[FoRK] New Benefits of Marriage Study Actually Hints at the Horrors of Middle Age

Reza B'Far (Oracle) reza.bfar at oracle.com
Fri Jan 23 12:07:44 PST 2015


:)  Yes, I wasn't meaning misogynistic or androgynistic... just myopic 
may be... and wasn't intended to you... it's kind of like I wasn't 
seeing anything new that I haven't heard before and would be good to get 
other perspectives.  I often get pleasantly surprised by how women think 
about exact same issues in a way that I haven't heard from men.  Or 
folks that are under-educated, yet very intelligent.  Or ... I don't 
even know where to research these perspectives honestly, but I know they 
are there and I occasionally hear them from places like NPR's Radio Lab 
or something like that... but generally these perspectives go ignored...

On 1/23/15 11:21 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> On 1/23/15 10:23 AM, Reza B'Far (Oracle) wrote:
>> Side-point on this thread -
>>
>> 1. There are no females commenting.  I think latest I saw, more than
>>    50% of population is female and I KNOW that there are female fork
>>    members. It's curious why they have chosen to abstain
>
> Curious indeed.  Although I don't think we've taken any misogynistic 
> or androgynistic positions.  People don't prepare, learn the right 
> lessons, ingrain the right habits, or have a reliable ability to 
> properly train their children to avoid those problems.  Applies to 
> both men/boys and women/girls.  Whether it applies equally and whether 
> the available escape paths and ability to take them are the same is a 
> completely different discussion.
>
>> 2. Obviously, given the nature of fork, almost everyone has at least an
>>    undergraduate degree
>
> Or (more than) equivalent, thank you very much.
>
>> 3. The link that was originally sent out seems to make conclusions that
>>    are not directly related to where the thread is going.  It's funny
>>    that the article is not really talking about economics and tangible
>>    assets as much as this thread is focused on it.  I assume again,
>>    there is bias here given membership of fork.
>
> We're on a derivative discussion which started there.
> However, I think we could be said to be exploring an area of the 
> Horrors of Middle Age, particularly those areas that tend to create 
> and perpetuate the HoMA.
>
>> 4. With marriage, I think it's mostly confirmation theory - if you fail
>>    at it, you think it sucks... if you succeed at it and have a great
>>    marriage, then you think it's great.  Not sure if given the source
>>    of commentary is so biased on the thread with little diversity of
>>    thought, if there is a ton I've learned :)  No offense intended...
>>    it's interesting to read... but all of it seems myopic... not that I
>>    have any better ideas, but...
>
> Sure.  I think we've been around enough to have seen and experienced 
> directly and indirectly many of the things that can go wrong with 
> marriages, careers, and raising (and being) children, teenagers, etc.  
> I think we're far less myopic than we would have been 15 or 20 years 
> ago.  And we do seem to have skepticism and difference of opinion of 
> whether anything can or should be done, and if so whether it could or 
> will work, and what the alternatives are.
>
> In what ways does this discussion seem myopic?  What are we not 
> considering?
>
> sdw
>
>>
>>
>> On 1/23/15 9:42 AM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
>>> These studies are misleading. High mobility in these studies is 
>>> correlated with countries that have highly compressed wage ranges; 
>>> it does not indicate economic mobility in the sense that most people 
>>> mean it.
>>>
>>> The gap between the top quintile and bottom quintile in the US is 
>>> >$80k. In Denmark, it is something like $35k. These numbers are PPP 
>>> terms.
>>>
>>> In other words, a change of income (PPP) in Denmark that would be 
>>> classified as “mobile" could be *doubled* in the US and it would 
>>> still be considered “not mobile”. Yet in any kind of absolute sense, 
>>> the US person would be much better off economically even though they 
>>> are not in the top quintile. Or to put it another way, if you 
>>> evaluated the Danish income mobility in the context of the US income 
>>> ranges, Denmark would be among the least mobile countries in the 
>>> developed world.
>>>
>>> Any standard for “income mobility” that tacitly defines communism as 
>>> the society with the highest income mobility is not that helpful.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jan 23, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Owen Byrne <ojbyrne at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I thought you lived in the US.
>>>>
>>>> "At least five large studies in recent years have found the United 
>>>> States
>>>> to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus 
>>>> Jantti,
>>>> an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of 
>>>> American men
>>>> raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That 
>>>> shows a
>>>> level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 
>>>> percent)
>>>> and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class 
>>>> constraints.[19]
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-economic_mobility_in_the_United_States#cite_note-19> 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, just 8 percent of American men at the bottom rose to the 
>>>> top
>>>> fifth. That compares with 12 percent of the British and 14 percent 
>>>> of the
>>>> Danes.
>>>> Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless 
>>>> society,
>>>> about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top 
>>>> fifth of
>>>> incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the 
>>>> Economic
>>>> Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 
>>>> percent born
>>>> in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths."
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-economic_mobility_in_the_United_States 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Gregory Alan Bolcer <greg at bolcer.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If I truly cared about other's people's children, which I do, then 
>>>>> I would
>>>>> teach them personal responsibility, problem solving, a strong work 
>>>>> ethic,
>>>>> and personal entrepreneurship instead of teaching them to rely on 
>>>>> free
>>>>> stuff at the whim of others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Luckily we live in a society, even at the lowest rungs of the 
>>>>> economic
>>>>> scale, that has extremely high economic mobility.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's called teaching people to fish.
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/23/2015 8:30 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Whether that is a problem that you think needs addressed depends on
>>>>>> whether you think the world is strictly competitive, whether you 
>>>>>> feel
>>>>>> indirectly enriched or diminished by it, and similar philosophical
>>>>>> motivations.  We'll take it as a given that you care for your own
>>>>>> children and family.  Do you care about other people's children and
>>>>>> people in general as an extended family?  Do you feel any 
>>>>>> responsibility
>>>>>> to them?  Even if we have a lot of resources, we may feel 
>>>>>> helpless or
>>>>>> expect waste in trying to help, or feel that other pursuits may have
>>>>>> better society payback.  But we should consider it. And, 
>>>>>> sometimes, the
>>>>>> right small pushes can make a huge difference. Sometimes it is 
>>>>>> just the
>>>>>> right ideas in the right places that make a difference.
>



More information about the FoRK mailing list