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

Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 209 posts

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#121

Post by jb1991 »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #71
jb1991 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s unfortunate. And it’s a uniquely American mindset. Long-term relationships in Europe for example do not require marriage in the same way that Americans do. People get married in the states because of the law, people get married in other countries because they just want to get married for emotional or spiritual reasons.

> People get married in the states because of the law That's at least vastly overstated, and probably just false. I'm an American living in a major urban center and I don't think I know anybody for whom the decision to get married was influenced by legal considerations to any significant degree.

Tax benefits. Married, filing jointly. Happens a lot, including to people within my family.

Also, health insurance. Another thing Americans have yet to learn from Europe. In the states, sometimes you have to get married just to get health insurance. It’s kind of ridiculous.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#122

Post by WarOnPrivacy » 

    This article addresses how the 2015 SCotUS decision affected marriage stats. The factors in play then changed how I thought about marriage.
My alignment in early 2010's was staunchly RW Christian. The 2015 changes in marriage law had me reconsider what marriage was historically. I came to some conclusions (that I mostly still agree with).

My 'tribe' attached money and other benefits to marriage. This fundamentally reframed marriage in secular ways; it diminished religions' claims on it.

We Christians had been solidly in charge of marriage and for the previous 80 years divorced had steadily climbed. I felt we should own that; we should stop blaming societal factors - because we were also part of society.

Prior to the 2015 SC decision on marriage, I was a strong proponent of civil unions. I felt CUs were a path to decoupling marriage from secular benefits (tax breaks, spousal privilege). However, hard liners held sway and they were having none of it.

After 2015 I openly hoped that gay marriages gained a better track record than 'traditional marriages'. I felt there was a lot we Christians could do to be better spouses - in ways that both partners would want to stay married. I hoped gay couples would set examples for us. This was a simplistic fantasy on my part, pure immaturity.

ftr: I presently identify as Recovering Conservative. Where I have religious leanings, they run counter to the modern right. I sometimes use more nuanced pronouns.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#123

Post by ultrasaurus »

toshinoriyagi wrote: post #18
georgeburdell wrote: post #4

I do want to point out that never-married by looking at legal paperwork is a blunt instrument. There are reasons, especially for dual high earners, to not get a marriage license. Examples of tax-related things that don’t double when married; -Income tax brackets above about $200k -SALT cap -Mortgage interest deduction -HSA contributions (if have children) -Dependent care FSA contributions

Isn't this all solved by just filing separately, not jointly?

There are places in the tax code where Single != Married Filing Separately.

One pertinent example is that Washington State's capital gains tax applies after $270k per single person, per married couple filing jointly OR split in half for married filing separately. Which could be a theoretical $18.9k/year difference in taxes.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#124

Post by jb1991 »

Aurornis wrote: post #76
jb1991 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s unfortunate. And it’s a uniquely American mindset. Long-term relationships in Europe for example do not require marriage in the same way that Americans do. People get married in the states because of the law, people get married in other countries because they just want to get married for emotional or spiritual reasons.

I cannot think of anyone here in the United States who got married for legal benefits, other than some couples working on citizenship issues for one partner without citizenship. I think your Americans-vs-Europeans argument is greatly exaggerated if not outright false.

I just did a search of all the different legal benefits, and financial benefits, you get in the United States if you’re married. It’s quite a vast list.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#125

Post by jb1991 »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #71
jb1991 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s unfortunate. And it’s a uniquely American mindset. Long-term relationships in Europe for example do not require marriage in the same way that Americans do. People get married in the states because of the law, people get married in other countries because they just want to get married for emotional or spiritual reasons.

> People get married in the states because of the law That's at least vastly overstated, and probably just false. I'm an American living in a major urban center and I don't think I know anybody for whom the decision to get married was influenced by legal considerations to any significant degree.

Just google all of the legal and financial benefits that you get in the United States when you get married.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#126

Post by graemep »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #119
graemep wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is US law on this and what are the "rigid assumptions" people find troublesome. In the UK the main effect of marriage is that it protects the lower earning partner if the relationship breaks down - most often (even now!) this is a woman who gives up work/takes a break from work to bring up kids. I come across a good many single mothers (mostly online because of an FB group I admin) who would have been MUCH bette…

There is minimal US law on this. States have their own laws individually which vary considerably. The context here has nothing to do with children and these people commonly don’t have any. Legal jurisdiction can be quite fluid, which just adds to the complexity. A major motivating factor is that marriage can create myriad ruinous financial entanglements and eliminate most possibilities for recourse. Especially in aff…

I do not really understand that. Why would people have to start again from zero? What sort of "forced loss of agency" happens? Are there laws allowing people to stop their spouse from running an existing business?

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#127

Post by euroderf »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #97
TriangleEdge wrote: post #54

I live in Seattle now, am married, and have an infant. I find Seattle not friendly towards families at all. The going rate for a daycare here is 3.5k per month for an infant. My wife and I are both ~7%ers? individually and we can barely afford our home (a tall skinny townhouse with no yard) and the cost of 1 baby. Having a family is hard here... Also, I don't find Seattle safe for infants and toddlers, or anybody rea…

The ~$21/hr minimum wage, 1:2 staffing ratio, etc required by law in Seattle puts a very high floor on the cheapest possible daycare. Just being a bare minimum legal daycare business has a cost floor of at least $2k/month per infant.

1:2 adults:kids ? That's crazy.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#128

Post by jandrewrogers »

jb1991 wrote: post #120
Aurornis wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot think of anyone here in the United States who got married for legal benefits, other than some couples working on citizenship issues for one partner without citizenship. I think your Americans-vs-Europeans argument is greatly exaggerated if not outright false.

Married filing jointly, tax benefits. My sibling did it. Also, health insurance. Another thing Americans have yet to learn from Europe. In the states, sometimes you have to get married just to get health insurance. It’s kind of ridiculous.

FWIW, it has become increasingly common in the US (or at least the parts I’ve lived in) to allow adding an informal domestic partner to your health insurance, no marriage required. IIRC, there is a tax quirk if you do it but I haven’t done it in many years.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#129

Post by siffl »

pfdietz wrote: post #50
inglor_cz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See also "The Global Collapse of Coupling and Fertility" https://www.ggd.world/p/the-global-collapse-of-coupling-and I wonder if the ultimate cost (in lives never born) of technologies like smartphones and Tinder will be. If a significant part of the entire youth cohort never learns to interact with the other sex in the real world, we might be looking at a pandemics of loneliness - and at subsequent global birth defi…

I've come to a conclusion that the solution may be somewhat radical. If coupling is reduced, it should become the norm for women to have and raise children alone, or at least without a male partner. This increases the burden on women, so at the same time the number of children they must support would have to decrease. This could be achieved technologically, by filtering sperm to remove Y chromosome carrying gametes.…

Perhaps even more interesting in the near-future is the prospect of creating sperm, through technological means, from female cells.

The research to do this seems to be close to succeeding - see e.g. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11601-bone-stem-cells...

When researchers perfect this technique for humans, which they almost certainly will eventually, there will be no need for men at all. Women will be able to obtain lab-grown sperm from other women, and use this for fertilization.

All of these female-originating sperms will be X-chromosomed, and so in the much longer term we will see the eradication of the Y chromosome - and all the problems that arise from it.

Re: Half the men in Seattle are never-married singles, census data shows

#130

Post by evantbyrne »

mattgreenrocks wrote: post #64
evantbyrne wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a natural human tendency to shift blame to external boogeymen, but to speak frankly, I think there's something deeper going on with the loneliness epidemic than nudey videos on the internet. A seemingly large chunk of both sexes have major personality issues that prevent them from getting along with each other.

> A large chunk of both sexes have major personality issues that prevent them from getting along with one another This sounds like the inverse of the white, “every generation thinks they invented sex.” I say that because I doubt people have changed that much.

Hah yeah I don't necessarily believe it's all a generational thing, because I see it in the older folks as well. And every generation has had its masculinity grifters. This one is obsessed with porn. The biggest generational differences I've noticed are that women seem to need men less, people are losing shape at earlier ages, and a lot of people have become very outspoken about distrusting members of the other sex. Just from those factors I think it would be natural to see increased competition for the people who have everything together.
Post reply on HN