Why Family Values Are Economic Values

[Fife]

Repeal.

Don't replace. Just repeal.

Ah ok. Any other fantasies we are indulging in?

Not really realistic to think that will be happening anytime soon. Unless this is just one of those "don't poor people suck?" threads.

What does "don't poor people suck?" have to do with your point? To which "fantasies" are you referring? Can you answer either question?

[Speaker to Animals]

We might want to lose our "debtor's prison" laws--passed under the guise of dead beat dads.

Yep.

Dead beat dads: aka the fathers who were alienated from their children for money.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I'm completely shocked that grumps has come out against a reliable path to success with a screed about, "the game's rigged. there's nothing you can do. it's just correlation. success is impossible."

totally shocked.

never saw it coming.

ever.

Yep. Also the consistent retreat into "virtue signaling" to shut down conversation anytime someone dares to suggest that virtuous conduct might tend to improve one's life prospects.

Are you referring to every discussion we have, where we start out with a policy, or societal issue, but get instantly sideswiped into each member showing off their plumage and variations on bootstrap metaphors?

Oh, if only those stupid lazy poors would just get a job.

[skankhunt42]

I suspect it's not "family values" so much as routine. A nuclear family has a strict routine, as do all the other traditional societal constructs. Chaos breeds chaos.

Post of the year as far as I'm concerned. Chaos always does breed chaos. Rarely do people get out of chaos.

[heydaralon]

What if those much maligned "family values" that have fallen so out of fashion c.2017 actually served as successful predictors of economic success? That would flip things around, a bit, eh? There might be reasons beyond the oft cited "bigotry" for people to promote "old fashioned" and antiquated ideals like marriage before children, a strong nuclear family, and education.

What if Major Causes of Poverty Are Behavioral?

. . . The success sequence, previously suggested in research by, among others, Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution, is this: First get at least a high-school diploma, then get a job, then get married, and only then have children. Wang and Wilcox, focusing on millennials ages 28 to 34, the oldest members of the nation’s largest generation, have found that only 3 percent who follow this sequence are poor.

A comparably stunning 55 percent of this age cohort have had children before marriage. Only 25 percent of the youngest baby boomers (those born between 1957 and 1964) did that. Eighty-six percent of the Wang-Wilcox millennials who put “marriage before the baby carriage” have family incomes in the middle or top third of incomes. Forty-seven percent who did not follow the sequence are in the bottom third. . . .

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... e-followed

Contrast that with the African American community where:

A staggering number of African-American children are raised in single parent homes, compared to the rest of America, and the rest of the world. A study conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found that 25.8 percent of American children are raised by a single parent, a number high above the 14.9 percent average seen in the other 26 countries surveyed. Among African-Americans the rate nearly tripled, with 72 percent of black children relying on a single parent.

http://atlantablackstar.com/2012/12/23/ ... ent-homes/

Taking this into consideration, does it make more sense to focus like a laser beam on issues of race and racism, or might it be wiser to consider if our policies are subsidizing (and thereby encouraging) the destruction of the nuclear family, particularly in certain communities?

Yeah, yeah, I know a bunch of you noobs will be like "You're just seeing this now?!?!", and of course, I'm not. But I'm doing that renegade thing where someone actually posts topics and content in a board that has been largely surrendered to shitposting and misanthropy. I like to go against the grain.

You're just seeing this now?!?!

[clubgop]

I'm completely shocked that grumps has come out against a reliable path to success with a screed about, "the game's rigged. there's nothing you can do. it's just correlation. success is impossible."

totally shocked.

never saw it coming.

ever.

Yep. Also the consistent retreat into "virtue signaling" to shut down conversation anytime someone dares to suggest that virtuous conduct might tend to improve one's life prospects.

Are you referring to every discussion we have, where we start out with a policy, or societal issue, but get instantly sideswiped into each member showing off their plumage and variations on bootstrap metaphors?

Oh, if only those stupid lazy poors would just get a job.

The stats are undeniable. Graduate High School, get a job, keep a job, no children till marriage. You can deny reality all you like, , facts don't care about your feelings.

[de officiis]

I'm completely shocked that grumps has come out against a reliable path to success with a screed about, "the game's rigged. there's nothing you can do. it's just correlation. success is impossible."

totally shocked.

never saw it coming.

ever.

Yep. Also the consistent retreat into "virtue signaling" to shut down conversation anytime someone dares to suggest that virtuous conduct might tend to improve one's life prospects.

Are you referring to every discussion we have, where we start out with a policy, or societal issue, but get instantly sideswiped into each member showing off their plumage and variations on bootstrap metaphors?

Oh, if only those stupid lazy poors would just get a job.

What I said was reasonably clear. Keep retreating into your kneejerk rhetoric to avoid a serious discussion; it's par for the course and exemplifies your pattern of thought when anyone starts talking about the role that personal responsibility might play in improving the health of our society.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Yep. Also the consistent retreat into "virtue signaling" to shut down conversation anytime someone dares to suggest that virtuous conduct might tend to improve one's life prospects.

Are you referring to every discussion we have, where we start out with a policy, or societal issue, but get instantly sideswiped into each member showing off their plumage and variations on bootstrap metaphors?

Oh, if only those stupid lazy poors would just get a job.

What I said was reasonably clear. Keep retreating into your kneejerk rhetoric to avoid a serious discussion; it's par for the course and exemplifies your pattern of thought when anyone starts talking about the role that personal responsibility might play in improving the health of our society.

And how do you propose to improve personal responsibility in 350 million people? Should we play only country music on the radio? Ban non-family-promoting media?

You can scream at the bad people all you want, but they respond to incentives. And plenty of them are not bad people. Hard work and virtue do not guarantee success.

[Speaker to Animals]

You stop rewarding the bad behavior to start with..

[SuburbanFarmer]

You stop rewarding the bad behavior to start with..

And in doing so, abandon good people to starve. Even if that doesn't bother you morally, it's no recipe for stability.