To be fair, economic safety always has been a core promise of marriage. Feminism has ended that. But in a market economy, increasing supply means falling prices. So doubling the workforce reduces wages.
What we see is how the market resolves the economic side effect of allowing women basic human rights. People can’t afford a family, so they choose not to have kids. A few generations later, the oversupply of workers will be corrected, and work will be worth enough to fund a family again.
It isn’t really necessary to solely rely on the market to fix this. And it is absurdly cruel to do so. And of course, governments have the legislative power to ease the adaptation pain. But even with a pure Epstein-class government, this problem will actually solve itself eventually. It just takes a few generations.
To be fair, economic safety always has been a core promise of marriage. Feminism has ended that. But in a market economy, increasing supply means falling prices. So doubling the workforce reduces wages.
What we see is how the market resolves the economic side effect of allowing women basic human rights. People can’t afford a family, so they choose not to have kids. A few generations later, the oversupply of workers will be corrected, and work will be worth enough to fund a family again.
It isn’t really necessary to solely rely on the market to fix this. And it is absurdly cruel to do so. And of course, governments have the legislative power to ease the adaptation pain. But even with a pure Epstein-class government, this problem will actually solve itself eventually. It just takes a few generations.
Damn feminism, always protecting women from the crushing burden of supporting everyone else!
Holy upside-down analysis Batman. Let me clue you in to something: feminism and socialism were together from the start.
Yeah this makes total sense /s. It’s not like we have more people, so we can do more work. There is only a set amount of work available in the world.