Although this seems counter-intuitive as their are many studies available now indicating that more homes then ever are dual-income, and yet despite that they seem only just able to make ends-meet. Compare this to the 1950s where it was the norm for the man to work and the woman to tend the home.
There are also other studies that show the reason for this is overtaxation. When you look at your tax burden and how much the secondary working spouse (the one that makes less money) makes you see that the bulk of the money that he makes goes to cover what they have to pay in taxes. Intresting reading on the subject of taxation can be found here: www.cato.org
Capitalism creates abundance, only a socialist/communist would say that capitalism relies on scarcity. when the truth is reversed. Look at the old soviet union the only place where if anything was abundant it was abundant at the very top. In a market economy you need to have abundance, its a lot easier for a company to survive if it has a larger market share (i.e. has an abundance of product to sell) and takes smaller profit margins than if it has less product to sell and has to take higher margins. This is easily demonstrated by the computer industry, SUN and such are far more likely to go under if the market turns bad because they sell a small amount (relatively) kit at a much higher margin, where as a company like Intel which sells a whole bunch of kit, can take a market that turns down and still be able to survive. what's that Pontiac commercial wider is better.
Slashdot Mirror
There are also other studies that show the reason for this is overtaxation. When you look at your tax burden and how much the secondary working spouse (the one that makes less money) makes you see that the bulk of the money that he makes goes to cover what they have to pay in taxes. Intresting reading on the subject of taxation can be found here: www.cato.org
Capitalism creates abundance, only a socialist/communist would say that capitalism relies on scarcity. when the truth is reversed. Look at the old soviet union the only place where if anything was abundant it was abundant at the very top. In a market economy you need to have abundance, its a lot easier for a company to survive if it has a larger market share (i.e. has an abundance of product to sell) and takes smaller profit margins than if it has less product to sell and has to take higher margins. This is easily demonstrated by the computer industry, SUN and such are far more likely to go under if the market turns bad because they sell a small amount (relatively) kit at a much higher margin, where as a company like Intel which sells a whole bunch of kit, can take a market that turns down and still be able to survive. what's that Pontiac commercial wider is better.