The Real Trap

The real trap here is that you're looking at this from an upper middle class viewpoint. Its easy to say "stop working, you don't need so many things" but the reality is that most families in America are living paycheck to paycheck, and having one parent drop out would have dire consequences for the family.

You don't mention, for example, what Ms Ody did when quitting her job lost her family their insurance. In lots of families, a pre-existing condition for parent or child would make a private policy burdensomely expensive - hundreds of dollars per month for much less coverage than they had previously.

Do some two-income families spend money on crazy material objects? Sure. But its tunnel vision to think that for most families, the loss of one income would be anything but devastating. In my own family, with both parents working, we make about $60K a year, in a good year. 85% of that goes to necessary bills: mortgage, heating, insurance, student loan repayments, groceries. Losing one income, for us, would not be a question of "living without abundance" as it would of "living on assistance."

The real trap is that housing costs are high. Heating costs are high. Healthcare costs - even for those who have insurance - are high. Americans haven't been taught to believe that mother's have no choice -- they've done the math. They have no choice because the alternative is not just living a simple life, its living an austere life where one misstep - an injury or illness, an unexpected large expense - would result in the family falling into the abyss.

If the math works for you, great. But if you really want to challenge the argument, start challenging the "fait accompli" of the realities of the cost of healthcare and energy in this country, and agitate to find a new way, a better way, to make sure our children (and parents) are healthy and live in warm homes and a clean environment .