271–280 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It sounds more like the author wants "elites" to preach what they practice.
They largely do? Divorce rates are much higher among people with lower educational attainment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A large supply of men who DGAF and don't have much holding them down is how you get really serious social instability. They might not be beating their wives but let it roll unchecked for 20yr and it gets bad.
It's not about "dont give a fuck". This is about intergenerational poverty, and the costs that we all will have to pay because the elites decided to destroy social mobility for the poverty-stricken classes. When you are born and live in poverty, hold jobs that amount to minimum wage or tiny bits above it, have no way to *see* a future of any sort of success; happiness, alcohol, drugs, and sex are the primary forms of…
Maybe it's wrong and I'd love to know if that's the case but from personal experience the only way I've seen out of poverty is interest in an in demand field leading to the building and maintenance of marketable skills that allow you to earn a living sufficient to attain economic escape velocity. That seems to me to be a whole lot do with luck at the ground floor. And fiscal and social policy can be as much of a burden as it is a boon all the way along the pipeline.
That said, that escape velocity was directly mediated by both the tax burden of the jurisdiction coupled with the economic opportunities of the jurisdiction and at the end of the day it meant the correct choice was to leave for greener pastures, both lowering the necessary target for escape velocity as well as reducing economic drag getting there.
In the meantime all those kids I knew back in the old neighbourhood are still there, mostly on subsistence handouts, firmly in poverty, and show no signs of that changing.
>For example, there are many studies on identical twins separated at birth who are adopted by different families.
How the hell are there 'many' studies on this? I'd think this Prince and the Pauper scenario would be so fantastic, that there'd be no more than a dozen cases, owing to the extreme rarity of circumstances which all need to happen for this sensational scenario to come about.
Or do psychiatrists make sure somehow that identical twins in orphanages are adopted with people from different socioeconomic strata?
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Men who DGAF aren't the same as "incels". You and GP aren't at odds with one another. And yes, it is somewhat ironic society is making the exact same mistakes it has before: forgetting how destructive a large population of uninterested young men is towards society, without ever having to be violent.
Could you say more about this? What historical events are you referring to? I consider myself a disaffected male, and am curious to understand my situation from a historical perspective.
This is an important read, especially this part. > This highly educated and affluent person prioritized stability for her own children. But refused to publicly endorse this value so that less fortunate children could also benefit from family stability. I’m from a rigidly socially conservative immigrant family that professes fashionably liberal values in public—imposing a double standard between “us” and “Americans.”…
> America so thoroughly that the head of the “conservative” party is a three-times-divorced man of little character. I think that’s an interesting point. The political window has shifted further and further left in recent years. The fact is he’s not the head of the conservative moment, he’s the head of the Republican Party. There are differing factions and he promised something most in the party could support. For ex…
Please provide actual policy examples. I don't mean like when he put on a hard hat and pretended to dig coal with an imaginary shovel while on stage, I mean actual tangible policy proposals that would have improved the lives of working folks. Tariffs were very likely a net negative. Tax giveaways to build domestic factories almost never resulted in actual factories being built or jobs being created. I can't think of anything else.
This is an important read, especially this part. > This highly educated and affluent person prioritized stability for her own children. But refused to publicly endorse this value so that less fortunate children could also benefit from family stability. I’m from a rigidly socially conservative immigrant family that professes fashionably liberal values in public—imposing a double standard between “us” and “Americans.”…
You seem to be attributing the cause of this to 'Telling men and boys it's cool and fine to divorce' and not attributing to say... declining material and social capitol in the lower four quintiles of wealth that have created pressure that exacerbates marriage instability and numerous other social ills.
Also, divorce sucks when kids are involved, I don't think anyone on earth, left or right, would dispute that.
> Creating a culture where men can attain dignity and social respect **
We do in fact need a culture where it is possible for people to attain human dignity. I don't think that the path to gaining this needs to be a rigid and proscriptive 'return to tradition'.
For example, with the advent of no-fault divorce, divorces went up, but female suicide rates dropped by 20%. It wasn't all streamers and light when the 'guard rails' were on.
And speaking of America specifically, dignity and respect were not equi-distributed if you were a simply a 'married man' in decades past. It was quite a bit stricter: white, middle class or higher, married men were the ones afforded government support and social protection.
> My family’s rigid expectations have been such a blessing.
I won't dwell on this, but not every (or even most) children benefit from this approach to parenting. Extreme rigidity, in fact, is more associated with negative long-term outcomes.
Finally, historically speaking, decrying the next generation as depraved, lost, and needing traditional discipline has been something the older generations have done since at least the invention of writing (across all cultures too!). Yet I'm still continually shocked that this argument continues to be unironically employed century after century.
It’s interesting to read these (plausible, far from absurd) analyses from the Anglosphere when we have an alternative to compare, to whit the northern European democracies where marriage is in steep decline across all social classes yet the societies are more successful (at least if your metrics are things like poverty rates, lifetimes, nutrition, stress, etc).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Schools in the US are funded by property tax. It makes no sense to do that unless the goal is to keep everyone in their place and prevent kids born into poorer areas from competing on equal footing with the children of wealthy people.
Schools in poor areas have higher funding than schools in rich areas, the property tax funding is only one part of where schools get their money from. See this report for example: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs95/web/95300.asp (it's a bit old but nothing substantive has changed).
"How do education expenditures vary with alternative district and community measures? Students in districts enrolling the lowest percentages of students in poverty and the lowest percentages of students in need of special education services received the highest expenditures."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do they? I can see the third bullet in practice, although I think it’s more of a fix than a cause for single-parent homes. On the other hand, my social circle is highly educated and well-off and I’m not sure I know a single person who would agree with the first bullet. The second point I’m less clear on myself: is there evidence that children of lesbian couples are somehow worse off?
The third bullet here is basic economics. When you create demand for a product by subsidizing it, people will create supply. Practically, these subsidies mean that poorer women who could marry the father of their children will often choose not to because they are getting money from the government that exceeds what the man can bring in. It is a little bit like the effect of a very high minimum wage: it helps a certain…