Quote: (03-12-2015 11:55 AM)speakeasy Wrote:
Quote: (03-12-2015 08:34 AM)RioNomad Wrote:
I'm 30 and only a couple of my friends from HS are married. Many have kids and long term girlfriends, but don't seem to be in a hurry to get married.
I'd say most guys from HS don't have particularly well paying jobs, even the college educated ones. Most don't own homes and mostly seem to living paycheck to paycheck.
Now, most of us come from lower-middle class families whose parents struggled their whole lives also. So there isn't much family money or connections. The ones I see doing best career wise seem to be firefighters. They make decent cash, but throw in a wife, baby and mortgage and they are basically living paycheck to paycheck also I think.
From what I see, it seems more difficult for people now to get a job that pays enough to live that American dream that leads to marriage, having kids, buying homes, etc.
My grandpa is 76. He got out of the army, went to work for PG&E for 30 years, got married, raised a family, bought a home, and got a very good retirement. Maybe it's just the area I'm from, but I don't really see that happening much anymore.
Combine all of that with divorce and custody laws and I think men my age just don't want to get married. I also think they see how miserable their parents are and don't want to repeat the same mistakes.
This. I really do feel that economic stability is at the heart of this. From studies I've seen, most young men DO actually want to get married and have families. Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that this 70% are a bunch of red pill players with who are having too much fun to get married. The truth is far from that. Most men will sleep with less than 10 women in their life. And what that article said about college is a joke. That men are controlling the terms of relationships and women can't find guys. Bullshit. Most dudes in college actually aren't getting laid much. It's the jocks and top frats that getting laid the most. A lot of guys graduate from college with little sexual experience. I don't remember the number right now but I read a sizable number of guys graduate college without losing their virginity.
The cost of rent and housing as a percentage of your income is steadily rising. As is the cost of an education, and day care if you want kids. And since public schools in many cities are shit, you may have to shell out extra for private school if you want a good education for your kids. And then you have to put something away for their future education which will be even more expensive than yours, and still try to sock something away for your own retirement.
My whole theory behind this is that laissez-faire capitalism and rising inequality is destroying our social fabric. All the gains of our productivity and GDP go straight to the top 10%. The average person hasn't seen a pay increase in many decades adjusted for inflation. Yet everything is getting more expensive. An apartment I rented for $1150 a month several years ago now lists for $1600. My health insurance plan like rent goes up every year and never goes down. Ultimately responsible people want to plan their families and give their kids the best chance. They don't want to start a family under unstable conditions where you are living paycheck-to-paycheck. Many will opt to just stay single and not have kids than have to endure that kind of stress. And now that there's no stigma to perpetual bachelorhood, there's no pressure to dive into marriage when you're not ready.
You're 100% right that this is an economic issue more than anything else. However, I disagree that laissez-faire capitalism is the problem. In a later post you clarified that it was more post 80s deregulation that was the culprit, but I've never bought that explanation either. It's been the reasoning of people who think that the 1950s were the good ol' days and everything was fine until Reagan came along and fucked everything up.
The 50s didn't come out of nowhere, it came from being the last power standing after WWII, which in turn came from being the preeminent economic and industrial power in the first place. That ultimately had its foundations in the economic boom that took place between the Civil War and WWI, which was based on perhaps the closest system to textbook laissez-faire capitalism that has existed, certainly during the Industrial era.
Of course it wasn't perfect, and not everything that happened should be emulated, but having access to history, we should be able to note what worked and what didn't and mix in the good elements with the modern advancements to propel ourselves even further. Unfortunately, things like minimal regulation, no federal income tax, and stable money in the shape of a gold standard were deemed unworthy of making the cut.
Closer to the topic, the elimination of the classical gold standard, over a period of 60 years from WWI to 1971, has probably done more than anything else to create the economic disparities you describe. One of the features of a gold standard is to limit the amount of debt that can be realistically created, not only by governments, but by bankers.
By 1971 the GS had already been bastardized, and only lip service was paid to it. The reason it was formally ended was political. Over the prior 10 years, the US expanded its money supply massively to pay for the new welfare state and Vietnam. Other countries who held the dollar as reserves (particularly France) noticed this and wanted to cash its dollar chips for gold, which it had the right to do under the GS. Nixon's response was a gigantic middle finger, and he announced that the dollar was no longer redeemable for gold, thus removing any restrictions on the US to keep its financial house in order, and in turn removing any restrictions on the banking system in general to do the same.
Ever since then, we've been on an exponential track with respect to outstanding credit levels. Look at any historical chart relating to outstanding credit and you'll see a clear line in the sand around 1971. Before that date, credit expansion was more or less flat, with a bias to a steady rise over time. After that date, it's been exponential to the present day. Case in point:
Generally, when the economy as a whole takes on more debt than it can handle, a crisis is around the corner. We've seen that multiple times in the last 15 years. The problem, in this post gold-standard era, is that we have the illusion of a get out of jail free card - more debt. The proliferation of debt makes it seem like we can keep on spending, which keeps driving prices higher and higher, until the point where we can't afford it any more and must start paying down debt and accepting lower prices.
But this sobering reality is untenable for mainstream economics phd's and central bankers, so the 'solution' is even more debt, to an even greater degree than before, because otherwise prices won't rise. All of this is impossible under a gold standard because you can't create gold out of thin air in unlimited quantities. So from time to time, the economy was forced to 'revert to the mean,' flush out the bad, keep the good and build again. To be sure, this was a painful process for those who were on the wrong side of it, but completely necessary for overall progress.
Today, we never have to revert to the mean, at least on the surface. We can seemingly take on debt in perpetuity, which enables the continued accumulation of material goods, which builds a false sense of abundance. But all we've really done is pledged our future labor for the right to consume in the present.
It is this illusion of abundance that allows feminism/cultural Marxism/SJWism/r-selection to flourish. It's no coincidence that those trends have grown in concert over the last 50 years with the cessation of the GS, as the loss of economic discipline basically financed the loss of social discipline. Some have argued that we need a war or some other catastrophe to keep women and SJWs in line, but I'd argue that the return of economic discipline is more than enough to do the job.
Upthread Phoenix had a nice post describing essentially what was The 'American Dream.' Roughly speaking it is a sort of life plan that looks like this:
Go to school > Get a Job > Get married > Buy a house > Have 2 kids + dog > Move up in the company and settle in at middle management > Retire at 60-65
An average person starting on this track in 2015 is plunged into debt slavery literally from the first step. Owing to some of the economic forces I've already described, tuition has risen to the point that 18 year olds are on the hook for crippling debt, where they once could have paid their way through school waiting tables over the summers.
Assuming you get an adequate job, and find a girl worth marrying (lol), all you've really done there is sign on to pay for your wife's student loans as well as yours. On top of that you need a car, so there's auto loans. Buying a house? Prepare to plunge even deeper into debt, as the powers that be are deathly afraid of home prices dropping, even though all economic fundamentals suggest home prices should be nowhere this high (recall what I said about endless credit allowing us never to face reality). Then there's rising maintenance costs, rising utility costs and of course taxes.
All of that means that you're not retiring at 65. Along the way, the fact that prices keep rising means that on top of your debt, you might have to turn to credit cards, or your wife has to work, which means a suboptimal environment for your children. Saving for your retirement, or for your children's inheritance is almost out of the question.
Virtually the only way to avoid some version of this fate is to be rich already, or to own assets that continue to appreciate along with the inflation driven by this continued credit expansion. Therein lies the inequality we're seeing now, because with most people drowning in debt of some sort, it is only a few who have the means to own income producing assets, in addition to those who are already rich.
In addition to that, the way out is to avoid the 'American Dream' track as I wrote it. Constant self improvement, side hustles, being reliant on yourself and not a corporation necessarily. Understanding women, and children/family life by extension. All things that are discussed regularly on this forum. But outside of this forum, how many are attuned to these sort of issues?
Most will hop on that American Dream track because it's what they were told to do by their parents, guidance counselors at school, etc. This article suggests that they're beginning to see the flaws and starting to back out before its too late. For me, that track will never be viable again until the economics change.