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

Two-parent households should be a policy goal

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 291 posts

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#21

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

pjc50 wrote: post #8

Can't read the article even with archive.ph, but do they have an analysis of why relationships break down?

> the idea is that as some men have become less reliable as financial providers for their family, the value proposition of marriage between a man and a woman has fallen.

> Multiple studies document a causal link between the economic struggles of men and the growth in single-mother families.

> To give disadvantaged children better futures, policy makers should promote widespread employment and economic security among a wider segment of the population—particularly non-college-educated men.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#22

Post by foobarian »

bbor wrote: post #9

Serious question: why not three parent? Does every stable relationship involve sexual aspects? Seems like an article stating an obvious fact but missing the bigger picture

Why stop at three? The saying goes, "it takes a village." Would be nice to see a resurgence of this instead of the insane isolation of suburban atomic families.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#23

Post by matthewfelgate »

The 1970s called; they'd like their arguments back!

Arguing that children with married parents fare better, thus promoting two-parent families, is akin to suggesting that since blue cars have fewer accidents, everyone should drive a blue car.

Pressuring dissatisfied couples to stay together or marry benefits no one.

The article fails to provide actionable recommendations on promoting marriage.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#25

Post by giantg2 »

michaelleland wrote: post #2

The tax credits for married people here in the US seem to be part of this type of policy, no?

You can actually benefit from being single filers (non-married) by choosing who claims what to get the biggest breaks. Not being married means you can also mix and match certain things that you otherwise might not be able to, like regular vs Roth IRAs (although I think this is state level).

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#26

Post by darth_avocado »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #7
michaelleland wrote: post #2

The tax credits for married people here in the US seem to be part of this type of policy, no?

There are still tax disadvantages for some married couples (used to be all, assuming both worked). However, there are also plenty of welfare programs that are means tested so marriage is ruled out. (One of the leading theories for the number of babies born out of wedlock rising so much since the early 1960s is the end of the shotgun wedding: the baby daddy counters by pointing out that the mom will lose out on a lot…

There is an additional Medicare tax of 0.9% if single income exceeds 200k, but if you file jointly, that limit is 250k. So a married couple with each earning 125k+ would pay more tax than an unmarried couple where person made 200k.

This hardly mattered years ago, but with median wages getting around 70k+, a lot more people pay this penalty for getting married.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#27

Post by version_five »

matthewfelgate wrote: post #23

The 1970s called; they'd like their arguments back! Arguing that children with married parents fare better, thus promoting two-parent families, is akin to suggesting that since blue cars have fewer accidents, everyone should drive a blue car. Pressuring dissatisfied couples to stay together or marry benefits no one. The article fails to provide actionable recommendations on promoting marriage.

Western society peaked in the 80s so maybe we should listen to some of the arguments from back then.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#28

Post by Analemma_ »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #13
pjc50 wrote: post #8

Can't read the article even with archive.ph, but do they have an analysis of why relationships break down?

For me, I click the "I'm not a robot" captcha checkbox, and it just reloads the captcha. I'm nervous and concerned that I'm not human. I distinctly remember having a childhood and living a human life, but those might just be uploaded memories. What is my best course of action to get to the bottom of this mystery?

archive.is has some kind of really aggressive captcha protection set up. I find it doesn't like public DNS servers like Google's or CloudFlare's: on my home wifi which points to 8.8.8.8 I always get the captcha loop, but then if I switch to accessing over a cell network it works fine.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#29

Post by bluescrn »

foobarian wrote: post #22
bbor wrote: post #9

Serious question: why not three parent? Does every stable relationship involve sexual aspects? Seems like an article stating an obvious fact but missing the bigger picture

Why stop at three? The saying goes, "it takes a village." Would be nice to see a resurgence of this instead of the insane isolation of suburban atomic families.

They'll still be staring at their own individual screens all day.
Post reply on HN