Child Care - who's responsibilty?

[observer]

The whole premise behind "equal rights" is simply that - equality; however for obvious reasons men and women are different. Put simply, they have to choose between child bearing or a career; indeed to many young girls nowadays, child bearing is their career! The idea that employers are saddled with the cost and inconvenience of keeping jobs open for maternity leave, may have some liberal social merit, but alas little economic sense. Many high flying women are now discovering that they can't have it all, and the increasing cost of child dumping is just another example of the impediments that nature has ordained.

[Cleopatra]

I'm warming to you observer.

[Lt Kije]

In the 1950s it was possible to get a mortgage with only the man working in the household, that is no longer possible for an average wage earner now, both parents would have to work to get and keep a house.

 

Obs, what do you mean by many, can you give a percentage?

 

Ie

 

10% of all women having kids do so to get a council house

 

What is many?

[observer]

... the only "right to buy" that exists was the one that Maggie brought in to deplete the Council housing stock, that provided the cheaper rented accomodation for those who couldn't afford to buy. If you can't afford it - don't try buying it - simples.

[Lt Kije]

The point being Obs, in the 1950s a man on an average wage could get a morgage, A man on an average wage could not get a mortgage now, his wife would have to be working now.

[inky pete]

Don't quite follow your logic there Ink: presumably house prices are conditioned by supply and demand?

 

Precisely, and when supply is less than demand (as it always will be with a population which has grown by 10 million in just a couple of decades) then prices rise - and are only limited by what people can afford to pay.

 

Dual income families becoming the norm has simply meant that housing costs could rise to a much higher level than most single income families could even hope to afford.

 

So single income families can't find anywhere affordable to live - either to buy or to rent. And dual income families don't find themselves any better off for both working - because it all gets swallowed up by childcare costs and outrageously sized mortgages or rent commitments.

[observer]

Agreed - BUT Joe Average has never been able to afford to buy decent property throughout history.

[Lt Kije]

You could get a mortgage on an average wage in the 50s

[observer]

Quite possibly, that was probably the period when our wealth gap was at it's historical minimum.

[Bazj]

but what is a good idea is the one being floated by the government now which means kids shouldn't get housing benefit to move out of their parents house and get a flat; even if they are pregnant.

 

Families living in London on more housing benefits to pay rent that would need a net income of over £60,000.... just isn't right and should be stopped

[Peter T]

The majority have a choice. In most cases pregnancy is an option. Cohabiting is an option. IF you can't afford, either "save" up or DON'T to it. Simples.

[inky pete]

but what is a good idea is the one being floated by the government now which means kids shouldn't get housing benefit to move out of their parents house and get a flat; even if they are pregnant.

 

Families living in London on more housing benefits to pay rent that would need a net income of over £60,000.... just isn't right and should be stopped

 

Why should a family who aren't working be able to choose to live in one of the most expensive parts of the country?

 

I live in one of the more expensive parts of the borough as far as house prices go, but if I were to lose my income and become long term unemployed then I would simply have to MOVE MY FAMILY SOMEWHERE CHEAPER.