Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great food for thought on marriage and economic inequality as we move forward in our society. Also has tremendous retirement implications and if it plays out as expected will create even more retirement challenges for some and prosperity for others.
In recent years, people with a college degree have become more likely to get—and stay—married than their less educated counterparts, and those who stay married also tend to be much wealthier than unmarried adults.
"Some people have talked about marriage as a luxury good," said Susan Brown, a sociology professor at Bowling Green State University and co-director of the National Center for Family and Marriage Research.
That's a stark switch from decades past, especially for women, according to the research center's analysis of government data on women's marriage patterns by education.
Back in the 1940s, college-educated women were the least likely to be married. The opposite is true now. As of 2011, around 60 percent of women with a college degrees were married, compared with less than 50 percent of those with a high school degree or below, the analysis found.
Quote:
Some experts argue that marriage itself is contributing to rising inequality, because people who are highly educated—and therefore have higher income potential—are more likely to choose each other as spouses.
That's making it less likely that marriage itself will move someone up the economic ladder, and increasing the chances that two low- or high-income people will couple up and share their economic struggles, or fortunes.
"The doctor used to marry the nurse. Today, the doctor marries the doctor
Great food for thought on marriage and economic inequality as we move forward in our society. Also has tremendous retirement implications and if it plays out as expected will create even more retirement challenges for some and prosperity for others.
Interesting article, but I disagree on the following point:
"The doctor used to marry the nurse. Today, the doctor marries the doctor." Can this statement be backed up in any way?
As far as I know, women still tend to marry someone that earns more than they do, which would mean the Dr. marrying the Dr. isn't as common as the article would lead us to believe.
Interesting article, but I disagree on the following point:
"The doctor used to marry the nurse. Today, the doctor marries the doctor." Can this statement be backed up in any way?
As far as I know, women still tend to marry someone that earns more than they do, which would mean the Dr. marrying the Dr. isn't as common as the article would lead us to believe.
Tend, yes. But less of them do. There's a growing number of women who out earn their husbands.
Growing as in more than zero, sure, but not necessarily growing as in a new trend. Most of the "breadwinner" women are single mothers... So they out earn their husband because there is no husband.
Some experts argue that marriage itself is contributing to rising inequality, because people who are highly educated—and therefore have higher income potential—are more likely to choose each other as spouses.
That's making it less likely that marriage itself will move someone up the economic ladder, and increasing the chances that two low- or high-income people will couple up and share their economic struggles, or fortunes.
"The doctor used to marry the nurse. Today, the doctor marries the doctor
Read the article, this is flat out wrong. The only source for this is the statistic that people without a college degree are marrying less in general by the center for marriage and families.
While I think it is nice of them for stopping the opposition of gay marriage after they lost all of their cases and propositions against it, I don't really agree with their championing ideals that even they say in "The Marriage Index"...cannot be measured.
Interesting article, but I disagree on the following point:
"The doctor used to marry the nurse. Today, the doctor marries the doctor." Can this statement be backed up in any way?
As far as I know, women still tend to marry someone that earns more than they do, which would mean the Dr. marrying the Dr. isn't as common as the article would lead us to believe.
There have been multiple studies that be marriage helps to lift women out of poverty. One of the surest causes of poverty among women is having children outside of wedlock, which has been shown many times. No references at hand, I've just read it more times than I can count.
There have been multiple studies that be marriage helps to lift women out of poverty. One of the surest causes of poverty among women is having children outside of wedlock, which has been shown many times. No references at hand, I've just read it more times than I can count.
Exactly.
Here are some references that I keep handy:
Forget Juno. Out-of-wedlock births are a national catastrophe.
Scholar Kay Hymowitz.......says it's not that harsh economic conditions lead to women having children without fathers, but that the decision to have children without fathers leads to harsh, and self-perpetuating, economic conditions. She explains that having the belief that a solid marriage is central to one's life—that it precedes starting a family—encourages women and men to make important choices based on self-discipline and deliberation. This is a formula "needed for upward mobility, qualities all the more important in a tough new knowledge economy."
...a wealth of research strongly suggests that marriage is good for children. Those who live with their biological parents do better in school and are less likely to get pregnant or arrested. They have lower rates of suicide, achieve higher levels of education and earn more as adults. Meanwhile, children who spend time in single-parent families are more likely to misbehave, get sick, drop out of high school and be unemployed.
And by the way, these researchers are of a more secular/liberal bent and they've basically saying the same thing conservatives have been saying for a long time.
The number of murders has declined steadily as Internet Explorer lost market share. That doesn't mean Internet Explorer killed people and Firefox and Chrome don't.
It's a bit of both. Harsh economic realities mean a lot of people view having a kid and getting on the dole as the best way to "provide" for themselves. I'd agree that the bigger effect is having kids out of wedlock causing poverty though. It's pretty tough as single parent period. If you've already got the education and a stead job, that's one thing. Childcare is expensive. If you're just looking at the difference between welfare and a mediocre job and paying for childcare, you're often better off just staying on welfare.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
