Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

econlog.econlib.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 119 posts

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#71

Post by cm2187 »

DonHopkins wrote: post #59
dasil003 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's valuable to have multiple lenses. One thing I feel has increased dramatically over the last few decades is that if you use the wrong lens when speaking the wrong audience then a witch hunt ensues. Something about the internet has enabled tribalism without personal liability, which is a powder keg of situation that leads to the sort of political outcomes we are currently seeing.

There's no value in looking through what you believe is a "current hysterical liberal lens", when it actually makes you act hysterically dramatic and reinforces your inaccurate prejudices against liberals. cm2187: Can you provide some actual proof that liberals believe that anyone who thinks or suggests otherwise than what you're dramatically parodying should be silenced? Or are you just being as hysterical as you ac…

It sounds dramatically parodying but the reality is that it is pretty much the liberal line for the gender pay gap. As the article suggests there might be many explanations for the married man pay gap that may not involve discrimination. However for the gender gap most large companies have made up their mind. And where I work I am being asked at the end of the year in my appraisal, what have I done to reduce this discrimination. That pretty much qualifies as forced thinking in my book. Agree or do not get paid or promoted.

This thinking only looks outrageaous if you replace "gender" by "married man".

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#72

Post by clarkmoody »

acchow wrote: post #2

Enjoyed the analysis. I wonder if our educational system will ever reach the point where the layperson doesn't immediately think "I should get married to increase my income". Tho many people seem to believe that moving to the Bay Area will increase their earnings... post hoc ergo propter hoc.

"Children raised in families that own a home reach higher levels of achievement"

"Let's promote home ownership..."

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#73

Post by svv »

Mz wrote: post #60

They missed the obvious: Married men are more productive because they have a woman at home doing the "women's work." This both raises their quality of life AND frees up both time and energy to put into their job instead of into self-maintenance. I have seen this from both sides of the equation: I was a full time wife and mom for a lot of years. Then, I got divorced. I told my sons I would rather they take over the "w…

This falls under the Explanation #2: Human capital. By the way, the post does not mention whether the study controlled for wives staying at home.

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#74

Post by civilian »

anqh4 wrote: post #30
civilian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Having a housewife leaves the man with more free time to work. That's hypothesis 2 of the three that they looked at, that marriage "makes a man a more productive worker". There is a need for a study. What if employers are simply assuming that married men are better workers (hypothesis 3), but married men aren't actually better workers? Than as an unmarried man, I'm getting discriminated against, and marital stat…

I forgot 3, then: 3. Employers assume married men, especially if they have children, are hard workers and responsible

I'm glad you're being complete :)

But, can you see why it'd be good to study this? Which one of the three is it? Or if it a mix, and what is the mix?

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#75

Post by Mz »

svv wrote: post #73
Mz wrote: post #60

They missed the obvious: Married men are more productive because they have a woman at home doing the "women's work." This both raises their quality of life AND frees up both time and energy to put into their job instead of into self-maintenance. I have seen this from both sides of the equation: I was a full time wife and mom for a lot of years. Then, I got divorced. I told my sons I would rather they take over the "w…

This falls under the Explanation #2: Human capital. By the way, the post does not mention whether the study controlled for wives staying at home.

Except for the detail that the article entirely credits the man with being more productive and in no way whatsoever suggests that his wife's work in any way whatsoever contributes to it:

Maybe marriage makes men work more hours; maybe it makes them work harder per hour; maybe it makes them control their tempers better; maybe all of these and more.

It gives zero credit to the wife somehow genuinely enhancing his life by cooking, cleaning, having sex with him, etc. It just suggests that married men choose to be more virtuous. Done.

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#76

Post by cm2187 »

sctb wrote: post #66
cm2187 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha ha. ...or downvoted!

Please stop violating the guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

No I think in this case my comment was in the line as it was about silencing diverging opinions which I think the downvoting illustrates. I wouldn't dare violating the guideline but your fervent vigilance is much appreciated!

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#77

Post by Falling3 »

freeflight wrote: post #62
Falling3 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the part of it that appears classist?

The part where people are treated differently based on their personal procreation/relationship choices? While not strictly classist, it's at very least discriminatory. Some people just don't want to produce offspring or commit to a traditional marriage for a number of different reasons, some of these even include focusing on work/business. Why should these people "earn" less than people who went with the cookie cutte…

Discriminatory sure. I'm not arguing it's right, but I'm just not seeing anything classist about it.

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#78

Post by ianai »

linkregister wrote: post #55
ianai wrote: post #3

They routinely give the men with children/wives the better hours, pay, and whatever else at my work. They just changed several peoples' schedules so that my peer could have Saturdays off with his kid. Contrast that with myself: I have requested the same shift and been denied. I don't have kids. I also have better reasons to be on that shift. In my anecdotal experience, it appears classist. I would file that under 'hu…

I think this might actually be a leverage / tolerance question. Your employer knows that your peer would probably not be able to tolerate too much time away from children and are a higher risk of leaving if he were not able to spend that time with his child. Where unless you were to adopt a lifestyle with hard time requirements (mandatory night & weekend religious ceremonies), your employer knows you are less likely…

No doubt there are many factors involved. Clearly from my point of view it feels wrong and from other points of view it appears correct.

A more interesting question to me is this: Those hours would allow me to have a more socially adjusted life. I would have more opportunities to meet women with similar views and personalities to my own (outside of work). I would have more time to date during traditional hours, for instance. So which should it be? Should society always optimize for the families that exist or should it optimize (in circumstances left for debate elsewhere) at least some of the time toward the possibility of new families? I'm talking the difference between pure strategies and mixed strategies. Usually mixed strategies work out best for everyone involved over repeated games - and this is definitely a repeated game situation.

Re: What Is the Male Marriage Premium?

#79

Post by ianai »

Falling3 wrote: post #77
freeflight wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The part where people are treated differently based on their personal procreation/relationship choices? While not strictly classist, it's at very least discriminatory. Some people just don't want to produce offspring or commit to a traditional marriage for a number of different reasons, some of these even include focusing on work/business. Why should these people "earn" less than people who went with the cookie cutte…

Discriminatory sure. I'm not arguing it's right, but I'm just not seeing anything classist about it.

It's classist in that it denies the person seeking what the other person has the opportunity to progress. I would personally benefit from those hours in ways that include family forming. I'm not a member of the "family man" class and I'm being denied the opportunity to join it. My current work situation puts me in a very disadvantaged position for family forming. You, of course, have to take my word on much of this.
Post reply on HN