Have Dutch women got the right idea
Discussion
A true blast from the past.
A happy medium is perhaps where we should be? Maybe one parent becomes the 'housewife'.
Unemployment would go down anyway.
Looking at that side until fairly recently most women were housewives, at least whilst the children were young.
Now all of a sudden everyone works or wants to work, (excluding the career skanks), so you have effectively double the work force of 40 years ago.
House hold incomes not quite double but up on average say 50% so the cost of living quickly shoots up to match and now we have the situation where few households can function on a single income.
Car ownership rockets, how many had more than one car per household? Not that many i can remember we certainly didn't. If mum wanted the car she had to take dad to work and pick him up.
A happy medium is perhaps where we should be? Maybe one parent becomes the 'housewife'.
Unemployment would go down anyway.
Looking at that side until fairly recently most women were housewives, at least whilst the children were young.
Now all of a sudden everyone works or wants to work, (excluding the career skanks), so you have effectively double the work force of 40 years ago.
House hold incomes not quite double but up on average say 50% so the cost of living quickly shoots up to match and now we have the situation where few households can function on a single income.
Car ownership rockets, how many had more than one car per household? Not that many i can remember we certainly didn't. If mum wanted the car she had to take dad to work and pick him up.
The_Burg said:
A true blast from the past.
A happy medium is perhaps where we should be? Maybe one parent becomes the 'housewife'.
Unemployment would go down anyway.
Looking at that side until fairly recently most women were housewives, at least whilst the children were young.
Not at all. For most of history, women have worked OUTSIDE the home as well as inside. The period where women were able to concentrate almost 100% on the home was fairly short - I would suggest in Britain it was from about 1920 to about 1970.A happy medium is perhaps where we should be? Maybe one parent becomes the 'housewife'.
Unemployment would go down anyway.
Looking at that side until fairly recently most women were housewives, at least whilst the children were young.
Eric Mc said:
Not at all. For most of history, women have worked OUTSIDE the home as well as inside. The period where women were able to concentrate almost 100% on the home was fairly short - I would suggest in Britain it was from about 1920 to about 1970.
These days house prices mean that both parents need to work. MidlandDan84 said:
But then isn't that partly the reason why house prices have increased so much, due to a much higher combined household income?
House prices are dictated by mortgage availability - not by the value of a property per se. As multiples of incomes increased to match available lending house prices followed, its not the other way round 
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Again, you are only talking about a fairly short period in historical terms - probably the decdes from the 1930s to the 70s.Before the 20th century, the vast bulk of the population lived in rented accomodation. The landlords were either private landlords or the employers (houses often came with the jobs people had).
freeloadingutchbabe said:
Even Dutch high-fliers don’t see a career as the most important thing in their life. A female newspaper editor was quoted in the Press recently as saying: ‘We look at the world of management — and it is a man’s world — and we think: “Oh, I could do that if I wanted. But I’d rather enjoy my life.” ’
Can't argue with that. 
Eric Mc said:
Bing o said:
Bill said:
These days house prices mean that both parents need to work. IMO. And rapid house rises meant banks felt safe lending more. It all fed the bubble.The_Burg said:
Now all of a sudden everyone works or wants to work, (excluding the career skanks), so you have effectively double the work force of 40 years ago.
From where did you source this data?http://www.20thcenturylondon.org.uk/server.php?sho...
"The proportion of women in the workforce rose during the 20th century. In 1900 the British workforce included five million women, about a third of the total. By the end of the century it was over half - seven million women."
NoelWatson said:
The_Burg said:
Now all of a sudden everyone works or wants to work, (excluding the career skanks), so you have effectively double the work force of 40 years ago.
From where did you source this data?http://www.20thcenturylondon.org.uk/server.php?sho...
"The proportion of women in the workforce rose during the 20th century. In 1900 the British workforce included five million women, about a third of the total. By the end of the century it was over half - seven million women."
Eric Mc said:
I wonder wht it was in ,say, 1800 or 1850.
More data herehttp://www.manshead.beds.sch.uk/History/AS%20and%2...
el stovey said:
Can't argue with that.
Absolutely, no doubt to cries of Sexist, I'll say it would be better all round as well if couples could de-stress their lifestyles and have an agreement where one worked and one stayed at home.But things will have to change dramatically for that balanced Utopian lifestyle to re-emerge.
fingers!
Edited by Mojocvh on Thursday 10th March 09:46
Eric Mc said:
Very interesting.
It shows that in 1871 the percentage of women working was quite high but on a gradual decline. There would have been obvious massive upsurges in the years 1914-18 and 1939-45 followed by rapid declines before the numbers started growing again in the 1960s.
Weren't women required to continue to work after the wars to fill the holes created by several million of the workforce lying in military cemetaries?It shows that in 1871 the percentage of women working was quite high but on a gradual decline. There would have been obvious massive upsurges in the years 1914-18 and 1939-45 followed by rapid declines before the numbers started growing again in the 1960s.
Bing o said:
Eric Mc said:
Very interesting.
It shows that in 1871 the percentage of women working was quite high but on a gradual decline. There would have been obvious massive upsurges in the years 1914-18 and 1939-45 followed by rapid declines before the numbers started growing again in the 1960s.
Weren't women required to continue to work after the wars to fill the holes created by several million of the workforce lying in military cemetaries?It shows that in 1871 the percentage of women working was quite high but on a gradual decline. There would have been obvious massive upsurges in the years 1914-18 and 1939-45 followed by rapid declines before the numbers started growing again in the 1960s.
But the numbers employed would have tailed off fairly quickly as the menfolk returned home.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff