101–110 of 141 posts
Excellent explanation of why, despite the hollowed out middle class, we see a surge of developer housing marketed to those who wish to retain the pretense of class status.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Has it declined as much as we would expect, given the decrease in religiosity in the US over that time period? I've only found data going back to 1995,[0] which shows relatively flat numbers for the past 15 years or so. (And the amount of parents which are interested in their children attending private schools vs those who have access to and can afford them is an entirely different discussion.) [0] https://nces.ed.go…
> given the decrease in religiosity in the US over that time period? Has religiosity actually decreased? Christianity certainly has, maybe even all god-based religions, but the religion of formal education seems to have fully picked up the slack. There are a shocking number of people who believe that you will be stricken to the hell of flipping burgers at McDonalds if you don't praise the institution and attend colle…
This is fair* (and I expect many Christians would agree with you in generalities of "everyone worships something"); what I was getting at here was that (by the first numbers I found) those who regularly attend organized "god-based" worship has dropped by ~1/3 over the past 20 years or so, and so I would expect roughly a corresponding drop in attendance in parochial schools. If the drop is less than that,** that would seem to support the author's hypothesis.
> What were you hoping to add by mentioning this?
Along the same lines as the previous: even if more families aren't able to send their kids to private schools, but desire to do this, the could support two parts of his narrative: (1) decrease in social capital (of which he defines part as, to paraphrase, schools that people trust); and (2) that more essential parts of life (such as education, as opposed to television) are becoming rapidly more expensive.
(Not stating which of his points I agree with, but I think that "private school enrollment is declining" does not necessarily rebut the core of his arguments.)
* Though I think my meaning was clear
** Though of course this becomes more complicated when you look at figures for all private schools
They’ve got it better than I did at their age.
Maybe it’s worse elsewhere.
“The cheap and effective Catholic school system of old has largely collapsed due to the dearth of nuns“
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What factors? Why are they unlikely to come about again? How do we make them come about again? You realize that your comment reads like "well, actually things shouldn't be getting better over time" I, for one, completely disagree.
They burned non-renewable resources at an unsustainable pace, like nothing ever seen before in history, resources that took millions of years for the Earth to produce, gone in a century, to make themselves wealthy - among other things.
We now have renewable energy sources for both of these things spinning up faster than ever. It won't be all that long before we can generate a majority of our energy with clean power that doesn't require consuming any non-renewable resources.
No; much more important differences between then and now are the top marginal tax rates and the labor power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's look at those claims: "the vast majority of other children would belong to intact families" In 1975, the single motherhood rate was 15%. In 2015, it was 40%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_parents_in_the_United_S... "communities like their own," In 1970, the US was 83.5% non-Hispanic White. In 2020 it was 57.8%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_d... "and would speak English as a…
To clarify, I object that any of these things matter much for general outcomes. If the article had immediately supported these claims, maybe I'd be more accepting, but as is it appears I'm supposed to have taken it as a given.
However, I'll concede its juxtaposition with overall whiteness and Spanish language fluency as additional metrics of population-level success are highly suspect, even if we grant that being a white, English-first speaker may contribute significantly to an individual's success (for reasons which include the unsavory).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> given the decrease in religiosity in the US over that time period? Has religiosity actually decreased? Christianity certainly has, maybe even all god-based religions, but the religion of formal education seems to have fully picked up the slack. There are a shocking number of people who believe that you will be stricken to the hell of flipping burgers at McDonalds if you don't praise the institution and attend colle…
> Has religiosity actually decreased? This is fair* (and I expect many Christians would agree with you in generalities of "everyone worships something"); what I was getting at here was that (by the first numbers I found) those who regularly attend organized "god-based" worship has dropped by ~1/3 over the past 20 years or so, and so I would expect roughly a corresponding drop in attendance in parochial schools. If th…
Why's that? Around here the parochial schools are fuller than ever. Not because people have taken a greater interest in the religion — the local data shows the same decline in god-based religious observance that you spoke of — but because they are the schools which have gained a reputation for providing a better education, which strikes a chord with those fearing the fiery hell of the McDonald's grill.
Heck, even if we assume for the sake of discussion that the original claim is the truth and that parents must turn to private schools, why does that preclude parochial schools? On the premise given, if that's where the "desirables" are found that is where the students needs to go, even if one doesn't buy into the religious foundation of the school.
> the could support two parts of his narrative
If it had said that parents want to turn to private schools then you'd have a point, but it says they must. "I cannot afford it" doesn't fly for things you must do. Since it is something they have no choice in now, that they didn't do decades ago, where is it showing up in the data? Another comment indicated that charter school growth is where the data suggests there is a clear growing trend. We could accept the premise that parents actually see those features in charter schools instead, but then that same comment pointed out that charter schools are often the most diverse, which contradicts the original premise.
> It’s Hard to See My Parents Live So Lavishly While We’re Struggling While I won't deny there are some problems currently, I think people comparing where they start to where others end is a huge mistake and leads to a lot of unnecessary anguish. Someone in their 60s is supposed to be doing better than someone in their 20s. They had 40+ years to work and save. If they did it right, that will put them in a better posi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those 60-year-olds existed in a brief and exceptional moment of wealth creation brought about by factors that are unlikely to happen again in ours or our children's lifetime. The problem being that the American ethos decided to pretend that brief moment was normal and sustainable.
What factors? Why are they unlikely to come about again? How do we make them come about again? You realize that your comment reads like "well, actually things shouldn't be getting better over time" I, for one, completely disagree.
>five pillars of a stable middle-class existence: education, stable employment, marriage, homeownership, children. This is cultural bias spoken as though it’s universal Plenty of fulfilling lives out there that don’t include home ownership, being a parent, having secondary schooling or being partnered with offspring.
Regardless of the path you have chosen for yourself, your existence is owed to your parents having had at least some, if not most, of those things.
Most people are not well off and anecdotally I also don’t know many happily married couples nor happily married parents.