RaoulDuke79 Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Johnny Hammersticks said: Oh yeah. The charred baby in the oven with stab wounds.... Here’s a wild idea! People should have to get a license to procreate. Yeah, I said it! They need to pass a FBI background check, satisfy certain mental health criteria, and they have to take parenting classes. Lesson one...don’t stab your baby and put it in the oven. Yeah, it seems absurd that you have to jump through hoops to get a driver's license, but you can have a kid without one ioda of decency or intelligence. Unfortunately it seems the lowest common denominators seem to procreate the most frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Feminism changed this, in large part. It was the raw economics surrounding the reality of doubling the work force (labor supply) without increasing demand for goods and services (there were the same amount of people). A family used to be supported by a single income, but the doubling of the labor supply reduced wages, and eventually a two income family was required for most to achieve a middle class lifestyle. Without a parent able to stay at home to actually raise a family, family planning was pushed back. Couple that with a second economic change, the introduction of federal aid and subsidization of secondary education, and a culture demanding "college degrees for everyone" had the dual effect of prolonging the entry into professional life/adulthood while simultaneously creating a massive new industry of educational debt service which sucks the financial capability out of many Americans until they're in their 30's, and voila. There's your recipe for a delay in family rearing. Can one also apply "tragedy of commons" to this? Hear me out in a creative way I mean. Back then everybody has one income. All making roughly the same. All roughly buying the same stuff, doing the same things in life. Then along comes one family that sends the other spouse off to work. Bam! There comes new shiny car in the driveway and family trip to DisneyLand. The other neighbors see this, they want part of the action. First thing you know, they are all doing it and competing for less and less resources. Things go to shambles around the community. Now... If this highly competitive game needs to be stopped, aren't You pushing for some kind of collective, socialist system based on strict social structure? Somebody staying home, not earning a wage. I wouldn't think You of all people would espouse that. How can You, TYTT, tell a family that one spouse, even worse just the females to stay home! That's unAmerican! The first taste of this didn't begin with the feminist movement. The feminist movement was born out of War Time (WWII) production. The taste of getting ahead of Your neighbor, competing to do better, move up the social ladder. The "commons" is industry, production, the job market & economy. Feminism is a scapegoat. It will readjust itself when the Boomers kick the bucket and automation, tech factors in. Such a libertarian telling others what they can and can't do that has slow societal impact even @ best! Who gets to make the rules once these highly competitive games get started? Just My 2¢. Edited October 18, 2018 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 (edited) That's... that's not what "the tragedy of the commons" is. That's not even close to what it is. And no, you've put effect before cause. Also, I haven't condemned feminism at all. I haven't given prescription or preference. All I'm doing is explaining cause and effect. If you don't like it, take it up with the cosmos. I didn't make the rules. Edited October 19, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 6 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Feminism changed this, in large part. It was the raw economics surrounding the reality of doubling the work force (labor supply) without increasing demand for goods and services (there were the same amount of people). A family used to be supported by a single income, but the doubling of the labor supply reduced wages, and eventually a two income family was required for most to achieve a middle class lifestyle. Without a parent able to stay at home to actually raise a family, family planning was pushed back. Couple that with a second economic change, the introduction of federal aid and subsidization of secondary education, and a culture demanding "college degrees for everyone" had the dual effect of prolonging the entry into professional life/adulthood while simultaneously creating a massive new industry of educational debt service which sucks the financial capability out of many Americans until they're in their 30's, and voila. There's your recipe for a delay in family rearing. I'd argue that women in the workforce didn't have much to do with wage suppression; their en masse entrance during the first and second world wars was due to a labor shortage, and the subsequent economic uptick following wartime production left plenty of jobs (and wages) to go around. Real worker compensation stagnation didn't truly occur until the mid-1970s for a multitude of factors, one in feminism you've correctly identified: And yes, secondary education costs are absolutely a factor in delaying men and women from having families, as are increases in costs of living across the board in general. When taking into account the inverse relationship between a woman's age in having children and her level of education (true for countries worldwide, not only the US) it's not hard to see people are having children later in life...and we're not even considering factors like increased life expectancy, IVF and other artificial reproductive tech, the advent of the pill, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teef Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 20 hours ago, Fadingpain said: I would imagine education is a huge factor in terms of age when having children. I lived for 12 years in Old Town, Alexandria, VA, in the DC metro area. Affluent little community in one of the best educated enclaves in the country. Couples in their 40s pushing around infants in baby strollers was a very common sight. Big cities are filled with career oriented people with lots of education and they often start families late. Absolutely. Not to mention it’s awful going through school with kids. I know a few guy who went through it, and it’s not something I could or would have wanted to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 10 minutes ago, teef said: Absolutely. Not to mention it’s awful going through school with kids. I know a few guy who went through it, and it’s not something I could or would have wanted to do. A guy in my "cohort" never finished his dissertation because it just became too much to handle with his two kids. After all that work and money spent on education.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts