Great post. I look forward to seeing more if you want to write more (whether that’s here or on your own blog for more in progress works, or anything).
Specific:
The post itself seemed more focused around other things (child care/raising) and less about ‘human creation’ in the sense that first came to mind reading those words. (Admittedly, it was about unbundling A from B, so...)
Childcare seems a tough one to unbundle, but if say rising childcare costs – both time and money – are leading to lower fertility rates, what if the government subsidizes childcare immensely.
...
but then allow the state to spend on their childcare.
Sometimes these words are used to refer to lowering costs, as well as paying people (even though they’re ‘not working’). This seems to go in the opposite direction from where this post is going—unbundling things you didn’t list, like ‘Working’.
and then take over the guardianship of these kids.
This idea of the state being the only other way this ‘un-/re-bundling’ could happen seems weird...maybe it’s just the phrasing because the state isn’t a person with a body that can fill that role. (The stuff around adoption also seemed relevant.)
(see Feeld)
Broken link. (In the post there’s a link, but it just goes back to the page itself.)
I do think there is potential for new age kibbutz type arrangements for childcare where childcare costs (time and money) can be spread across more people.
Interesting. Also, the stuff about unbundling earlier would have made more sense with something like this in the vicinity.
Then what happened was by the late 1800s, early 1900s, sending your kids to work early on meant sending them now increasingly than farm, sending them to a factory where there’d be wage labor.
Overall:
Great post. I look forward to seeing more if you want to write more (whether that’s here or on your own blog for more in progress works, or anything).
Specific:
The post itself seemed more focused around other things (child care/raising) and less about ‘human creation’ in the sense that first came to mind reading those words. (Admittedly, it was about unbundling A from B, so...)
Sometimes these words are used to refer to lowering costs, as well as paying people (even though they’re ‘not working’). This seems to go in the opposite direction from where this post is going—unbundling things you didn’t list, like ‘Working’.
This idea of the state being the only other way this ‘un-/re-bundling’ could happen seems weird...maybe it’s just the phrasing because the state isn’t a person with a body that can fill that role. (The stuff around adoption also seemed relevant.)
Broken link. (In the post there’s a link, but it just goes back to the page itself.)
Interesting. Also, the stuff about unbundling earlier would have made more sense with something like this in the vicinity.
This sentence was a little rough.