Re: Which came first?
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:36 am
astonamous,
I'd say it's a little of both.
Mostly the economy can ony employ the workers that are out there wanting to work. Sending jobs overseas to squeeze every drop of profit out of products has nothing to do with women in the workforce, but the influx of women into the previously male dominated workforce has had an effect.
50 years ago it wasn't just possible to raise a family on one income, it was normal. Now it is nearly impossible unless you are at least upper middle class.
Are women to blame for the slashing of slaries? No. Greed is. The upper management of companies has seen their salaries increase in the last 30 years at a rate that the average worker could never even dream of. Women did voluntarily enter the workforce at a time that made it convenient for the employers not to slash wages, but to suppress wage increases as inflation devalued the dollar.
I'd say it's a little of both.
Mostly the economy can ony employ the workers that are out there wanting to work. Sending jobs overseas to squeeze every drop of profit out of products has nothing to do with women in the workforce, but the influx of women into the previously male dominated workforce has had an effect.
50 years ago it wasn't just possible to raise a family on one income, it was normal. Now it is nearly impossible unless you are at least upper middle class.
Are women to blame for the slashing of slaries? No. Greed is. The upper management of companies has seen their salaries increase in the last 30 years at a rate that the average worker could never even dream of. Women did voluntarily enter the workforce at a time that made it convenient for the employers not to slash wages, but to suppress wage increases as inflation devalued the dollar.
