I'm all for stay-at-home moms, but the salary analysis needs to be realistic in order to be taken seriously. (The stay-at-home mom is not doing the work of a $600,000/year CEO during a portion of the day.)
I think it is part of the long time effort to have stay at home moms get socialist security money despite not paying money into the system.
I would argue that you are wrong. Raising a well adjusted, productive member of society is actually priceless.
How much does it cost society when at least one parent isn't home with their kids teaching them right from wrong? You cannot put a number on that cost!
I wouldn't want to make a bet on that one. I don't know any stay-at-home moms who get to work 9 to 5, then come home and put their feet up.
Neither is the $600,000/yr. CEO.