On average, only older men really contribute to society

[grumbler]

.. and, for that matter, how to troll without looking foolish.

Waa waa look at me, I'm grumbler, I accuse everyone of trolling, and now I'm surprised that it doesn't stick anymore. Waaa!

Wow.  Has that whining thing worked for you since, oh, third grade? 

Obvious evasion is obvious.

[Jacob]

And will point out that it's women who normally have to sacrifice their careers when they have children so we either need a change in social attitudes or far more affordable childcare  to correct that.

Indeed, which was my point.

It's the same basic fact "men make more money than women" but presented (at least by Hami) as "so men are clearly better" rather than "society is organized so men make more money".

[Admiral Yi]

And will point out that it's women who normally have to sacrifice their careers when they have children so we either need a change in social attitudes or far more affordable childcare  to correct that.

Indeed, which was my point.

It's the same basic fact "men make more money than women" but presented (at least by Hami) as "so men are clearly better" rather than "society is organized so men make more money".

It's a little ironic that one of your and Shelf's solutions to the issue raised by Hamilcar's article is to increase subsidies.

[Jacob]

It's a little ironic that one of your and Shelf's solutions to the issue raised by Hamilcar's article is to increase subsidies.

I'm afraid I don't follow... what is the proposed increase in subsidies I have proposed?

[grumbler]

It's a little ironic that one of your and Shelf's solutions to the issue raised by Hamilcar's article is to increase subsidies.

But that's counted against the kid, not the mom.

The mom gets to work more and so pay more taxes.  Yay, mom!

[merithyn]

It's a little ironic that one of your and Shelf's solutions to the issue raised by Hamilcar's article is to increase subsidies.

I'm afraid I don't follow... what is the proposed increase in subsidies I have proposed?

I think he means affordable childcare.

For what it's worth, none of this is news to me. It's just a different spin on an old tale. Hamilcar and Legbiter call women "dependents" and "takers", but the reality is that the reason women are on the lower end of the pay scale - if they're getting paid at all - is because they're taking care of the household most of the time. You can't have it all ways.

Those who stay home create the opportunities for those who work to make more. To disregard that is rather foolish. A person can't have a family and work 50 hours a week without having someone else willing to take care of the household. It's a balance. One is no better, nor worse, than the other, regardless of gender. They just contribute differently to society and to the family unit.

[Sheilbh]

It's a little ironic that one of your and Shelf's solutions to the issue raised by Hamilcar's article is to increase subsidies.

But that's counted against the kid, not the mom.

The mom gets to work more and so pay more taxes.  Yay, mom!

Exactly. It allows longer continuous economic participation by the mum while the kid's fiscal drag increases in years 0-4

[Jacob]

Exactly. It allows longer continuous economic participation by the mum while the kid's fiscal drag increases in years 0-4

Ah I see. I wasn't aware that I'd been advocating for subsidize childcare, but it seems like a reasonable solution

Yi - I don't think it's ironic, since subsidized childcare should be counted against the kid's "contribution" or alternately spread evenly between both parents, rather than solely against the mother's - so it would still push those graphs towards a more equal distribution I expect.