Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (32214)	3/8/1999 9:01:00 AM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Something to consider. How spontaneous was the woman's movement, or planned. As woman have moved into the workplace the government could tax the income, increasing revenue. The economy changed also to take the added earnings off our hands to the point now that both husband and wife have to work in order to have a prosperous lifestyle. The days of "the good life" on one income are gone forever. One income (unless it is a very good one) won't provide as it used to. So who has benefited, the government, not us. We have fewer options, the government has more revenue, what about the banking system and inflation? The buying power of the two incomes had shrunk as the dollars has gone up with the result that we only have the illusion of prosperity while we have not advanced nearly as mush in raw buying power with two incomes. There are a lot of factors involved. I think in the end the woman's movement has in some ways given woman fewer options that they expected.