Anti Wage-slavery, Pro-Freedom Quotations Of The Week 887-889

All mothers work; almost all will work for pay outside the home at some time in their mothering lives. And no mother, no woman, created this ridiculously inefficient, human-hating social structure that plops all responsibility for children on the frail shoulders of individual families.

It was not a mother who invented a 9 to 5 workday and a 9 to 3:30 school day, but of course mothers take the rap for the resulting “latch-key child.” No woman devised the economic structure that rewards leveraged buy-out jackals with mountains of gold, while condemning the most essential people in the country — child-minders — to lives of grinding poverty.

The quarrel is not between mothers who work for pay and mothers who don’t. The quarrel is between those who care about children’s future, and the (mostly) men in government who just don’t get it.
Michele Landsberg
National Post

...it is becoming increasingly clear that workaholics do indeed need help. Researchers in New Zealand have found that people who work at least 50 hours a week are up to three times more likely to face alcohol problems. Earlier this month, the American Journal of Epidemiology reported on a global study showing that over-workers are between 40 and 80 percent more likely to suffer heart disease than others. The lead researcher of that study had previously found that middle-aged people working more than 55 hours a week tend to be disproportionately slow-witted, and to be more at risk for dementia.
...
“The workaholic operates on the fight-or-flight response, which leads to a drench of cortisol, norepinephrine, and adrenaline. It can lead to heart disease and heart attacks, diabetes, compromised immune systems, and gastro-intestinal problems. We know this, the studies are pouring out.”
The Truth About Workaholics
Chris Wright
AlterNet
[emphasis JS]

Each year, American taxpayers spend nearly $1 trillion trying to help the poor, according to a recent study by the Cato Institute. It’s easy to miss that headline number, though, because the money flows into and out of scores of federal, state and local government programs.
…
Consider a thought experiment: Divide $1 trillion by 46 million and you get around $21,700 for each American in poverty, or nearly $87,000 for a family of four. That’s almost four times the $23,050 per year federal poverty line for that family. It’s intriguing to think about converting all of this to a cash payment that would instantly lift everyone in poverty up to the middle class.
The Wrong Way to Help the Poor
By GARY E. MacDOUGAL
New York Times
Published: October 10, 2012
[emphasis JS]


[He goes on to say " For a variety of reasons, of course, that’s not possible…" But doesn't give the reasons. Later in the article, he writes, "another factor is the natural reluctance of advocates, Congressional staffers, think tanks and providers of services for the poor to see their favorite programs cut or consolidated. Few are willing to give up authority over their piece of the program pie." -JS]