a ONE income family to exist. But, since 1973, wages have been flat (except for the top 1 percent).
Why?
Because WE DOUBLED OUR LABOR FORCE.
When we doubled our labor force, we halved the value of labor. So now we are in a situation where it takes TWO PEOPLE to make as much as one did before!
We went from a situation when women's career options were relatively limited to where they are relatively unlimited and there were 2 incomes, to now, where women HAVE to work. They have no choice. But they only make half as much as they would have otherwise.
I found thus to be a startling analysis of where we are today and how we have come to this. Women's desire to work has created a domino effect where they now have no choice but to work.
This is a problem that is much bigger than just tuitions in the frum world.
The beginning of the talk is about how people need to prioritize having kids and family because that is actually what counts.
It's well worth a listen. (Around 11 minutes)
https://youtu.be/1FQQ7vcq-rM?s.....LROTO
| |
|
| Back to top |
 6
 10
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:36 am
1. We didn't double our labor force. Women always worked. What changed is that women get paychecks.
2. If we doubled our labor force, we'd double our production and almost double our material wealth as a society.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
45
|
|
amother
Firebrick
|
Yesterday at 11:40 am
It is naive to think that you can turn back the clock on women working.
Women also stayed in abusive relationships because if they left they would starve. There were plenty of problems back then as well.
There is a concept of women gaining a more public role as Mashiach comes closer, just as the moon will return to its “original size.”
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
28
|
causemommysaid
|
Yesterday at 11:43 am
|
Jordan Peterson says lots of dumb things that sound smart.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
27
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:46 am
|
BC has been around for awhile. It has been easily accessible for probably the last 100 years, at least for married women.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
2
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:46 am
| amother OP wrote: | I only noticed the thread on tuition now, so I'm late to the discussion.
But I want to point out something that hasn't been said, and that is that this financial crisis we find ourselves in is not limited to the frum world. Yes, tuition is a frum problem, but it's only one expense out of many. .
This is actually a problem in the greater society as well. We are on a terrible trajectory which is leading towards disaster.
I found it frustrating that some posters (such as Raspberry on the other thread) think that the solution is to have less kids. It's extremely obtuse and dillusional to think that that would solve anything.
I recently heard a fascinating analysis by Jordan Peterson, on how we have arrived at this situation.
I will post the link here, but the relevant part is where he says the following:
Because women have access to birth control, they can now compete in the same domains, roughly, as men- and this creates a hug economic problem.
Years ago, it was still possible for a ONE income family to exist. But, since 1973, wages have been flat (except for the top 1 percent).
Why?
Because WE DOUBLED OUR LABOR FORCE.
When we doubled our labor force, we halved the value of labor. So now we are in a situation where it takes TWO PEOPLE to make as much as one did before!
We went from a situation when women's career options were relatively limited to where they are relatively unlimited and there were 2 incomes, to now, where women HAVE to work. They have no choice. But they only make half as much as they would have otherwise.
I found thus to be a startling analysis of where we are today and how we have come to this. Women's desire to work has created a domino effect where they now have no choice but to work.
This is a problem that is much bigger than just tuitions in the frum world.
The beginning of the talk is about how people need to prioritize having kids and family because that is actually what counts.
It's well worth a listen. (Around 11 minutes)
https://youtu.be/1FQQ7vcq-rM?s.....LROTO |
I have heard this before and it is so so so unbelievably fallacious. If we double the labor force, we create more opportunity, jobs and items. Bigger working populations makes the economy richer not poorer. More people is more wealth generation and strength.
This is a huge point. Same with immigration. If they can find a way to filter out the criminals, they will be (and are) extremely valuable to our economy.
That’s number one. Number two: the vast majority of women worked but they didn’t have access to higher status/paying jobs.
The bigger problem is wealth gaps and inflation.
I hate the premise of this. Really really do. Especially because it’s false.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
24
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:48 am
| amother Jasmine wrote: | 1. We didn't double our labor force. Women always worked. What changed is that women get paychecks.
2. If we doubled our labor force, we'd double our production and almost double our material wealth as a society. |
1.Women are doubly represented in the public sphere. Of course they worked in their homes and on the fields. But now the job market is oversaturated, causing incomes to go down and dorcing women to work.
2. We didn't double our production because, as he goes on to say, men have been slacking off in proportion to women taking on more of the responsibility. Also, it's not about productivity as much as how much we earn from what we produce.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
3
|
Makehumusnotwar
|
Yesterday at 11:49 am
|
Jordan Peterson is a psychologist, not an economist.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
16
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:50 am
| amother Poinsettia wrote: | | BC has been around for awhile. It has been easily accessible for probably the last 100 years, at least for married women. |
It was not considered to be as regular and commonplace as it has been the last 30 years or so.
Most women had a desire and goal to get married and have a family, and that meant starting young. Today this is no longer the case.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
2
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:51 am
| amother Firebrick wrote: | It is naive to think that you can turn back the clock on women working.
Women also stayed in abusive relationships because if they left they would starve. There were plenty of problems back then as well.
There is a concept of women gaining a more public role as Mashiach comes closer, just as the moon will return to its “original size.” |
I don't think anyone thinks we can turn back the clock.
My point was simply that this crisis isn't just limited to the frum world, but is a problem in the greater society as well.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
3
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:51 am
| amother OP wrote: | | It was not considered to be as regular and commonplace as it has been the last 30 years or so. |
Absolutely untrue.
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
7
|
mha3484
|
Yesterday at 11:53 am
|
I'm sorry but I really really disagree. I am deeply connected to the secular world and every relative of mine, classmate of mine etc has followed the traditional secular path of get an practical education, pay off your college debt, then get married, buy a house, send your 2-3 kids to public school. They have their own set of issues that I am not looking to trade for, but not the ones that are all over the tuition threads.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
18
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:53 am
| amother OP wrote: | It was not considered to be as regular and commonplace as it has been the last 30 years or so.
Most women had a desire and goal to get married and have a family, and that meant starting young. Today this is no longer the case. |
The emergence of birth control actually strongly correlates with society taking into account women's desires at all.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
12
|
Success10
↓
|
Yesterday at 11:55 am
|
What does that mean wages have been flat since 1973? Of course wages have gone up in all sectors, as has the required minimum wage.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
7
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 11:56 am
| amother OP wrote: | 1.Women are doubly represented in the public sphere. Of course they worked in their homes and on the fields. But now the job market is oversaturated, causing incomes to go down and dorcing women to work.
2. We didn't double our production because, as he goes on to say, men have been slacking off in proportion to women taking on more of the responsibility. Also, it's not about productivity as much as how much we earn from what we produce. |
1. Women aren't doubly represented in the public sphere.
2. That's not how things work. We didn't double our production because we didn't double our labor force, there's almost no such thing as slacking off in a free market economy (because people only pay for labor when they're getting value in return), and production is where the value represented by our money comes from. If we're earning less from what we produce, it can only be because the value is going somewhere else, not because it's been devalued.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
5
|
|
amother
Tuberose
|
Yesterday at 11:59 am
This is a great book that also blames womens working for increase in prices but less directly (people want a good public school, mother works to have money to pay for housing, house prices go up etc) And no slack in the family budget at this point
https://www.amazon.com/Two-Inc.....90907
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
0
|
|
amother
Lily
|
Yesterday at 12:02 pm
| amother OP wrote: | I don't think anyone thinks we can turn back the clock.
My point was simply that this crisis isn't just limited to the frum world, but is a problem in the greater society as well. | But this issue discussed in the tuition thread was tuition and that literally is only a frum jewish american issue.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
0
|
↑
Success10
|
Yesterday at 12:02 pm
|
Also, I’m not buying this because as little as a few years ago, people were making it. The middle class was not a bad place to be. Things have changed in the last few years, not related to women working. The housing crisis is also a factor.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
10
|
lamplighter
|
Yesterday at 12:03 pm
|
In the frum world, women working has definitely doubled. When I was growing up there were some teachers or secretaries but majority of my friends mothers did not work. Now it is very rare that anyone is a SAHM.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
3
|
amother
|
Yesterday at 12:04 pm
| amother OP wrote: | I only noticed the thread on tuition now, so I'm late to the discussion.
But I want to point out something that hasn't been said, and that is that this financial crisis we find ourselves in is not limited to the frum world. Yes, tuition is a frum problem, but it's only one expense out of many. .
This is actually a problem in the greater society as well. We are on a terrible trajectory which is leading towards disaster.
I found it frustrating that some posters (such as Raspberry on the other thread) think that the solution is to have less kids. It's extremely obtuse and dillusional to think that that would solve anything.
I recently heard a fascinating analysis by Jordan Peterson, on how we have arrived at this situation.
I will post the link here, but the relevant part is where he says the following:
Because women have access to birth control, they can now compete in the same domains, roughly, as men- and this creates a huge economic problem.
Years ago, it was still possible for a ONE income family to exist. But, since 1973, wages have been flat (except for the top 1 percent).
Why?
Because WE DOUBLED OUR LABOR FORCE.
When we doubled our labor force, we halved the value of labor. So now we are in a situation where it takes TWO PEOPLE to make as much as one did before!
We went from a situation when women's career options were relatively limited to where they are relatively unlimited and there were 2 incomes, to now, where women HAVE to work. They have no choice. But they only make half as much as they would have otherwise.
I found thus to be a startling analysis of where we are today and how we have come to this. Women's desire to work has created a domino effect where they now have no choice but to work.
This is a problem that is much bigger than just tuitions in the frum world.
The beginning of the talk is about how people need to prioritize having kids and family because that is actually what counts.
It's well worth a listen. (Around 11 minutes)
https://youtu.be/1FQQ7vcq-rM?s.....LROTO |
The inflation crisis is far worse in the frum world because we have certain expenses that others don't have.
Obviously tuition is a big one. A typical frum family can easily be paying 35% of their income to tuition. This is huge and exclusive to the frum world.
The average cost of a home in the US is around $420,000. People are running to Lakewood where the average cost is around $650,000. Again, this is a frum problem. Unless families are willing to move to Indiana, Cincinnati, Cleveland or a few other way oot areas, they are stuck with insane pricing.
Nobody is saying that having less children would "solve" the problem. But it stands to reason that it would take off some of the pressure. It's simple math. Raising a large family is more expensive than raising a smaller family.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
11
|
|
Imamother may earn commission when you use our links to make a purchase.
© 2024 Imamother.com - All rights reserved
|  |
 |
|
 |
|
|
