Marriage = $$$

Shoot the shit.
Steampunk
Posts: 142
Joined: 05 Aug 2006 02:54

Marriage = $$$

Post by Steampunk » 01 Jun 2007 08:56

Seriously has started a trend of half-way serious (seriously!) topics.


For your discussion:
http://influencepeddler.blogspot.com/20 ... rried.html
Want Successful Kids? Stay Married.

The Economist has a fascinating story on the economic and cultural gaps between those we might call the 'life-long married' and the rest of America. Based on research from a number of different organizations, it seems that the best educated and most prosperous Americans tend to marry for life, and are better at passing on the tools for success to their children. Single parents, separated parents, and those who move from one relationship to another are at a great disadvantage in trying to pass on to their kids the values and habits that will help them succeed:

There is a widening gulf between how the best- and least-educated Americans approach marriage and child-rearing. Among the elite (excluding film stars), the nuclear family is holding up quite well. Only 4% of the children of mothers with college degrees are born out of wedlock. And the divorce rate among college-educated women has plummeted. Of those who first tied the knot between 1975 and 1979, 29% were divorced within ten years. Among those who first married between 1990 and 1994, only 16.5% were.

At the bottom of the education scale, the picture is reversed. Among high-school dropouts, the divorce rate rose from 38% for those who first married in 1975-79 to 46% for those who first married in 1990-94. Among those with a high school diploma but no college, it rose from 35% to 38%. And these figures are only part of the story. Many mothers avoid divorce by never marrying in the first place. The out-of-wedlock birth rate among women who drop out of high school is 15%. Among African-Americans, it is a staggering 67%.

Does this matter? Kay Hymowitz of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think-tank, says it does. In her book “Marriage and Caste in America”, she argues that the “marriage gap” is the chief source of the country's notorious and widening inequality. Middle-class kids growing up with two biological parents are “socialised for success”. They do better in school, get better jobs and go on to create intact families of their own. Children of single parents or broken families do worse in school, get worse jobs and go on to have children out of wedlock. This makes it more likely that those born near the top or the bottom will stay where they started. America, argues Ms Hymowitz, is turning into “a nation of separate and unequal families”.



The Economist piece further notes that according to the National Marriage Project, marriage itself is a 'wealth-generating institution.' That is, those who marry wind up -- on the average -- four times wealthier than those who do not. It also addresses the seemingly counter-intuitive finding that couples who live together before marriage tend to divorce at a higher rate than those who do not.

I find this piece fascinating, and encourage you to take 10-15 minutes to read the whole thing. It's very reminiscent of the late Pat Moynihan's report on illegitimacy in the African American community, in its linkage between a strong two-parent family and ultimate economic success.

AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Re: Marriage = $$$

Post by AngelBaby » 01 Jun 2007 11:24

Steampunk wrote:
Kay Hymowitz

lolz. :lol:

eamon angelface
Posts: 960
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 22:06

Post by eamon angelface » 02 Jun 2007 01:46

I want super successful kids so I'm going to have multiple wives. Cause Mormons know how to run shit.

I like over simplifications. Nurture over nature means we have control and control makes me sleep better. Some day with my many wives. We'll all sleep better and our children of the damned will grow up to be big strong supermen (they will all be boys of course).

Some day your children will kneel and confirm their allegiance to my children.

That article was so great.
DLT Prom Queen 4 years running.

User avatar
exelis
Posts: 563
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:40
Location: Outside of Boston, MA

Post by exelis » 02 Jun 2007 03:45

A) In some ways, this is common sense. It's harder for one person to teach values than it is for two.

B) It's commented upon by a member of a conservative think-tank (note the contradiction in terms, and yes, if it said "liberal think-tank" it would be just as much of a contradiction). Any data is guaranteed to be skewed.

C) It's "based on research from a number of different organizations". None of them cited, nor relevant points discussed. 9 times out of 10 when there's an article describing some new scientific evidence about a politically charged topic, the media is going to take the real science and make it absolute, without any thought or mention of peer review, retesting, and rechecking data and experimental design (if the barely-cited data was even part of an empirical scientific venture and not just a "survey").

...And, lastly: D) How the fuck is this useful to anybody? Would it be better for two parents in a bad relationship to stay together and fight in front of their kid(s) on a daily basis, exposing them to all sorts of tension and bad examples?

DEET dee deeeee. Ree-tarded!

Seriously
Posts: 618
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:00

Post by Seriously » 02 Jun 2007 05:01

My parents stayed married until the termination clause was satisfied, but I'm pretty sure all involved would have been better off if they'd divorced.

But it was during my unstable adolescent years, and they'd heard of things like this.





Irritating.

But such is the human heart and honor.

This doesn't apply to them, but I have a better solution that would work for most in these kinds of situations: don't get married just because you can buy cigarettes. She'll be able to bear children for like at least a couple more years, dude.



EDIT:

That was a jab at like 65 people that will never read this. I'm annoyed that all of my high school friends are divorced with children while their car insurance companies still consider them teenagers.




ACTUAL EDIT:

Adjective Think-tank.


Excellent. Their job is to think of ways to advance adjective.


Studies have shown that adjective, for a variety of bulleted unexpounded upon reasons, is preferable.

Bullet points are like results of studies.



As you can see, this bar is higher than that bar.


Just look at the line: it goes UP.

INCONTRIVERTIBLE




On the other hand, I didn't read the article.

Have my instincts led me wrong this time?

Steampunk
Posts: 142
Joined: 05 Aug 2006 02:54

Post by Steampunk » 02 Jun 2007 07:17

Seriously wrote:My parents stayed married until the termination clause was satisfied, but I'm pretty sure all involved would have been better off if they'd divorced.

But it was during my unstable adolescent years, and they'd heard of things like this.

Bullet points are like results of studies.

On the other hand, I didn't read the article.

Have my instincts led me wrong this time?

Nah, you made a datum. (Can I make a verb? You "datumed"?) I linked your parents' non-divorce during your up-bringing with the fact that you don't have a propensity to carry guns.

*thumbs up*

UncleMao
Posts: 251
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 11:24

Post by UncleMao » 02 Jun 2007 09:23

I don't necessarily disagree but for the sake of playing devil's advocate...

Loveless marriages don't necessarily constitute separation or divorce but in many Asian families, the parents stay together even though one or both parents may have subsequent partners on the outside of the nuclear family.

Personally I know at least 3 different families who are subject to this situation.

Perhaps you could extend the context of the article to families that are already "mentally checked out" of the relationship, but to my experience the repercussions of such "faux marriages" also seem to have the same problems affecting them.

And in many instances is a lot worse than if both parties just decided to call it quits. The nuclear situation in may regards is more awkward and consistently damaging and in no process to recover.

Perhaps the article should be re-worded, "Want Successful Kids? Stay Married and in Love." ?

efilflah
Posts: 439
Joined: 16 Aug 2006 09:19
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Post by efilflah » 02 Jun 2007 17:41

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the religious angle yet.

Isn't the US like 75% Christianity? Doesn't God see divorce under any circumstance a humongous sin? You'd think something like that would probably have an impact on some couples staying married regardless of love or happiness or other little things like that.

I've known a few Christians who have openly said that they will never get divorced simply because they meant the 'til death do us part segment of their vows.

When asked "But what if your husband starts beating you or the kids or stealing from you to fund his habits?" the reply is usually a stern "But he won't" always avoiding answering a hypothetical, even if the person in question is a drunken drug addict who got kicked off a rugby team for being too angry.

I think Denial probably keeps most unhappy families together more than anything else, not the benefits to the kids.

eamon angelface
Posts: 960
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 22:06

Post by eamon angelface » 03 Jun 2007 00:42

UncleMao wrote:I don't necessarily disagree but for the sake of playing devil's advocate...

Loveless marriages don't necessarily constitute separation or divorce but in many Asian families, the parents stay together even though one or both parents may have subsequent partners on the outside of the nuclear family.

Personally I know at least 3 different families who are subject to this situation.

Perhaps you could extend the context of the article to families that are already "mentally checked out" of the relationship, but to my experience the repercussions of such "faux marriages" also seem to have the same problems affecting them.

And in many instances is a lot worse than if both parties just decided to call it quits. The nuclear situation in may regards is more awkward and consistently damaging and in no process to recover.

Perhaps the article should be re-worded, "Want Successful Kids? Stay Married and in Love." ?
I didn't know asian people were capable of love. Doesn't it require having a soul?

Kidding!

I read a survey that like 8/10 men in China think it's okay to cheat on your wife if you pay for it.

In Japan is was something like 50/50 for men but almost all women said it was okay to cheat if your partner/husband didn't find out.

In America everyone said is wasn't ok to cheat but a huge percentage admitted to having done it.

I forget what England came up with. Over all everyone is human and accountable to their own morals. If you can live with it and the consequences than who cares?

'That article should read: want successful kids? Be rich yourself and give them money. Want happy kids? Quit acting like a child yourself. '
DLT Prom Queen 4 years running.

Seriously
Posts: 618
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:00

Post by Seriously » 03 Jun 2007 01:17

efilflah wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned the religious angle yet.

Isn't the US like 75% Christianity? Doesn't God see divorce under any circumstance a humongous sin? You'd think something like that would probably have an impact on some couples staying married regardless of love or happiness or other little things like that.

I've known a few Christians who have openly said that they will never get divorced simply because they meant the 'til death do us part segment of their vows..
Not quite.

75% a pretty high number, even including the in-name-only crowd.

Also, divorce isn't mentioned in either of the 10 commandments, and God, to some people anyways, is a pretty forgiving character (but everyone has pretty different ideas about what God thinks about things).


I think a majority of Christians could rationalize divorce just fine, actually. Even some of the hellfire ones.

Steampunk
Posts: 142
Joined: 05 Aug 2006 02:54

Post by Steampunk » 03 Jun 2007 02:10

Seriously wrote:
efilflah wrote:Isn't the US like 75% Christianity?
Not quite.

75% a pretty high number, even including the in-name-only crowd.
FYI, last census (2001) said 77% self-identified as Christian.

Seriously
Posts: 618
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:00

Post by Seriously » 03 Jun 2007 03:01

Well shit.


I stick with the rest of it though.

efilflah
Posts: 439
Joined: 16 Aug 2006 09:19
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Post by efilflah » 03 Jun 2007 05:20

Seriously wrote:I think a majority of Christians could rationalize divorce just fine, actually. Even some of the hellfire ones.
I'm basing this mainly on people I've met/know (My mother being one of the crazy fools) and pretty much every one of them are adamant that they will never leave their spouses because of religious reasons.

That's not to say that some won't when they catch the other half in bed with the nanny for the 5th time, but there are just as many denial types out there who will make excuses forever if it means holding the family together.

eamon angelface
Posts: 960
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 22:06

Post by eamon angelface » 03 Jun 2007 10:01

efilflah wrote:
Seriously wrote:I think a majority of Christians could rationalize divorce just fine, actually. Even some of the hellfire ones.
I'm basing this mainly on people I've met/know (My mother being one of the crazy fools) and pretty much every one of them are adamant that they will never leave their spouses because of religious reasons.

That's not to say that some won't when they catch the other half in bed with the nanny for the 5th time, but there are just as many denial types out there who will make excuses forever if it means holding the family together.
Isn't this "rationalizing" tantamount to trying to fool their God and hoping he's cool with it?

That's hardly an adequate demonstration of true faith in a higher being/intelligence.

Hell whatever floats your dingy. The older I get the more I regret ever placing any importance on the intelligence or opinion of so called adults.
DLT Prom Queen 4 years running.

Seriously
Posts: 618
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:00

Post by Seriously » 03 Jun 2007 14:31

HAHagh

hahahahhhhaaahaha




Show me true faith and I'll show you...



Well.



You go first, let's put it that way.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests