(09-03-2022, 09:40 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote:

(09-03-2022, 06:53 PM)mikesez Wrote: Prior to the great depression, women were more frequently employed outside the home, than during. The depression is where you see it become normal for male employees to insist that their employer should not hire women because men provide and women nurture.  Before the scarcity of the great depression people were more likely to mind their own business about who provided for what family.

And businesses don't go and double their workforces just because they can.  They employ the people they need to meet the demand they forecast, no more and no less.  Yes, the captains of industry did try to continue to normalize employing women in factories after WWII was over.  This was mostly because women's wages were lower, though.  The idea that a person could sue in court for wage discrimination on the basis of gender wouldn't become law until 1964.

Employed how, Mikey? That's an important thing for you to know. In what fields? They weren't working industrialized jobs. 

The value of doubling your workforce isn't in more workers, dummy. It's in increasing the supply of available workers which drives down wages. They were able to get cheaper labor because the demand for work became higher because the pool of available workers was larger.

I guess textile mills don't count as industrial to you? Or bakeries?

As for doubling the workforce, I guess we agree, sort of, we're just using the word differently.  They were trying to double their supply of workers, yes.  The way you said it made it sound like they were actually doubling the number of people they would hire.

---