I have a sense of humor.  Some times that sense of humor leads me down unlikely paths.  Some time ago I was talking with a friend whom I know from political circles. I asked him if he knew what the root cause of global warming was.  He said; “Yes, CO2.”

“And what has caused all that CO2?”

He didn’t know, so I told him…  “Feminism”

He replied; “What?” His tone of voice implied that I had two heads.

I said; “You heard me. Remember Leave it to Beaver and Father Knows Best?  Dad went to work and Mom stayed home.  They had one car and homes were 40% smaller.  If we returned to that ethic we would have half the cars on the road and they would actually move.  We would have half the office and factory space to heat and cool; our homes would be smaller and easier to heat.  Our carbon footprint would be much smaller.  What changed all that?  Feminism”

He said; “You’re right!  How do we get the word out?”

My answer: “Do you really want to offend all the women in country?”


“Then let’s just keep this a secret. It is not a winning campaign strategy.”

While this is not something that anyone would recommend running on there is a great deal of truth in it.  The hacked email from East Anglican University have cast a considerable shadow on the voracity of the claim that CO2 causes climate change; however, many other things have changed as a result of moving from single income households to two income households.

Accountants point out that the wife’s income only adds about $500 a month to the bottom line of the family finances and a sizable minority actually loses money by having the wife work outside the home and does not know it. Accountants look at the cost of child care, maintaining a work wardrobe, a second car, and other costs related to having that second job such as eating out more often and maid service.

This analysis should actually be done by an economist. Mothers did not just sit at home doing nothing.  My mother made shirts for everyone in the family. She canned vegetables, fruit, and baked eight loaves of bread each Saturday. Home production made a huge difference.

In the early 1960’s a working couple, with no children, attempted to get a loan to buy their dream house. Banks would not consider the wife’s income at the time because it was assumed that she would eventually have children and quit working; hence, they did not qualify for the loan.  The working couple sued and it went all the way to the US Supreme Court where the couple prevailed. This lead to a surge in housing sales to working couples.  Demand was so high that the cost of housing doubled within two years, and then doubled again in the next two years. Builders were all building larger, more expensive homes to satisfy this market.  Eventually the cost of housing was so high that almost all women were forced out of the home into the job market.

In the 1980’s people complained about stagnant wages.  We had inflation; however, wages were not keeping pace.  Women were leaving the home in droves.  When you double the number of workers without doubling the number of jobs you have an employers market.  Supply exceeded demand.

The true cost of working outside the home must take into account the impact on markets.  Clothing was much less expensive because manufacturers had to contend with a significant cottage industry. Girls were taught how to sew in home economics classes. Almost all women knew how to sew. Food was grown in home gardens and mom canned much of it, forcing the cost at grocery stores down.

Crime was also lower.  With mom at home, children came home from school to mom, not an empty house. Kids did not have the opportunity to get into trouble with her around. Home owner’s insurance rates were lower and so was the prison population.

My father was a high school counselor.  The state required that sex education be taught in biology classes. These classes included both boys and girls. As the kids walked home from school they talked about what they “learned” in these sex education classes. Boys usually walked their girl friends home from school.  You can guess what happened when they got to the girl’s house and mom and dad were both gone. My father had to deal with the aftermath; pregnancy, disease, shame, guilt, destroyed reputations.  Over 80% of our prison population came from fatherless homes.

When you consider the high prices in housing, food, clothing and insurance rates (just to mention a few), and the lower wages caused from an oversupply of labor and then add in the social cost; there is significant room to doubt that anyone is better of financially with women working outside the home.

Stay at home moms bless our lives and society in so many ways. I realize that many women must work outside the home and I do not find fault with anyone for the decisions they make; nevertheless, the impact of the decision has had massive societal impact.

There is one more area that cannot be ignored.  When moms were at home they had time to volunteer in many ways, particularly in the schools. Mothers were in the classroom daily. Schools could not sneak objectionable things into the curriculum; mothers were there and would put a stop to this nonsense. The schools knew who was boss. What is the impact of not having mothers involved with their child’s education? It effects elections and elections affect the economy and our very form of government.

God bless the stay at home mom. They sacrifice so much and receive so little in return. They bless all of society.