Why do both parents have to work nowadays?

mahoganygas

regi3457 wrote: »

Well, maybe this makes for another post but maybe you can share why you think it won't be peaceful? What would happen if everyone did that?

In modern times it doesn't really happen.
Greece and Argentina came close to the brink. When they defaulted there were hardliners who suggested that they shirk their responsibilities and pay nothing back.
In the end international lenders stepped in and cut a deal. Argentina paid back 90%. It's difficult for a bondholder to retrieve sovereign debt. They can't exactly march in and seize assets. Although an Argentinian naval was captured recently as part-payment for their default.
There's a UN charter to prevent countries from going to war over debt. People no longer shrug their shoulders and say 'sorry, i don't feel like paying you back'.

But in less civilized times, violence and war happened all the time. European Kings and sovereigns constantly defaulted on their debts and dragged their people into wars. 'No taxation without representation' is an obvious example.

KomradeBishop

regi3457 wrote: »

Yes, corrupted is the right word but no need for force or violence. A very easy and peaceful way to do this (instead of protesting) would be for the vast majority of people to unite and jointly default on their debt. The economic system would plunder and a new one would have to be introduced.

Well, people are too easily cowed for that - and if an individual country like Ireland tried that, foreign powers (such as the ECB, given we're in the Euro) can pull the rug out from under the countries economy, and force them to do whatever is demanded - such as in the case of Greece.

A country needs to have control over its own currency, in order to be truly democratic.

KomradeBishop

regi3457 wrote: »

Yes you would question me because by now I am sounding like I have all the answers right? Well I don't. It would make for a good project and I could thing of a couple of ways. One way that I have considered is that people could trade more? Perhaps the web will come up with a way to help so that people can trade with each other without money? like having tokens on a site that you can use to redeem services and products?

Such tokens would be money though

regi3457

mahoganygas wrote: »

In modern times it doesn't really happen.
Greece and Argentina came close to the brink. When they defaulted there were hardliners who suggested that they shirk their responsibilities and pay nothing back.
In the end international lenders stepped in and cut a deal. Argentina paid back 90%. It's difficult for a bondholder to retrieve sovereign debt. They can't exactly march in and seize assets. Although an Argentinian naval was captured recently as part-payment for their default.
There's a UN charter to prevent countries from going to war over debt. People no longer shrug their shoulders and say 'sorry, i don't feel like paying you back'.

But in less civilized times, violence and war happened all the time. European Kings and sovereigns constantly defaulted on their debts and dragged their people into wars. 'No taxation without representation' is an obvious example.

I meant that people (not countries) all defaulted on their debt. Like everyone. You me, my mother. Everyone. My question still holds.... I wonder what really would happen.. anyone with more brains than me could step in and give us an idea? I am not really that good at thinking but my nose is as sharp as a hounds and I smell a rat!

mahoganygas

regi3457 wrote: »

I meant that people (not countries) all defaulted on their debt. Like everyone. You me, my mother. Everyone. My question still holds.... I wonder what really would happen.. anyone with more brains than me could step in and give us an idea? I am not really that good at thinking but my nose is as sharp as a hounds and I smell a rat!

The principle is still the same.
We default on our mortgage debts, credit card debts, goods bought on credit in our businesses etc.
It causes our banks to go bust, the state steps in, the state is on the line.

regi3457

mahoganygas wrote: »

The principle is still the same.
We default on our mortgage debts, credit card debts, goods bought on credit in our businesses etc.
It causes our banks to go bust, the state steps in, the state is on the line.

But what could they do about it? Why would there be "no peace". I can think of many people who would live more peaceful lives without their debt.

mahoganygas

regi3457 wrote: »

But what could they do about it? Why would there be "no peace". I can think of many people who would live more peaceful lives without their debt.

I can think of many people who would want their money back.

Part of the reason we have functioning international banking systems is so that we don't go back to the dark ages of war.

BloodBath

mahoganygas wrote: »

The principle is still the same.
We default on our mortgage debts, credit card debts, goods bought on credit in our businesses etc.
It causes our banks to go bust, the state steps in, the state is on the line.

mahoganygas wrote: »

I can think of many people who would want their money back.

Part of the reason we have functioning international banking systems is so that we don't go back to the dark ages of war.

It's this kind of thinking that has us in the mess we're in. The banking services nobody but the high up execs and the true ruling elite. The banks going bust had almost nothing to do with credit card debts or goods bought for businesses on credit. They abused their power giving massive loans to anybody and everybody and buying and selling bad debt because at the end of the day they can't lose with their gambles. Go bust and you get bailed out anyway. It's like having unlimited funds at a casino. It's a win/win situation for them.

They loaned billions to developers and big rental property owners while the average person struggled to pay overly inflated house/rent prices while these developers, the banks and the rental owners made billions. Then the bubble bursts and that 250k mortgage you took for a 300k property is now worth 150k because their actions inflated the prices and you're expected to bail out the banks while these ****ers have millions hidden away on offshore accounts. It's a joke.

As for the topic I'd say kids these days are part of the reason. I don't think they were asking for €500 iphones and ipads back in the 60's.

armabelle

mahoganygas wrote: »

I can think of many people who would want their money back.

Part of the reason we have functioning international banking systems is so that we don't go back to the dark ages of war.

Functioning? hmmmm. What about the people getting their money bank. That money they worked long hard hours to earn and then lost because banks had to be bailed out?

Fathom

Both parents working. Dual career couples. Pay imbalance by gender. Women paid less than male counterpart. Supply oriented labor market approaches & human capital studies suggested productivity differences. One approach narrowed gap in pay by improved education & training of women (Blossfeld & Drobnic 2001).

armabelle

Fathom wrote: »

Both parents working. Dual career couples. Pay imbalance by gender. Women paid less than male counterpart. Supply oriented labor market approaches & human capital studies suggested productivity differences. One approach narrowed gap in pay by improved education & training of women (Blossfeld & Drobnic 2001).

Don't mean to open a can of worms about this but women certainly do get paid less because they go on maternity leave where men don't

armabelle

BloodBath wrote: »

It's this kind of thinking that has us in the mess we're in. The banking services nobody but the high up execs and the true ruling elite. The banks going bust had almost nothing to do with credit card debts or goods bought for businesses on credit. They abused their power giving massive loans to anybody and everybody and buying and selling bad debt because at the end of the day they can't lose with their gambles. Go bust and you get bailed out anyway. It's like having unlimited funds at a casino. It's a win/win situation for them.

They loaned billions to developers and big rental property owners while the average person struggled to pay overly inflated house/rent prices while these developers, the banks and the rental owners made billions. Then the bubble bursts and that 250k mortgage you took for a 300k property is now worth 150k because their actions inflated the prices and you're expected to bail out the banks while these ****ers have millions hidden away on offshore accounts. It's a joke.

As for the topic I'd say kids these days are part of the reason. I don't think they were asking for €500 iphones and ipads back in the 60's.

An Iphone is hardly going to set you back that much and is a one-off purchase. Surely an iphone is not necessary either and a smart phone will do for kids. Anyway, these are small fries. This can't be the reason why both parents work nowadays IMO.

How did the house prices become overly inflated? Is this refering to 2008?

regi3457

mahoganygas wrote: »

I can think of many people who would want their money back.

Part of the reason we have functioning international banking systems is so that we don't go back to the dark ages of war.

War is not so profitable and has disadvantages. Everyone loses out. The current system of peace and stability is much more efficient in extracting and channeling wealth to the elite at the expense of the docile majority. The European union? WOAH! This is like a goldmine!!!! Let's unite in exploiting the population! Why do you think there are very few wars in the western world compared to the early 20th century? It is not that humanity has become peaceful or changed in any way. Today's war is an economic one and one that is happening under our noses while nobody hears a gun or bomb go off in the night. It is like war that has gradually crept up on you without you noticing and when there is a crisis people talk and headlines are made but nothing changes. The mule does not stop carrying the load just because it is tired does it? It must continue until the master says it can stop. The economic system has divided the world not by borders but by wealth and this "country" of wealth is becoming more and more wealthy while the rest of the world becomes poorer.

saram

Are there many on here surviving/doing ok in a 1 income household?
Is it impossible??

Fathom

armabelle wrote: »

Don't mean to open a can of worms about this but women certainly do get paid less because they go on maternity leave where men don't

Research control for maternity leave. Then compare. Women still get paid less.

BloodBath

armabelle wrote: »

An Iphone is hardly going to set you back that much and is a one-off purchase. Surely an iphone is not necessary either and a smart phone will do for kids. Anyway, these are small fries. This can't be the reason why both parents work nowadays IMO.

How did the house prices become overly inflated? Is this refering to 2008?

Sure it's a 1 off purchase but it's 1 of potentially many expensive gifts that they will want for their birthday/Christmas. I don't have kids but my sisters kids are spoiled rotten. By the time they get to their teens especially you're looking at game consoles, tablets, phones, PC's maybe, bikes, other expensive gifts that kids in Ireland at least just were not getting in the 60's. This is before we even get to the expensive clothes they want. Now if you have multiple kids you're looking at a lot of money a year to keep them happy.

regi3457 wrote: »

War is not so profitable and has disadvantages. Everyone loses out. The current system of peace and stability is much more efficient in extracting and channeling wealth to the elite at the expense of the docile majority. The European union? WOAH! This is like a goldmine!!!! Let's unite in exploiting the population! Why do you think there are very few wars in the western world compared to the early 20th century? It is not that humanity has become peaceful or changed in any way. Today's war is an economic one and one that is happening under our noses while nobody hears a gun or bomb go off in the night. It is like war that has gradually crept up on you without you noticing and when there is a crisis people talk and headlines are made but nothing changes. The mule does not stop carrying the load just because it is tired does it? It must continue until the master says it can stop. The economic system has divided the world not by borders but by wealth and this "country" of wealth is becoming more and more wealthy while the rest of the world becomes poorer.

War is incredibly profitable for the right people. Afghanistan and Iraq are good examples but I agree with most of what you are saying.

Electric Sheep

saram wrote: »

Are there many on here surviving/doing ok in a 1 income household?
Is it impossible??

It's doable, but for most it would mean living the way our parents did. One car, kids "actvities" limited to those they can walk or cycle to, holiday in a caravan or with relatives who live in the country, handing clothes down from one child to another, etc. If you lower your expections, you can get by on a lower income.

It was easier to do in the days when a Christmas present for a child was a doll, not a playstation.

Fathom

Aging parents. Have to work. Many cannot retire. Rising costs. Rebounding kids. Shrinking savings. Disappointing pensions. Investment plan shortcomings. Reverse mortgage fallback Stateside. Banks got them coming and going.

armabelle

Fathom wrote: »

Aging parents. Have to work. Many cannot retire. Rising costs. Rebounding kids. Shrinking savings. Disappointing pensions. Investment plan shortcomings. Reverse mortgage fallback Stateside. Banks got them coming and going.

sounds like the status quo alright, it is amazing what people will accept as a normal way of life, pretty soon we will be living in post ww2 times

Suryavarman

armabelle wrote: »

sounds like the status quo alright, it is amazing what people will accept as a normal way of life, pretty soon we will be living in post ww2 times

Unless they're planning a rerun of WWII then we are already living in post-WWII times.

Wanderer78

armabelle wrote:

sounds like the status quo alright, it is amazing what people will accept as a normal way of life, pretty soon we will be living in post ww2 times

I think we could be in pre ww2 Times or something similar. Kinna scary actually

armabelle

Suryavarman wrote: »

Unless they're planning a rerun of WWII then we are already living in post-WWII times.

you know what I meant

Fathom

4th of July. US Independence Day. Spoke with old retired couple. Aged in late 60's. Lost their home. Great 2008 Recession. Now live in apartment. Dramatic rent increases each year. 6 to 9% each year since 2008. Compounding. Many old retired like them. Millions of 2007-2008 home foreclosures. Supply & demand of apartments continues to drive up rent costs. Live in 700 sq ft. 1-bed & 1-bath. Pay $1900 month. Largest landlord in country owns apartment properties. Declared 1 billion net worth increase 2014. Total net worth almost 20 billion per Forbes. Retirement savings shrinking. Social Security no COLA last year. 2.5% inflation shrank SS by that much. Controlling Congress Republican Party talk of SS collapse in few years. No sympathy for retirees. Where will these people go? Live on streets? While obscenely rich billionaire declares his next 1 billion increase in net worth? Old retired couple forced to look for work. Several interviews. No offers. Suspect their advanced age reason. Surplus of much younger Baby Boomlet kids compete for jobs. Happy 4th old US couple. Happy 4th billionaire landlord...

OttoPilot

They still had a mortgage when they retired?

Fathom

OttoPilot wrote: »

They still had a mortgage when they retired?

Not sure. Didn't say. Lost home 2008. Millions in US lost them 2007-2008. Great Recession. Dow lost half same time. Dropped from 14K to below 7K. Triple wham for them. Lost home. Investment portfolio lost half. Forced to live in apartment. Supply & demand for apartments driving up rents yearly.

Fathom

Fathom wrote: »

Not sure. Didn't say. Lost home 2008. Millions in US lost them 2007-2008. Great Recession. Dow lost half same time. Dropped from 14K to below 7K. Triple wham for them. Lost home. Investment portfolio lost half. Forced to live in apartment. Supply & demand for apartments driving up rents yearly.

Their Dow is up about 29% from the 14k mark which is nice.

iguana

Fathom wrote: »

Not sure. Didn't say. Lost home 2008. Millions in US lost them 2007-2008. Great Recession. Dow lost half same time. Dropped from 14K to below 7K. Triple wham for them. Lost home. Investment portfolio lost half. Forced to live in apartment. Supply & demand for apartments driving up rents yearly.

While I feel huge sympathy for anyone who loses their home, I do have to wonder about exactly how they ended up in such an awful position at that time in their lives. Most people in their age group would have either paid their mortgage off completely or have paid down so much that their repayments are a very small sum of their income. And even if they couldn't manage to make those small repayments, they would have enough equity in the house to sell it, clear the remaining mortgage and buy a smaller property outright.

However a lot of people in that bracket did essentially gamble with their long-term security by remortgaging to 'release the equity' and either spend the money frivolously or re-invest it, usually on a second or third property. If this is the case then my sympathy is more limited. It's a very tough spot they have found themselves in, but ultimately it would be one that they put themselves in. Having had the luck to be born at a time when housing was more affordable, they chose to put themselves into debt, possibly in order to participate in and hopefully profit from a market that was preventing younger generations from ever owning the kind of home that they did. Maybe that's not the case for this particular couple, but it is the case for a huge amount of people in this situation. If you decide to gamble with your home, losing it is a very real risk and if that happens it is ultimately your own fault.

Fathom

iguana wrote: »

However a lot of people in that bracket did essentially gamble with their long-term security by remortgaging to 'release the equity' and either spend the money frivolously or re-invest it, usually on a second or third property.

"Frivolously" maybe, or other reasons? Complex reasons. Pay kids college tuition. Tuition skyrocketing. Millions of US foreclosures. 2006-2008. Rents skyrocketing to absorb foreclosure folks. Double digit unemployment 2008-2010. Surplus unemployed Millennials compete for jobs. Old age discrimination. Old age related illness. Double digit health care costs. Preexisting illness condition exclusions. Half US marriages end in divorce. Buy new before 2006. New housing double digit overpriced before 2006 crash beginnings. Dow loses half its value 2008. Speculators sell first. Slow moving retirement funds absorb massive losses. Hedge funds millionaires and billionaires profit. All these adverse financial conditions hit old folks within 2 to 4 years.

robp

Fathom wrote: »

armabelle wrote: »

Don't mean to open a can of worms about this but women certainly do get paid less because they go on maternity leave where men don't

Research control for maternity leave. Then compare. Women still get paid less.

The so called gender gap disappears when you control for child rearing. Men overall have higher incomes but that is do with the jobs women choose.

Fathom

robp wrote: »

Men overall have higher incomes but that is do with the jobs women choose.

"Jobs women choose?" Is there discrimination by gender? Some occupations? Medical school? MDs high paying profession. October 4, 2016 Washington Post reported "You're not wearing make-up today. Maybe you should rethink that choice." Ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/10/04/this-is-the-kind-of-sexism-women-who-want-to-be-doctors-deal-with-in-med-school/?utm_term=.1a6fd9da2fe5