home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=90TT2969>
- <title>
- Nov. 08, 1990: Running Hard Just to Keep Up
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
- Nov. 08, 1990 Special Issue - Women:The Road Ahead
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- ON THE JOB, Page 54
- Running Hard Just to Keep Up
- </hdr>
- <body>
- <p>By Sylvia Ann Hewlett
- </p>
- <p>[The author is an economist, whose forthcoming book is When the
- Bough Breaks: The Cost of Neglecting Our Children.]
- </p>
- <p> Faster and faster they go, harder and harder they push, but
- like hamsters on a wheel, America's working families are stuck
- at the bottom. Clobbered on two fronts, they must work twice as
- hard to stay even. On the income side, wages have gone down
- while taxes have risen. On the expenditure side, living costs
- have soared. Homes, health insurance, college education--the
- basic ingredients of the American Dream--are increasingly out
- of reach.
- </p>
- <p> The crunch began with a dramatic falloff in earnings,
- particularly for blue-collar males. Between 1955 and 1973, the
- median wage of men leaped from $15,056 to $24,621. Then, quite
- suddenly, it started to drop. By 1987 the male wage, adjusted
- for inflation, was back down to $19,859, a 19% decline. To shore
- up family income, wives have flooded into the labor market, but
- their earning power is low. In 1988 the average family income
- was only 6% higher than in 1973, though almost twice as many
- wives were at work. In many households, one well-paid smokestack
- job with health insurance has been replaced by two service jobs
- without benefits. Burger King doesn't provide as well as
- Bethlehem Steel.
- </p>
- <p> Higher taxes have tightened the pinch. The acclaimed Reagan
- tax cuts of 1986, which reduced marginal income taxes, merely
- shifted the burden to Social Security taxes, which fall heavily
- on low- and middle-income families. These payroll taxes were
- jacked up 24% during the 1980s. The true marginal tax rate is
- now higher for a couple making $14,000 a year than it is for a
- couple making $326,000 a year!
- </p>
- <p> It doesn't help that over the past 25 years the cost of
- housing has jumped 56% and college tuitions have rocketed 87.9%
- in real dollars. Joseph Minarik, executive director of the
- congressional Joint Economic Committee estimates that the
- typical 30-year-old man buying a median-priced home in 1973
- incurred carrying costs equal to 21% of his income. By 1987 this
- had risen to 40%. For the first time since World War II, home
- ownership among young families is declining. Complains Karen, a
- 26-year-old housewife in the Chicago area: "You either buy a
- home, both of you work and your kids suffer, or one of you works
- and you live in a rental. Paying rent feels like digging a hole
- and crawling right in."
- </p>
- <p> This squeeze on families bodes ill for children. Twelve
- million youngsters have no medical coverage; 5 million teeter
- on the edge of homelessness. Because of poor prenatal care, a
- baby born in the shadow of the White House is now more likely
- to die in the first year of life than a baby born in Costa Rica.
- </p>
- <p> But perhaps the resource in shortest supply to families is
- time together. The amount of "total contact time" between
- parents and children has dropped 40% over the past 25 years,
- says the Family Research Council in Washington. This is not good
- news. Researchers have uncovered ominous links between absentee
- parents and behavioral problems among children. A 1989 survey
- of 5,000 eighth-grade students in Southern California found, for
- instance, that latchkey children were twice as likely to use
- alcohol and drugs as were children supervised by adults after
- school.
- </p>
- <p> How can this situation be remedied? Corporations should be
- encouraged to design a family-friendly workplace that gives
- parents the gift of time. Several U.S. firms have shown that it
- can be cost-effective to create a more fluid work environment.
- Government could encourage this by granting tax breaks to
- companies that offer flexible hours, part-time work with
- benefits, job sharing, parental leave and home-based employment
- opportunities.
- </p>
- <p> To lighten the burden on working families, the tax system
- should be reconfigured so that relatively more is paid in income
- taxes and less in Social Security taxes. The government should
- also subsidize housing for a majority of young families with
- children. Rent vouchers in sufficient numbers would banish the
- specter of homelessness that haunts 10 million to 13 million
- low-income families. As for helping the middle class, the
- government should act as it did after World War II and offer
- low-interest mortgages to young families. Beginning in 1944, the
- Veterans Administration guaranteed 5 million home loans to
- ex-servicemen with no down payment required and a maximum
- interest rate of 4%. If something similar were done today, many
- more families could both buy a house and spend time with the
- kids. One Gallup poll shows that only 13% of working mothers
- want to work full time, although 52% of them do so. Often what
- keeps these mothers at work 40 hours a week is heavy mortgage
- payments.
- </p>
- <p> The U.S. can and should bend its public policies to free
- time and resources for families with children. With male wages
- sagging and the divorce rate at 50%, it's hard to spin out a
- scenario in which large numbers of women have the option of
- staying home full time. The trick is to spread the burden
- around. Employers and government both have to pull their weight.
- This critical task of building strong families can no longer be
- defined as a private endeavor, least of all a private female
- endeavor. No society can afford to forget that on the backs of
- its children ride the future prosperity and integrity of the
- nation.
- </p>
-
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-