to think dual person 'full time' worker family households should never have become the norm?

[workingdilemma]

Was thinking about the other thread talking about tax credits etc.

Around 40 years ago, as a society we'd reached a point where one person working in a household was enough to support a young family.

Now we've ended up where it's pretty much required to have both working full time to be able to afford the same lifestyle - mainly due to the insane 'cost' of housing.

It would have been far better to have had both people in a couple working perhaps part time to allow engagement with the world of work, and also a healthier work/life balance.

Why did we end up like this? Was it all an orchestrated plan to keep the debt cycle going - after all, you can lend on two incomes now for a mortgage. Lovely jubbly for the debt pushers. Is that why the banks and governments encourage this?

I dunno, but I do yearn for a better way to deal with the problems we're having now then everyone demonising each other.

Who on earth doesn't have time to drop bags to a charity shop, recycle or hang washing

I know puffin
Its laughable.
Because FT workers work 24/7 12 months of the year !

I believe the types of people who work full time are usually driven types who can get everything done. I know that is the case for me. I am not a do it tomorrow type of person.

Thats how we get everything done. We work opposite shifts. We have no outside help, but I can't say I have ever found that we can't get the rest done and we always have time for exercise.

You have us bang to rights.

Us part time workers are extremely workshy and sloth like. It does take us weeks of planning to sort out our recycling, washing and ironing as unfortunately its been proven that we actually share more of our dna with snails than humans.

We just can't match the fearsome organisational prowess of the juggling masterminds that are full time wealth creators.

We salute you all for helping drive the economic, debt fuelled powerhouse that is todays world whilst we fail in our duty to contribute to the stats.

I am not in that kind of job mine is a caring profession. I just love to work. I know not everyone does. Dh and I do love having children to though as we can't seem to stop having them, even when they are driving us crazy!

Yep I can clearly testify to having been driven insane by only having the dc 24/7

I took my first 2 children to work with me for the first 6 and half years. It is nice now having a break especially now having other child. I am in a new career now, and every day is exciting. I am so glad we live in an age where women can work full time.

I'm so disappointed we live in an age where everyone - male or female - can't choose to work part time, so each to their own.

I don't really recognise that. I only know a handful of full time working mothers. Most don't want to work after children.

I'm not just talking about parents.

Some poor exploited single childless person working in a minimum wage job has no choice but to work full time, unless they want to live in poverty.

Possibly in a terrible job too.

Yes they could be topped up by benefits - but that in itself is soul destroying and doesn't help anyone.

I have always appreciated all the benefits I have recieved over the years. They enabled me to pay the mortgage and continue with my career.

Should of read that thread you are living a vastly different lifestyle to me. All my bills, running 2 cars, 2 phones, mortgage and food are the same price as you are mortgage. Do you live near London? I would move to somewhere nicer and cheaper if you want to work less.

The dream would be 2x full time workers who both took equal responsibility and had a degree of flexibility, plus good childcare.

To suggest we should go back to a time where women are expected to give up work after children again is an awful proposition.

So what is the answer OP ?

The answer isn't that FT workers are bad which is what this thread has become.
I WOH FT now but when my DC were little I worked PT( no CC ) - times have changed considerably since then and I doubt I could afford to be a PT worker if I had small DC now.
So what is the answer to this? - my personal view is the buy to let industry needs reigning in and rents should be capped so that young parents are not paying 1.5K for a 2 bed house that would cost them 750 a month in mortgage.

Rapping people over the knuckles and telling them they are wrong for working FT and its their fault house prices are so high is not the answer !

The dream would be 2x full time workers who both took equal responsibility and had a degree of flexibility, plus good childcare.

A dream to you - a nightmare to someone who wants a different sort of life.

I think it is only the South East where life is like this, and people feel they have no choices.

Lots of HCP ,firemen /women/police work like this working
Benefits of FT career, salary, pension for both plus no CC and knowing your DC are being cared for by the other parent.
Downside can be shift work.

I think with globalisation the quality of life for people in the UK will have to deteriorate to a certain degree in order for the lives of those from less wealthy countries to improve. Therefore we will have to work longer, retire later, have less job security, public services and welfare benefits will be more stretched and lower in quality, Higher housing and commuting costs, our dcs will face more competition in education and jobs market and have a lower quality of life than us and possibly their grandparents. The upside is the lives of immigrants to the UK are much better than in their countries of origin and there will be a more equal distribution of resources.

Lots of interesting points on the thread. Mine are:-

1. Men and women have always worked (although in some tribes men sit around pretending to hunt whilst women gather most of the food so I am not sure it has always been a "fair" allocation)

1. A very few Victorians at the top could afford servants and servants were very cheap in those days as some of those people either didn't work (aristocracy although even managing a massive estate can be pretty hard work) or only did a bit of charity work or saw it as a symbol of male superiority to support a non working wife with a house full of servants. That's men for you....

1. People at all times have siphoned off the dross work - Romans had slaves, Victorians had 1m domestic servants, many people today in the UK have a cleaner as most of us aren't that keen on cleaning and help with looking after children. A lot of that used to be done by older siblings and relatives too. That is because it's tedious and low grade so you want to get it done by others where you can and that is reflected in the fact it is unpaid. That has nothing to do with loving and bringing up children of course which working men and women do.

1. A suggestion it is a wonderful thing if women could be chained to kitchens whilst men earn money - the premise of the thread - is appalling. I do however support equal marriage and also the new rules which enable men to take the 2nd of 12 months maternity leave or whatever combination the couple choose. That will make a big difference particularly with couples where women earn more than men which is most couples under 30 as 60% of graduates earn more than women. I earned 10x what my children's father earned and we both always worked full time and did as much as each other at home.

1. Most people are idle sods and if they could sit around all day letting some other poor bugger (husband, tax payer, God) pick up the tab they will. That is just human nature and I don't blame them for it. There is even a "slow" movement. However taxpayers are not keen to subsidise this kind of thing and the nation is almost bankrupt hence changes are being made.

A suggestion it is a wonderful thing if women could be chained to kitchens whilst men earn money - the premise of the thread - is appalling.

It absolutely isnt! Read the op! It is about balance for both partners. How dare you say that!

The country is bankrupt because our governments - labour or conservative - have decided that corporate welfare and landlordism is more important than anything else - they are the recepients of these 'benefits'. That and bailing out a bunch of parasites who have used an appalling money system to capture all the fake 'wealth'.

I cannot believe anyone sane can interpret my op as suggesting women should be chained to a sink! What about dads who would love to have the balance too - who would love to spend more time at home, but employers cant see that a man might feel like that.

That was an utterly disgusting post.

Oh damn - i misread who the post was from! Well done Lotus - you definitely got me riled! i would have grabbed a cup of tea and a biscuit, settled down and read it with my tongue in cheek laughing on the way had i seen your name at the top.

Superb wind up - all credit to you.

Mumsnet is the only place where I know full time working mums. I only know of 2 full time working mums of younger children and they're both wrung out and fed up (judging by their Facebook) but it seems all the full time wohms on Mumsnet are living the dream 24/7