Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday December 15 2014, @03:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the chasing-the-vanishing-jobs? dept.

Binyamin Appelbaum writes at the NYT that the share of prime-age men — those 25 to 54 years old — who are not working has more than tripled since the late 1960s, to 16 percent as many men have decided that low-wage work will not improve their lives, in part because deep changes in American society have made it easier for them to live without working. These changes include the availability of federal disability benefits; the decline of marriage, which means fewer men provide for children; and the rise of the Internet, which has reduced the isolation of unemployment. Technology has made unemployment less lonely says Tyler Cowen, an economist at George Mason University, who argues that the Internet allows men to entertain themselves and find friends and sexual partners at a much lower cost than did previous generations. Perhaps most important, it has become harder for men to find higher-paying jobs as foreign competition and technological advances have eliminated many of the jobs open to high school graduates. The trend was pushed to new heights by the last recession, with 20 percent of prime-age men not working in 2009 before partly receding. But the recovery is unlikely to be complete. "Like turtles flipped onto their backs, many people who stop working struggle to get back on their feet," writes Appelbaum. "Some people take years to return to the work force, and others never do "

A study published in October by scholars at the American Enterprise Institute and the Institute for Family Studies estimated that 37 percent of the decline in male employment since 1979 can be explained by this retreat from marriage and fatherhood (PDF). “When the legal, entry-level economy isn’t providing a wage that allows someone a convincing and realistic option to become an adult — to go out and get married and form a household — it demoralizes them and shunts them into illegal economies,” says Philippe Bourgois, an anthropologist who has studied the lives of young men in urban areas. “It’s not a choice that has made them happy. They would much rather be adults in a respectful job that pays them and promises them benefits.”

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Tuesday December 16 2014, @05:27PM

    by Hairyfeet (75) <{bassbeast1968} {at} {gmail.com}> on Tuesday December 16 2014, @05:27PM (#126549) Journal

    Spoken like a true libertarian, who when faced with the fact that they have NO actual useful counter argument (other than "fuck them poor motherfuckers, i got mine beeiotch!") will do nothing but throw insults or try to move the goal posts.

    This is why I lump libertarians with other radical religions like Scientology, Moonism, and hardcore Islamist because that is the response you get from all of the above when you point out the giant gaping holes in their religions, they cannot debate, only insult.

    --
    ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Kell on Tuesday December 16 2014, @11:23PM

    by Kell (292) on Tuesday December 16 2014, @11:23PM (#126662)

    It's funny when you say that because you can't possibly know a lick about my politics from the two dozen words in my reply. Ironically, I actually agree with pretty much every point you were making (shocking, right?). However, when you make those points in the style of a rambling manifesto, you also makes it difficult for other people to take you seriously. Oh, and immediately going ad hominem when someone calls you on it also isn't helping.
     
    If you want your arguments to actually convince people (presumably your goal?) then the form of delivery is rather important. Let your concise logical arguments speak for themselves - if your arguments are strong, then there is no need to dress them up with formatting, and certainly no need for ad hominem.

    --
    Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.