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

A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

pewresearch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 226 posts

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#91

Post by _2z1p »

renewiltord wrote: post #68
tremon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what you're saying is that people marry for economic reasons rather than romantic? And when the romantic partnership fails, should people stay together in the economic partnership because they can't afford to split up? That's effectively what we've been doing for the past few decades. And the result is as shown in TFA: a generation of adults who will avoid marriage like the plague, because they've seen how toxic…

Or alternatively, economic conditions are so much better than before that those who would marry for that no longer need to.

How are economic conditions better now than they were a decade or two ago?

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#92

Post by FooBarBizBazz »

presidentender wrote: post #21
FooBarBizBazz wrote: post #9

In beehives, the drones -- correction, workers -- are sterile. This maximizes returns on capital at quarter and even decade timescales.

The workers are sterile. Sterile drones would be counterproductive.

Thanks for the correction.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#93

Post by hospitalJail »

wonderwonder wrote: post #84
hospitalJail wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least everything you mentioned was completely optional and there are tons of public places to meet people. Outdoor malls, hobbies, gym, parties, libraries, book stores, parks, heck ask chatgpt. F society who says you can't talk to strangers, those are losers. Say Hi, ask about jobs/hobbies, if they arent interested, you can tell from body language. Tell them it was nice talking to them and leave. They won't rememb…

Sure there are plenty of public places, church [I'm not religious] etc. though ensured you had something in common. Imagine being the attractive girl at the gym trying to work out and every time you go, 4 dudes come up and hit on you, day after day after day. Or the married woman that doesn't wear a ring just trying to grocery shop for her family and cant get down isle without being hit on. Parties and bars sure, I g…

Doesnt matter if they are attractive or just trying to grocery shop. You can still talk to people.

I was at a wedding a few weeks ago, specifically looking for donors or entrepreneurial minded people. When I found out that a dude worked at Amazon Warehouse, I didn't turn around and walk away, I wrapped up the conversation and--- Oh my gosh this guy has a super cool hobby with a ton of skill. I got his phone number because this person and I might benefit from connecting later. Who knows.

But more than half the conversations will flop, who cares. You and they lost a few minutes of life communicating, how terrible! Call it practicing social skills if you need to.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#94

Post by lotsofpulp »

drumhead wrote: post #60
dougmwne wrote: post #6

The trend of less education means less marriage is interesting. I think that tells me the root cause is that 25% of 40 year olds are not financially attractive mates. I think this speaks to a broader trend of men not being able to meet the traditional expectations of the breadwinner in an increasingly precarious economy.

Men dont really care about the income of their partner, they're more interested in physical attributes. Maybe women have set much higher standards and the majority of men dont meet those standards. Maybe men just dont want to get married?

Source?

I can envision a decent proportion of men, at least myself and a few I know, who would find it preferable to have a redundant source of income in the household.

Even if a woman ends up becoming a non income earning partner temporarily or permanently, having one who is capable of earning more can be a desirable trait for multiple reasons.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#95

Post by _2z1p »

I think a lot of men are starting to do the cost benefit analysis of marriage.

If everything goes well you can buy a lovely house in the suburbs, raise 2.5 kids, grow old together with your wife and live happily ever after.

If it goes wrong she takes your kids and half your assets immediately, followed by several years of child support and possibly alimony.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#96

Post by xethos »

segmondy wrote: post #42
dougmwne wrote: post #6

The trend of less education means less marriage is interesting. I think that tells me the root cause is that 25% of 40 year olds are not financially attractive mates. I think this speaks to a broader trend of men not being able to meet the traditional expectations of the breadwinner in an increasingly precarious economy.

less education? the US has never been more educated.

Yeah, the gender that values education in a mate has never before, on average, attained higher levels of education. But women value education in men, and men have fallen behind.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#97

Post by amanaplanacanal »

talldatethrow wrote: post #33
InCityDreams wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>25% of 40 year olds are not financially attractive mates. Is this a peculiarity of the US? Income was never an issue when i got the hots for someone...especially when things turned into long-term commitment. In fact, quite the opposite.

You're probably a man. Women care a lot about income.

In my experience, women care a lot about income when their partners can’t keep a job and they are the only ones working. I’ve seen relationships end over that. But I’m guessing that’s not what you mean.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#98

Post by lotsofpulp »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #90
wonderwonder wrote: post #75

My take is that with the rise of social media and online lives, people have things to fill their time with that are a placebo for real relationships. They work, get home and then doom scroll or play games for 4 hours and go to bed. This eats into the time people used to spend socializing and meeting people in real life. The reduction in religion further eats into this as people would socialize at church, temple, etc.…

Have a look at Israel with their incredibly high fertility rate among secular population. They have the same access to social media, games etc. What they also have is a set of family friendly policies, which make it easier for couples to plan their life and their careers. Culture and lifestyle also matters, of course. It will be interesting to see how living in densely populated urban area vs typical American suburbi…

Secular Israeli fertility rate does not seem materially higher.

https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2022/08/18/...

https://archive.is/8FAsi/4ca20b298a776c0318c24337c475fa4dce0...

https://www.taubcenter.org.il/en/research/israels-exceptiona...

>Though Haredim are just 13% of the population, their offspring make up 19% of Israeli children under the age of 14, and 24% of those under the age of four.

>As can be seen, secular Jews are roughly at 2 children per woman and "religious" (but not Haredi) are at 4. Once again, other OECD countries are roughly between 1.0 and 1.7 and falling. And they, too, have a share of religious traditionalists.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#99

Post by bequanna »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #94
drumhead wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Men dont really care about the income of their partner, they're more interested in physical attributes. Maybe women have set much higher standards and the majority of men dont meet those standards. Maybe men just dont want to get married?

Source? I can envision a decent proportion of men, at least myself and a few I know, who would find it preferable to have a redundant source of income in the household. Even if a woman ends up becoming a non income earning partner temporarily or permanently, having one who is capable of earning more can be a desirable trait for multiple reasons.

Mobile so don’t have a source handy, but women typically seek to marry at or slightly above the economic class they were raised in. For men, there is no identified preference like this.

Attributes like physical attractiveness and traditional positive feminine qualities are generally what men list as what they seek.

Of course, we all know of exceptions but the general patterns of what men/women look for in a partner is quite well known at this point.

Re: A record-high share of 40-year-olds in the U.S. have never been married

#100

Post by herval11 »

_2z1p wrote: post #95

I think a lot of men are starting to do the cost benefit analysis of marriage. If everything goes well you can buy a lovely house in the suburbs, raise 2.5 kids, grow old together with your wife and live happily ever after. If it goes wrong she takes your kids and half your assets immediately, followed by several years of child support and possibly alimony.

[dead]
Post reply on HN