"FAMILY DIVERSITY," BUSINESS, AND THE STATE: Marty McKeever replies to Lisa Duggan and Richard Kim

Just thinly disguised Marxism.

What planet are these two on, to say "The net effect ... has been to push economic and social responsibility away from employers and government and onto private households."

From where I sit, economic and social responsibility is increasingly the burden of business (domestic partner and insurance benefits) and government (Social Security as a retirement fund), and less on families.

And, "The stress on households is intensifying, as people try to do more with less."

From where I sit, Westerners are far wealthier than they have ever been in the history of the world. What's this "doing more with less" business all about?

Next, "Care for children and the elderly, for the ill and disabled, has been shifted toward unpaid women at home or to low-paid, privately employed female domestic
workers."

Hasn't that been the status quo for thousands of years? Isn't it only during the last 50 years that care for children, the elderly, the ill and disabled has become MORE of a burden upon government and business, and less upon families? What evidence is there of a "shift towards unpaid women"?

Is it just me, or do these two have it entirely backwards, attempting to move society EVEN FURTHER in the direction of family disintegration and overbearing
government? And isn't that the same tired road we've been on for the past 50 years or more?
posted by Eve at 12:48 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home