It was suggested that dual incomes were a cause of increased inequality, not a symptom. And that's wrong.
The inequality that's an economic problem is not between those earning more than 100k and those earning less [1]. The problematic inequality is the difference between those earning more than 1M and those earning less. [2]
I absolutely agree that dual incomes are an increasing-necessity, but they're a symptom of inequality. They're more-required because the "below 1M" earners have not been seeing their wages rise with their increased productivity. And those "lost wages" are going to the "above 1M" crowd -- not the above 100k crowd.
[1] Two incomes are not making anyone cross that line, save a hypothetical family with two executives at small-to-mid-size firms. And the problem is primarily the rates-of-change of wages between those earning more than 1M and those earning less. That there's a gulf is not, by itself, much of a problem. That it's getting wider, is concerning. That tangible objective increases in worker output and efficiency are not translating into increased worker rewards is the ticking time bomb.
Comments
It was suggested that dual incomes were a cause of increased inequality, not a symptom. And that's wrong.
The inequality that's an economic problem is not between those earning more than 100k and those earning less [1]. The problematic inequality is the difference between those earning more than 1M and those earning less. [2]
I absolutely agree that dual incomes are an increasing-necessity, but they're a symptom of inequality. They're more-required because the "below 1M" earners have not been seeing their wages rise with their increased productivity. And those "lost wages" are going to the "above 1M" crowd -- not the above 100k crowd.
[1] Two incomes are not making anyone cross that line, save a hypothetical family with two executives at small-to-mid-size firms. And the problem is primarily the rates-of-change of wages between those earning more than 1M and those earning less. That there's a gulf is not, by itself, much of a problem. That it's getting wider, is concerning. That tangible objective increases in worker output and efficiency are not translating into increased worker rewards is the ticking time bomb.