And compared to the men, women still make 77 cents on the dollar.
Female participation in the workforce today merely keeps the household income picture from looking as bad as it could, but no one seems to reflect on the social costs to the country at large and to the children not raised by a parent in the home. Nor do many appreciate the massive cheapening of the worth of all labor which their participation necessarily caused starting in the 1970s.
What on earth was improved by nearly doubling the workforce and halving the income? The American family? In truth the only thing which was improved was the corporate bottom line, and the investor class which it rewarded.
And often the price was having a smart-mouthed, ungrateful, unemployed 26-year old college graduate still living in the basement trying to figure out how to pay off the college loan between bong hits. Imagine that person ever growing up, flying straight and voting for anything worthwhile except for goodies from Uncle Sam.
If the working women of America really wanted to change something, they'd unite . . . and go home.
The data were reported here in The Wall Street Journal:
The income of the typical American family—long the envy of much of the world—has dropped for the third year in a row and is now roughly where it was in 1996 when adjusted for inflation.
The income of a household considered to be at the statistical middle fell 2.3% to an inflation-adjusted $49,445 in 2010, which is 7.1% below its 1999 peak, the Census Bureau said. ...
For a huge swath of American families, the gains of the boom of the 2000s have been wiped out.
Earnings of the typical man who works full-time year round fell, and are lower—adjusted for inflation—than in 1978.
