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

Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 431 posts

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#91

Post by bryanlarsen »

Mayzie wrote: post #32
christophilus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure everything stems from this. Marriage was not just for the wealthy and nobles in the Middle Ages, or in the 1800s or in subsaharan Africa, etc. If it’s a matter of relative wealth disparity, there have been plenty of eras (probably the majority of recorded human history) in which the kings and nobles had a similar wealth gap to their poorest married subjects as we see today between the 1% and the 99%. I’m…

You can’t survive or support a family with a single income these days.. It’s required for both partners to work.

That's an argument that should be increasing the number of dual parent households. If a family could be supported on a single income, then abandoning your family would have fewer consequences and thus seemingly more likely.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#92

Post by nec4b »

lapcat wrote: post #61
christophilus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure everything stems from this. Marriage was not just for the wealthy and nobles in the Middle Ages, or in the 1800s or in subsaharan Africa, etc. If it’s a matter of relative wealth disparity, there have been plenty of eras (probably the majority of recorded human history) in which the kings and nobles had a similar wealth gap to their poorest married subjects as we see today between the 1% and the 99%. I’m…

> I’m not defending wealth disparity; simply suggesting there’s likely another cause for the marriage-rate collapse. In the past that you're talking about, women were not allowed to be independent, i.e., own property or obtain jobs that could support a family. So women had little choice but to get married. As long as non-marriage is a realistic choice for women, the marriage rates will never be as high as they were w…

>> In the past that you're talking about, women were not allowed to be independent, i.e., own property or obtain jobs that could support a family.

That is maybe half true or not true at all. Women could own property and could be somewhat independent. Queen Elisabeth owned a whole country in the 16th century. In general not only women but men as well had a duty to their families and had to do what their parents demanded of them. And marriage was high on the list of things parents expected from their children whether they were male or female.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#93

Post by em-bee »

threeseed wrote: post #27
bloopernova wrote: post #5

America is moving the other way because all the wealth and power has been sucked up by the 0.1% and a large majority are too tired, stressed, and poor. Everything stems from this. Too much wealth tied up in the health insurance scam to switch to single payer, so people stay bound to their employment, and they can't afford time off or visits to the doctor because nothing is completely covered anymore. Too much wealth…

> Everything stems from this. Almost everything. One issue is that although most Western countries have Paid Parental Leave (except for US) pregnancy still puts women at a career disadvantage. Because companies can sometimes find out that either (a) the person's role was unnecessary or (b) their replacement is better. And so especially for women in senior positions it's just not worth the risk. Another is around the…

so effectively that means that children themselves are a career disadvantage, which is a problem in itself that needs to be addressed because we can't sustain a society where having children is a negative.

the equality part of the issue could be addressed with men getting equal parental leave, but it doesn't solve the actual problem.

we really need to support parenting more, deemphasize the importance of career and emphasize the importance of having children.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#94

Post by BaculumMeumEst »

tetromino_ wrote: post #88
BaculumMeumEst wrote: post #13

"Kearney says she wants to grab the attention of both conservatives who say they care about children's well-being and progressives reluctant to talk about family structures, because the link between single parenting, inequality and mobility in America is too strong to deny." She doesn't need to grab the attention of conservatives because her findings already support their pre-existing beliefs, like it says earlier in…

I suspect her findings that the gender of the married parents is irrelevant, the thing that matters is whether or not they are married is the part that conservatives are unwilling to accept.

that is a good point

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#95

Post by bequanna »

2devnull wrote: post #77
bequanna wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You absolutely can. Our family does and many of my friends do. They aren’t all wealthy people. It isn’t always a choice, but often it is. Many people can live on one income but choose a lifestyle that requires two.

Do you live in an area with high international demand for housing? Not all of the US is a hot spot for high paid immigrants, yet. Displacement is a real thing. Not everyone can change states or nations to make the finances work out.

Luckily in the US you can choose to live wherever you want. If you’re priced out of a neighborhood, you can choose to live somewhere else.

You can also choose how many and why type of cars to have, what food to eat, how much to spend on vacations, etc.

Hell, you can even choose where and what you do for work! What a country!

Many people will choose higher spending power with two incomes rather than take a step down to live on one.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#96

Post by black6 »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #74
DonaldTruck wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Few have the combination of intellectual integrity and social obliviousness to publicly ignore that these socioeconomic factors likely have common causes among them, including lower intelligence, poorer impulse control, tendency towards violence and aggression, lower empathy, etc. OK, assuming for a moment these are true. What solutions do you offer? Because if this is the conclusion, i.e. the fault is inherent to…

All those are symptoms of chronic vitamin D deficiency. High melanin content associated with adaptation to the higher year-round insolation at lower latitudes also inhibits the natural production of vitamin D in the body. Living at higher latitudes, wearing more clothing due to the weather (further limiting sun exposure), and a modern lifestyle largely spent indoors all exacerbate the underlying problem.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#97

Post by 2devnull »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #49
unnamed76ri wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything does not stem from wealth inequality. Almost-everything wrong in US culture stems from selfishness. Which would include things you talked about. But it also includes people making selfish choices that bring about the end of their marriages (affairs, career, addictions).

? So the wealth inequality right? How do you think the wealthy got wealthy without selfishness? You seem to be implying that it isn't the inequality, but that all those poor people should stop being selfish. If only those poor people would stop being selfish, the wealth inequality wouldn't be a problem. LOL.

“How do you think the wealthy got wealthy”

Most inherit it. Then lose it. That’s the typical path of wealth. Rarely, it’s amassed by someone who starts with little. Here these people, the ones who create rather than squander wealth, are called “selfish” often by the wealth squanderers, the children of abundance.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#98

Post by WillAdams »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #83
WillAdams wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who are curious about this, I would recommend that you graph violent crimes and the prevalence of unwed mothers, and then re-do the graph for each race which one is interested in.

Sure, but what's the way out? What is the solution for both the white and blac population? We can just accept the data as they are or, as a society, try to do something that improves the situation. In this case, it would make sense to ask why black fathers are much less interested in being a father than their white counterparts. Is it culture? Is it social issues? Once we discover the cause, we can try to do somethin…

For research on that, turn to your car radio and tune it to any rap or hip-hop station.

Re: Children of married parents do better, but America is moving the other way

#100

Post by hirundo »

wenebego wrote: post #84
hirundo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wealth follows a Pareto distribution, and there are many Pareto distributions of things that are not caused by selfishness. https://www.thelangelfirm.com/debt-collection-defense-blog/2... If selfishness isn't a good general explanation for Pareto distributions, is there a reason that it's particularly explanatory for wealth distribution?

They are choosing to further enrich themselves past what any single person can consume, instead of helping those around them, the definition of selfishness.

You could get the same distribution if everyone is assigned a random amount of selfishness regardless of wealth, but some people are better at achieving their selfish goals than others, or just luckier. How could someone know that the result is primarily due to non-uniform selfishness?

You could measure selfishness in small experimental scenarios and try to correlate it with the wealth of the subjects. Does that evidence exist?

Post reply on HN