Working parents: would you rather have more time or more money?

Suppose that US politicians decide they want to address the needs of working families. They come up with two competing plans:

Plan 40/0: Raise wages & salaries so that a single semi-skilled worker working 40 hours a week can support a reasonable middle-class lifestyle (defined however you like), and various incentives or disincentives would discourage both parents from working. Most couples with children would have a working partner and a stay-at-home partner under this plan. Single parents would earn enough to pay for day care, but might need additional subsidies.

Plan 20/20: Raise wages so that 40 hours of work can support a family, as above, but the work week would lowered to 20 hours. Most couples would have two working partners, but they would usually be able to arrange their shifts so that one parent was home while the other worked. Single parents would either work two jobs to pay for day care, or network with each other to trade childcare, or have lifestyles that were more modest than “reasonable middle-class”.

I’m not concerned about how such plans would be implemented or whether either is “realistic”. I just want to know which outcome you would prefer.

If you don’t live in the US, I’d be interested in knowing how the competing demands of work and family are handled in your country.