Women at work... or, not

Registered users do not see ads, it's free and easy. Register Here

lizkat

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Top Poster Of Month
Posts
2,449
Reaction score
5,586
Awards
1
Registered users do not see ads, it's free and easy. Register Here

thekev

Site Champ
Posts
284
Reaction score
498
It's difficult to say how much of this is attributable to which industries were hit hardest. It hit a lot of industries which employ large numbers of women.

That gap is in large part due to steep job losses in three sectors: education — which remains a female-dominated industry — hospitality and retail, particularly clothing and accessories stores. All of these industries have been hammered by the pandemic.
 

lizkat

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Top Poster Of Month
Posts
2,449
Reaction score
5,586
Awards
1
It's difficult to say how much of this is attributable to which industries were hit hardest. It hit a lot of industries which employ large numbers of women.

They all have crap pay and no bennies and the Trump administration like other GOP dominated ones (either via WH or Congress or both) has slashed away at programs that try to ensure there's a floor under single parents with children so the kids and their moms don't starve, freeze or die from lack of even the most basic medical attention.

Maybe with Trump on his way out and McConnell still hoping to obstruct every move Biden makes despite Mitch being in the minority now, we'll end up with Paul Ryan in 2024 throwing his hat back in the ring, I hope not. He was Romney's VP running mate in the 2012 election. The quote below is from a compendium of his positions on issues related to welfare and poverty.


Illustrating his new poverty plan, Ryan said a 24-year-old single mother of two could go to a local social services provider for help. Instead of applying for food stamps, housing vouchers and welfare checks, she would meet with a case manager and draft an "opportunity plan" to achieve her goals, targeting money where it is needed most, such as transportation or child-care costs. The catch: she would have to sign a contract and meet certain benchmarks for success, such as learning new skills or seeking work. Failure would mean a cut in aid while exceeding expectations would earn her a bonus.

There would be a time limit on assistance, and Ryan said the plan would need to show strong evidence of positive outcomes and poverty reduction, arguing such data is lacking in current programs.

Democrats and liberal policy groups bashed the plan before its release as a way to do away with programs that have formed the core of federal anti-poverty efforts since the 1960s

 

thekev

Site Champ
Posts
284
Reaction score
498
They all have crap pay and no bennies and the Trump administration like other GOP dominated ones (either via WH or Congress or both) has slashed away at programs that try to ensure there's a floor under single parents with children so the kids and their moms don't starve, freeze or die from lack of even the most basic medical attention.

I'm aware of that. I felt the article's headline was reaching a bit to appeal to their typical readers though, by leading with a focus on the impact on women rather than what is actually happening.

Maybe with Trump on his way out and McConnell still hoping to obstruct every move Biden makes despite Mitch being in the minority now, we'll end up with Paul Ryan in 2024 throwing his hat back in the ring, I hope not. He was Romney's VP running mate in the 2012 election.

I started reading the quote there, but he doesn't really say much of anything. Blah blah let states handle it... That might work to a degree if we had good consensus among governors and some federal authority in negotiating things like drug prices.

I would like to see McConnell resign and these idiots that continue to support Trump ejected from public office forever. I haven't paid attention to Ryan, but Foghorn Leghorn needs to go.
 

lizkat

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Top Poster Of Month
Posts
2,449
Reaction score
5,586
Awards
1
I'm aware of that. I felt the article's headline was reaching a bit to appeal to their typical readers though, by leading with a focus on the impact on women rather than what is actually happening.

The data in the piece though supports the headline, and a part we didn't address is in the quote about covid impact on schools and daycare facilities, i.e. the instability in their status from week to week sometimes means that the women with kids are hard pressed to re-apply in the job market or meet requirements of the job she was furloughed from. So they lose the jobs first and then sometimes can't get back on the ladder now because of the covid not being under control.


On Ryan:

I started reading the quote there, but he doesn't really say much of anything. Blah blah let states handle it... That might work to a degree if we had good consensus among governors and some federal authority in negotiating things like drug prices.

A big problem from my viewpoint with Republican social contract programs is their desire to let states do whatever they want to do with block grants, and so social services get short shrift in GOP-controlled settings. Also they tend to lean towards privatization via vouchering or contracts with for-profit private companies, and there's not enough state oversight to see that the tax monies are not only equitably applied but also do improve the client's situation and prospects... per their advance claims that their way works better for both the taxypayer and the client needing benefits. We already know how private prisons work out for taxpayers and inmates... not that great.

I would like to see McConnell resign and these idiots that continue to support Trump ejected from public office forever. I haven't paid attention to Ryan, but Foghorn Leghorn needs to go.

No argument there. As for Ryan, I'm not sure he really wants to seek elective office again. I appreciated his speaking out about the insurrection the other day though. Kevin McCarthy certainly left room for it.
 

thekev

Site Champ
Posts
284
Reaction score
498
The data in the piece though supports the headline, and a part we didn't address is in the quote about covid impact on schools and daycare facilities, i.e. the instability in their status from week to week sometimes means that the women with kids are hard pressed to re-apply in the job market or meet requirements of the job she was furloughed from. So they lose the jobs first and then sometimes can't get back on the ladder now because of the covid not being under control.

That is possible. I wasn't considering that. The COVID situation is garbage for everyone, but yeah it would be particularly bad for single parents employed in heavily impacted fields.

A big problem from my viewpoint with Republican social contract programs is their desire to let states do whatever they want to do with block grants, and so social services get short shrift in GOP-controlled settings. Also they tend to lean towards privatization via vouchering or contracts with for-profit private companies, and there's not enough state oversight to see that the tax monies are not only equitably applied but also do improve the client's situation and prospects... per their advance claims that their way works better for both the taxypayer and the client needing benefits. We already know how private prisons work out for taxpayers and inmates... not that great.

Generally these programs do require some amount of state level cooperation with administrative tasks, so it's a matter of how tasks are divided and the degree of autonomy at the state level in budgeting these things.

As you point out though, the tendency of red states to privatize these things is nonsense, particularly with the prevailing view that businesses (which include government contractors) lack social responsibility.
 

P_X

Elite Member
Posts
1,501
Reaction score
2,709
The data in the piece though supports the headline, and a part we didn't address is in the quote about covid impact on schools and daycare facilities, i.e. the instability in their status from week to week sometimes means that the women with kids are hard pressed to re-apply in the job market or meet requirements of the job she was furloughed from. So they lose the jobs first and then sometimes can't get back on the ladder now because of the covid not being under control.
It makes total sense, but unemployment isn't even a great benchmark of the extra pressure on mothers.
 
Registered users do not see ads, it's free and easy. Register Here
Top Bottom