Thread by @bansisharma

1. A Fucking Insane Idea That Has Taken A Strong Hold on Western Minds

Bear with me as a I explain how this whole framing is so stupid. Assume the data is correct. Just look at the news commentary.

Headline: Jaw-dropping Gender Gap for Jobs

2. "This appears to be about child care. Issues with schools and daycare centers kept women, who are typically primary caregivers to children, out of the workforce throughout the pandemic — and it's still happening," explains Axios Markets co-author Emily Peck.

3. Now it is reasonable and productive to discuss why women are primary caregivers to children. That would be a worthwhile discussion. But that is not the focus of all news commentary today. What is the focus? Read on.

4. "That reality [childcare needs] holds back the economic recovery, keeping women on the sidelines at a time when companies are desperate to hire.

Women with young children at home, who might have considered going back to work, likely couldn't because of child-care schedules."

5. WTAF! Taking care of one's own children is somehow a negative for the economy. Whatever else you may justifiably complain about the burden of childcare primarily falling on women, its effect on the economy should be the last thing anyone should complain about.

6. By having a stranger take care of your children while you go off to a desk job in some office doesn't create any new real value for the economy. It just pads up infertile, useless numbers on a spreadsheet, because more money changes hands and thus shows up in the GDP.

7. Children still need to be taken care of no matter who does it, and the quality of care presumably always suffers when children are taken care of by strangers than parents. Who in the world cares more about the children than the children's own parents?

8. Let me illustrate with a specific example. If A and B are two mothers with young children (I will use mothers in the example because of the topic at hand). If both of them stay at home and take care of their children, they add nothing to the "official" GDP numbers.

9. But if A drives to a childcare facility where she "works" to take care of B's children and B drives to another such facility where she "works" to look after A's children, they have both "contributed to the nation's economy" because their mutual payments show up in the GDP.

10. Is the nation somehow better off? Are the children? I would say the answer is an emphatic no, on the whole. Of course it gets complicated if you start bringing in the psychological needs and financial independence aspects, etc.

11. I am keenly aware and totally supportive of the benefits of work and careers in and of themselves for all members of society, and we should do our best to maximize opportunities for everyone. There has been great societal progress on that and may it continue apace.

12. My only point in this thread is that we should not insanely portray women taking care of their own children transiently as we come out of a pandemic as some "great loss to the economy." What is the economy for if we cannot even pause to ensure the welfare of children.

13. A society that considers children being looked after by strangers as preferable to being looked after by children's own parents, in and of itself, because it "adds to the economy" is sick in its head.

14. Childcare provided by strangers is a necessity for a whole lot of reasons but not an ideal to aspire to.

15. Societal structures that enable mothers to pursue independent aspirations and careers are needed and good in their own right. We should promote them, but not because they artificially pad up the GDP. There is more to a wholesome society than a spreadsheet rigmarole.

The End