Not so much sarcasm, as cynicism... I mean it, if the current employer-employee dynamic persists, either you need women to sacrifice their career, or pay someone to bear your children. Which you then have no time to raise, so you pay someone to do it for you. You can find a certain parallel with characters in novels who are children of rich people who are never home and thus the child is raised by the wet nurse&#x2F;maid&#x2F;etc. If you do the same at scale, it should be cost-effective and probably the only option.<p>Fortunately, I&#x27;m pretty sure we&#x27;ll run out of resources long before our greed for growth pushes us that far.<p>Edit: of course companies are emotionless. They aren&#x27;t people. You should view any company of more than about 200 people as a super-organism. Every actor in the company acts in their own best interest, while kept in check by the people on top. The emergent behaviour is one of calculated exploitation.