That’s the upshot of this Washington Post piece.

The story segues quickly into the expenses of child care, which is just part of the equation. The other part comes later: Jobs with flexibility to tend for kids are essential. (If that weren’t the case, I might still be at USA TODAY.)

The ideal solution: Employ more people and have them work fewer hours. What sense does it make to have parents working 60-hour weeks while others are unemployed?

Then if you have health care and child care that fills any gaps, you have a productive, family-friendly society.

Too logical?