IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Parasitic-Industries Analysis and Arguments for a Living Wage for Women in the Early Twentieth-Century United States

Listed author(s):
  • Marilyn Power
Registered author(s):

    This paper examines arguments by activists and economists surrounding attempts to establish minimum wages for women in the United States in the Progressive Era. In particular, the paper focuses on analyses based on Beatrice and SidneyWebbs' argument that industries paying less than a living wage were "parasitic" on the society, a net drain on macro-efficiency. This analysis, widely accepted among economists of the time, viewed women as particularly vulnerable workers facing labor markets that were institutionally constructed and predatory. Unequal gender roles, employer power, and the absence of collective bargaining could all result in wages that were socially unacceptable as well as economically nonoptimal. These debates offer insights for modern feminist wage theories, and for current living wage campaigns.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Feminist Economics.

    Volume (Year): 5 (1999)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 61-78

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:5:y:1999:i:1:p:61-78
    DOI: 10.1080/135457099338157
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Duncan Ironmonger, 1996. "Counting outputs, capital inputs and caring labor: Estimating gross household product," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(3), pages 37-64.
    2. Kathleen Cloud & Nancy Garrett, 1997. "A Modest Proposal for Inclusion of Women's Household Human Capital Production in Analysis of Structural Transformation," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 151-177.
    3. Beneria, Lourdes, 1992. "Accounting for women's work: the progress of two decades," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 20(11), pages 1547-1560, November.
    4. Dorothy W. Douglas, 1920. "The Cost of Living for Working Women: A Criticism of Current Theories," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 225-259.
    5. Diana Strassmann, 1993. "The Stories of Economics and the Power of the Storyteller," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 147-165, Spring.
    6. F. W. Taussig, 1916. "Minimum Wages for Women," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 411-442.
    7. Deborah Figart, 1997. "Gender as More Than a Dummy Variable: Feminist Approaches to Discrimination," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(1), pages 1-32.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:5:y:1999:i:1:p:61-78. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.