82% of Quebecers in favor of a salary to housewives

The March 8, 2001 issue of the Montreal daily La Presse gave the figures of a recent poll which revealed that 82% of the Quebecers are in favor of a salary to the mothers who stay at home. Here is the translation of this article of La Presse, written by Louise Leduc, under the title, "Four Quebecers out of five say 'yes' to a salary to the parent who stays home":

"Over 82% of the people polled said they are 'very' or 'quite' in favour of giving a salary to the parent who stays at home to take care of young children. As for the specialists, this idea makes them indignant, and they agree to say that it is unrealistic and retrograding.

"In Quebec, this idea has been mainly spread by the White Berets of the 'Michael' Journal, who have been asking for more than twenty years $12,000 for stay-at-home mothers. They say they drew their inspiration from the 'Charter of the Rights of the Family' issued by the Holy See in 1983. This charter promotes social measures 'such as family allowances or the remuneration of the work in the home of one of the parents; it should be such that mothers will not be obliged to work outside the home to the detriment of family life, and especially of the education of the children.'

"According to Thérèse Tardif, spokesperson for the 'White Berets', 'mothers go to work because they are obliged to, because one salary (that of the husband) is not enough. Nobody can replace a mother for the care of her children.'

"This perspective of remunerating a parent at home fills with anger Jean-Luc Migue, chairman of the scientific council of the Montreal Economic Institute. A true neo-liberal, Mr. Migue maintains that 'to have children is a choice. A child is not a social good, and brings in nothing to society.'"

And the article of La Presse concludes with this reflection of Ruth Rose, a professor of economics at the UQAM (University of Quebec in Montreal): "A salary to housewives will bring the option for women to choose this way..."

Specialists in lies

One should not wonder at the strong opposition of these university professors against a salary for the mothers who stay home, because they have themselves been brainwashed by the Marxists, who are experts in swindles and lies, and whose objective is to destroy the family, by directing women to get a job outside their homes.:;

To destroy the familyux: Marxists make young ladies believe that the beautiful career. of raising children is a degrading task, and that in order to be autonomous, they must work like slaves, not for their own happiness, nor that of their husbands and children, but to serve a boss who is more and more demanding.

And Mr. Migue goes as far as to say that "a child is not a social good, and brings in nothing to society." It is the chairman of the scientific council of the Montreal Economic Institute who talks such nonsense. If he is not one of these Marxist specialists in lies, he is certainly a specialist in foolish remarks. To day, one must go to the university to specialize in falsehood.

A specialist in the truth

Msgr. Michel Schooyans (see article pages 3-4), professor at the University of Louvain in Belgium, and consultant for the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences in Rome, does not share the same views as Migue. In his book, "La face cachée de l'ONU" (The hidden face of the UN), he mentions, for example, the result of the researches on the value of the family, made by Gary Becker, winner of the 1992 Nobel prize in economics, and leader of the Chicago school.

"In his researches, Gary Becker noticed that national accounts did not take into account parental activity. He therefore began to measure and calculate it in a precise way. Above all, he reached the conclusion that the family is the primordial link where human capital is formed. He showed that human capital represents today over 80 per çent of the wealth of a modern nation, and that physical capital (industrial plants, natural resources) represent less than 20 per cent.

"The prosperity of nations obviously depends on other factors: the government system, its competence, its honesty, the economic system, etc. However, the most important factor is the family. It is there that the child is first awaken to the human qualities that will be later highly appreciated in society in general, and in the economic and political life in particular: the sense of initiative, punctuality, order, solidarity, etc.

"Moreover, Gary Becker has been curious enough to measure the contribution of the housewives to the formation of human capital. It is the mothers who stay home who contribute the most to feeding, looking after, forming, teaching children; they do the cooking, laundry, sewing, cleaning; they reconciliate, teach how to save money, help their children in their studies, make them sensitive to what is good and beautiful, and guide them in their leisure. Becker thus calculated that at least 30 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of a nation comes from the work of the mothers who stay at home, a contribution that is completely ignored today in official national statistics.

"It would be a good thing to complete this research by calculating the contribution of the fathers in the formation of their children, and therefore of human capital. What emerges from these studies is that the family is a good of fundamental importance.

Protect the family

"To conclude, the States must protect the family against programs of a totalitarian nature that the United Nations wants to impose, and of which the objective is the destruction of the family institution. Moreover, public authorities must review the national laws that weaken families. Public authorities must recognize parental activity since, by helping their children, parents help society as well. Gary Becker also notices that Catholic schools perform better than other schools. The reason for this performance is twofold: in Catholic families, parents put pressure on their children, and they also put pressure on the schools attended by their children.

"The least the State could do is offer women the conditions for a real free choice between a full-time commitment with their families, and professional commitment, either full time or part time, Common sense also requires that the State offers parents the possibility of freely choosing the schools their children will attend. It will be in the interest of society and that of the family as well.

"These studies strongly increase the standing of the family institution. It comes from the fact that family is the key of the well-being and happiness that the common good of the society of the future needs. However, with the present fall in the birth rate, one risks a shortage of human capital that is formed in the family. Public authorities should therefore promote the family not only because it is a good for those who make it up, but also because it is a good for the political and economic community. In the field of family policy, the duty of the State corresponds with its own sovereign interests.

"These same studies show that it is in the family that strong, free, autonomous characters are formed, who are capable of personal judgment. These people can resist totalitarianism...

"Like every totalitarianism, that of the UN dreams of controlling the number and the 'quality' of men and women. It is an actual war: one does not wait for men to become adults to kill them; one kills them in the wombs of their mothers, or one prevents their conception." (End of Msgr. Schooyans'remarks.)

The work of mothers outside the home, advocated by the Marxists, favours this program of the UN.

The money spent by the Government for day-care centers should be given directly to the mothers at home.

Yes, it is both logical and laudable, and even necessary, to call for a $12,000 allowance to the mothers who stay at home.