1. I think you left out an important component in the formula for pricing - women's production. Doubling incomes for households when women went to work did not raise prices due to more income because the woman produces her share of the goods. Her work adds to more production doubling the amount of goods a country produces which balances the prices. (Assuming one to one man to woman production and the number of workers). Otherwise, if you;re correct, when you double a country's population, prices would double also. But that doesn't happen because the amount of goods a country produces doubles as well. So the prices stay constant.
2. The problem of having to work harder today is because of the government, not private industry, not the rich. It is that taxes have gone up enormously. Additionally, deficit spending, debt, and money printing (inflation) raises prices. Business owners are protected the quickest when this happens because they can raise prices. Workers on the other hand have to wait for salary increases which follow much later. So they feel inflation the worse.
3. Regarding escalating high tuition mention by Roaldi, that's another government caused problem. By guaranteeing college loans to every Tom, Dick and Harry, half who should be learning a trade rather than going to college, you have too much money chasing too little goods. So naturally the price of tuition has gone up four fold compared to inflation for everything else. Meanwhile, you have all these kids in debt who won;t be able to get a starter house and buy other things due to all the debt. Another government boondoggle. Same thing happened 15 years ago with government mandated loans to buy homes given to people who couldn't afford it. Artificially raised the price of homes until the market collapsed and we had the 2008 worldwide recession. Another clever government attempt at equalizing wealth and advantage that took the country off the rails.
1. The world is full to capacity with overproduction; don't you read the papers, see the ads for Black Frdays, etc, etc.? There is more crap on sale today than ever. Steel production: China makes enough to supply the whole bloody world, at prices the west can't match, and it simply doesn't matter why that's the case: it just is. We don't need more production, we need less, and stable prices where value is tied to reality, not the screw ever variable pitch, of price based on ability of buyers to pay. Milk: there is so much around that our farmers can't get a decent price for it anymore. Our supermarkets are already filled with chicken, eggs, fruit-out-of-season, vegetables and on and on, never mind the threat of a post-Brexit world and us being forced to buy American food products filled with added chemicals nobody in Europe wants... Need a car? the dealers offer all sorts of incentives; why? It's obvious: they have too many. In Britain last month, car sales dropped over 40%, which is a measure of the crazy prices for basic cars, fiscal fears of job tenure if Brexit goes sour; the mess over fuel types and the promise of pie in the sky electric vehicles only the rich can afford. We have problems producing the electricity to service our daily lives as it is; imagine if cars suddenly switched to a total reliance on the plug in the wall! We couldn't service it. The problem is the opposite of what you state: we
make too much stuff and so create what used to be referred to as mountains. More hands ensuring more production is the last thing this world needs, of any gender or sexual persuasion.
As for your neat equation of more production, more hands at work balancing the prices, we have more production since at any time, massively growing populations, and prices everywhere have rocketed: your theory is filled with blissful holes.
The work many women did back then was often secretarial and admin. and they seemed to be very capable at it, too! It's my experience from the females I have known that they genuinely are better at multitasking, whatever convenient new theories come along to dispute that. Just consider the busy women you know, and be honest in your appraisal of their abilities to organise. Women used to run a household, balance the domestic budget and keep that smile on every family face; all men did was try to do one job well enough not to get fired. Those essential women at work, those doctors, nurse, lawyers, teachers, they do their jobs well, too, and we could not do without them. But they are not the ones leading to overproduction of goods.
2. I am sure that the very rich will be the first to agree with you; especially those in politics.
Your differentiation between "workers" and business owners is mildly amusing. Both are hit hard. Those who skin the noses of the rest of us are the megas, the invisibles, the Googles of this world, the banks and the money lenders of all stripes; the financial gamblers who brought about the disaster of 2007/2008, where I found myself trying to switch banks as my wife was dying of cancer, trying to help her hold papers steady as she countersigned her name to enable the swapping of accounts in time. We, the little people, always end up in the shit. Those giving advice to governments, toothless, blind watchdogs of the institutions those are meant to oversee, seem to have retained their jobs in the Ivy League business colleges, haven't they; did any go to prison for neglect...? Those sub-primes had nothing to do with political social engineering and raising/lowering people to a common level: they had everything to do with poor surveillance that let them play the game, which was all pure, greedy, and recklessly irresponsible speculation on the part of the moneymen selling fantasies: they just passed the buck to the next guy in their chain. It was bound to crash.
3. Yes; higher education has been touted in Britain for a few years now, and anecdotal reports tell me of kids wanting to leave school earlier than allowed so that they can become plumbers or electricians like their older brothers or mates, and earn massive sums of money a week doing jobs for which there is ever a queue of waiting customers. Those cats don't give a fig for Hamlet. Shakespeare? That's a motorboat, innit? And if they want one, they will probably be able to buy it pretty damnd quickly. Instead, they have to waste a couple more years at school disturbing those who want to study and annoying the teachers. But, but, politicians aspire to being loved for providing higher education to all, even at the price of creating a sub-class of professional students wasting their parents' money or just getting laid. And even some of those who work, what do they study? Esoteric stuff that doesn't give them a snowball's of using the resulting degree to get a job. There's something far wrong with that. You don't need to fund departments that lead nowhere. If you want to do esoteric do it in your own time and wholely on your own buck.
