NYT: Forget Pancakes. Pay Mothers.

[Anonymous]

Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

This is a good idea. It would be a way of validating their labor and proving that society does value it.

[Anonymous]

Oh come on. The author wouldn't have liked her maid writing an article in the NYT about being "fully human" back when the author was underpaying her domestic help, but now that the author is going to have to get a job she doesn't like due to the divorce, she wants a national platform to whine about it? Spare me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

SAHMs can already get up to half of their spouse’s benefit without having worked the requisite 40 quarters.

You want your children to have to work longer to support you staying at home? The whole idea is quite ironic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

SAHMs can already get up to half of their spouse’s benefit without having worked the requisite 40 quarters.

You want your children to have to work longer to support you staying at home? The whole idea is quite ironic.

+1

Her children and poorer working mother's need to work to support her, apparently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The feminist movement has always been driven by MC and UMC women (mainly white women). You're just now figuring this out? Get the hell out of your bubble.

This is what we need: Stop trying to make a class war!

https://www.wwiimemorialfriends.org/blog/wwii-universal-childcare/

[Anonymous]

Having kids isn’t just a lifestyle choice, it’s vital to the health and growth of the country. Otherwise you wind up in population death spiral like Japan. Even American conservatives are starting to advocate for family allowances.

But this country sucks and it’s not changing at least not until a few years of economic depression take their toll. I’m contemplating quitting my job in 1-2 years to stay home. Saving money like crazy right now. Wish I could get out of this country but sadly, no where to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the very least, we should bring alimony back.

Alimony is a feminist issue imo. If we believe women are equals and empower them to make choices, then we need to make sure they don't suffer the consequences of them.

No, not until the aspects of alimony that wildly favor UMC and UC women while harming working class families are ended. Wealthy women who don't want jobs should not be driving policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

SAHMs can already get up to half of their spouse’s benefit without having worked the requisite 40 quarters.

You want your children to have to work longer to support you staying at home? The whole idea is quite ironic.

half is not enough to live on

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the very least, we should bring alimony back.

Alimony is a feminist issue imo. If we believe women are equals and empower them to make choices, then we need to make sure they don't suffer the consequences of them.

No, not until the aspects of alimony that wildly favor UMC and UC women while harming working class families are ended. Wealthy women who don't want jobs should not be driving policy.

huh? how does alimony hurt working class families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

SAHMs can already get up to half of their spouse’s benefit without having worked the requisite 40 quarters.

You want your children to have to work longer to support you staying at home? The whole idea is quite ironic.

half is not enough to live on

You do realize that this puts the burden of working to support you from having to get a job on the backs of poorer working mothers who have no choice?

[Anonymous]

NP. I'm the alimony poster. We live in NY which is not a community property state. During the twenty years we've been married, I've stayed home and my husband worked. His work has produced a net worth of around 5 million excluding our house.

Theoretically, he could argue that I did not contribute much money to our net worth and so I am not entitled to any of it in a divorce. On the other hand, you could argue that my staying at home freed him up to make that kind of money, yada yada. But of course, as pointed out in the article, we don't live in a society that values that type of work and so it is unlikely a judge would agree.

And you all think that is fair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

SAHMs can already get up to half of their spouse’s benefit without having worked the requisite 40 quarters.

You want your children to have to work longer to support you staying at home? The whole idea is quite ironic.

half is not enough to live on

You do realize that this puts the burden of working to support you from having to get a job on the backs of poorer working mothers who have no choice?

+1 where do people think Social Security comes from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe SAHMs shouldn't be paid a salary but they could be given social security credits.

SAHMs can already get up to half of their spouse’s benefit without having worked the requisite 40 quarters.

You want your children to have to work longer to support you staying at home? The whole idea is quite ironic.

half is not enough to live on

You do realize that this puts the burden of working to support you from having to get a job on the backs of poorer working mothers who have no choice?

Why does that matter unless you disagree that raising kids is not work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I'm the alimony poster. We live in NY which is not a community property state. During the twenty years we've been married, I've stayed home and my husband worked. His work has produced a net worth of around 5 million excluding our house.

Theoretically, he could argue that I did not contribute much money to our net worth and so I am not entitled to any of it in a divorce. On the other hand, you could argue that my staying at home freed him up to make that kind of money, yada yada. But of course, as pointed out in the article, we don't live in a society that values that type of work and so it is unlikely a judge would agree.

And you all think that is fair?

Let’s be real: you can afford to lawyer up and assets would likely be split.

But if you have a guy making $80k, he’s not equipped to pay much beyond child support. Both will need to work to maintain two households.