Not sure if this is the right forum but here goes…
**If your household has two incomes and your neighbor has none, would you be willing to give up one of your incomes so that your neighbor might have one? **
The above statement is, of course, a gross simplification of a rather complex issue…But I think it does cut to the core of a moral issue that deserves to be addressed.
What are the moral implications of having two incomes when a neighbor, who could do that job, has none?
Thoughts???
Peace
James
You answered your own question with the statement that it is a gross simplification of a rather complex issue. The question also assumes that the neighbor is qualified to do one of the jobs, which is not always the case, and ignores the fact that two income families support the economy in other ways.
It is a complex issue. Many two income families spend their entire second paychecks to employ other people to do what SAHM used to do for free. (And then they frequently say they “have to work” because they haven’t looked at where they spend the money.) I know several female professionals who quit work to raise their families after seeing their entire paycheck spent on the nannies/daycare, housekeepers, gardeners, eating out, transportation, work clothes and taxes. Even if they just try to save it, their investment firm or bank probably takes a chunk of the money to employee people to manage the funds! All of the areas where they spend money supports employment for other people.
Also, what about people who don’t work for pay who may “take jobs” away from those who could be working? I do my own housework, when I could be employing someone to clean my house. Is that selfish of me? I even homeschool my own children, thus taking some work away from teachers and schools. What about all those volunteers at our parishes and schools, who do the type of jobs that some people could be getting paid for? I know someone who worked as a professional fundraiser, getting paid a decent salary (enough to buy a house and support a family) when in previous times and in some places still, “housewives” do that type of work for free. Should volunteers stop volunteering so that other people can be hired? Should stay-at-home-mothers go back to work to earn paychecks so that they can employ other people to clean their houses, do their laundry, cook their meals, and then donate any extra money to places that spend a portion of the money on professional fundraisers?
The SAHMs that I know usually do lots of things with their time that that other people get paid for doing. Funny but true, when I did some volunteer work in the area where I am professionally trained and regarded as an expert, some of my peers in that field weren’t too happy about me “working” for free. We can’t please everyone.
Perhaps some two income families
should re-assess their work situations, but not just on some theoretical possibility that their unemployed neighbor will be able to go back to work. There’s no guarantee that their neighbor will be qualified to do the job, and if their other neighbor is their nanny, housekeeper or gardener, they might be putting
that neighbor out of a job! They might even displace few other folks once they start volunteering. But…they should evaluate to see if they really “need” the second income the way they think they do, because as I mentioned above, it’s often spent on things they only “need” *because *they have two jobs. They may be able to afford for one to stay at home with the children–and perhaps they might even be able to afford more children than they think they can afford.
The moral implication as I see if for us as Catholics is that we need to be obedient to the Lord and open to His will for our lives.
…then I come up with these questions.