Should people get married?

[bchad]

Ah, gotcha. My apologies if I overreacted (though my post is long in part beacause the complexities are interesting in and of themselves).

[system]

@Aether

Dayyyyyym. Come to WC to get some racist jokes to relieve myself of the L3 pressure. All I see is NANA’s threads based on some random Cosmo articles she read.

NANA - most people get married because most governments incentivize (through taxes) the act of getting married. If I was given tax cuts for staying single (and arguably a more responsible human), I’d stay single all meh life.

Taxes are also the reason people justify having kids. Again, the act is incentivized by most governments.

Really?

I would assume most people get married because they don’t want to spend the rest of their life alone. We aren’t island’s, we’re social creatures…you’d really stay single all your life?

I can see the argument where marriage just makes it legally binding though and ultimately the commitment should just remain with 2 people, but if i ever date a girl for 4-5 year’s im putting a ring on her, end of.

[sluggy1616]

It would be nice if marriage could be set up as a lease with an option to extend. That way if either party gets a ‘lemon’ they are not stuck with it the rest of their lives or stuck with a hefty exit fee.

[Ramos4rm]

@sluggy1616

It would be nice if marriage could be set up as a lease with an option to extend. That way if either party gets a ‘lemon’ they are not stuck with it the rest of their lives or stuck with a hefty exit fee.

My reasoning is I would never propose if there was the possibility she was a lemon. If I propose, it’s for life, good or bad…because presumably I love her…requires some extensive due dilly.

[ohai]

The problem with that is the sole breadwinner model, which would be highly disadvantageous for the non-earning spouse if there was a costless exit option. The optimal productive state would involve both parents working, and the kid attending 9 to 5 school. We still haven’t manage to synchronize this.

[Aether]

@isildurrr

@Aether

Dayyyyyym. Come to WC to get some racist jokes to relieve myself of the L3 pressure. All I see is NANA’s threads based on some random Cosmo articles she read.

NANA - most people get married because most governments incentivize (through taxes) the act of getting married. If I was given tax cuts for staying single (and arguably a more responsible human), I’d stay single all meh life.

Taxes are also the reason people justify having kids. Again, the act is incentivized by most governments.

Really?

I would assume most people get married because they don’t want to spend the rest of their life alone. We aren’t island’s, we’re social creatures…you’d really stay single all your life?

I can see the argument where marriage just makes it legally binding though and ultimately the commitment should just remain with 2 people, but if i ever date a girl for 4-5 year’s im putting a ring on her, end of.

Staying single while p00ning the crap out of anyone/anything you’re into and whenever you want to. Just saying that marriage/kids/house ownership (in the US) are all things incentivized by the govt., so there’s a higher demand for it.

[system]

But marriage is universal even in places where it isn’t incentivized. Conversly it’s places like USA where it is incentivized that are the biggest critics of marriage.

[Ghibli]

@bchad

@Ramos4rm

^Bringing in stereotypes (which have a little truth behind them, but wrong to use as generalizations to discriminate), I would bet the former case is due to lack of education in contraceptive methods and the pregnancies are generally accidents or unwanted whereas the latter case likely has a higher proportion of women with that very independent spirit who neither need a man nor want a man but want children and so use methods like artificial insemination. In these cases, I’d assume most of the pregnancies are wanted. Just a hypothesis.

You may or may not be right, but it sounds like you are assuming a lot more about me having “an agenda” than I do.

There’s a whole history of things that make it challenging for African American families to be stable. Poverty alone in the inner city is one, a history of families being deliberately broken up in slave times has meant that the tradition of trying to make families stable is centuries long for most racial groups in the US, but only about 150 years old for African Americans (through no fault of their own). The fact that African American males have such high incarceration rates (whether deserved or undeserved: that’s a separate debate) makes stable marriage difficult. The fact that inner city regions are often violent areas contributes.

Trying to figure out why out-of-wedlock births are happening in those communities is complex, and there are a lot of factors contributing, and each factor could potentially be spun in ways with fair or unfair overtones. Maybe being unwed as a parent is rational decision on the part of women; maybe it’s rational for the men; maybe women don’t have enough power relative to men, or maybe they have too much power and so the men stay away from committment. I don’t really know. All I’m saying is that I know that African Americans in the inner city have a tough life and are up against a lot of things I don’t have much experience with, and yet they are human beings with human urges and, by-and-large, fewer resources to deal with some of the unplanned things that go along with them.

My observation was simply that it is interesting that births to unwed mothers seem to be highest at the lower and the upper ends of the wealth and education spectrum, and it’s the middle that seems to be more into the “we’re pregnant, therefore we’re getting married” (or, alternately “we’re married, therefore we’re getting pregnant”) approach.

Black American family units were very strong from emancipation through the 1950s. Yes, during slavery, families were broken up, but through the 1950s blacks had to rely on each other to survive and just about instantly became a very patriarchal class after slavery. Is this disputed? Are you suggesting the black family is progressively becoming more stable as time passes, especially during the last fifty years or so? Never heard a defense of such an idea. Please provide. Or was that just one of those made up “statistics?”

[ohai]

I do not think that the US is anti-marriage, especially not when compared to other Western countries. However, the US does have a strong tradition of free speech and social revolution. Because of this, US people discuss and question social conventions a lot compared to people in most other countries.

Marriage incentives can also be implicit in society. For instance, women in countries with discriminative work cultures are incentivized to find husbands, instead of trying to advance their own careers.

[krnyc2008]

@ohai

For instance, women in countries with discriminative work cultures are incentivized to find husbands, instead of trying to advance their own careers.

This. Plus all the social pressure, when if you aren’t married by a certain age, something is wrong with you…

[igor555]

^especially for gals

[Sweep_the_Leg]

Not to get all mushy, but there is a purpose - aside from regulatory and taxation - to a wedding. You’re literally pledging yourself to someone you love in front of all your family and friends. There’s a commitment there that isn’t lightly put aside. I’m not saying Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn are more likely to break up than a married couple, but I gave my word that I’d love, cherish, blah, blah blah my wife. That shit means something to me.

[geo]

@Aether

Taxes are also the reason people justify having kids.

Clearly not a parent, one of the dumbest thing I’ve read here. I bet about 0.01% of people having kids did so to get a tax break. There is no way the tax break ever justifies the economic cost of a kid, not even close. The justification for kids is not economic, at least in North American culture.

There isn’t really a tax advantage to be married in Canada, so this wasn’t an incentive for us in that regard either.

[Sweep_the_Leg]

@geo

@Aether

Taxes are also the reason people justify having kids.

Clearly not a parent, one of the dumbest thing I’ve read here. I bet about 0.01% of people having kids did so to get a tax break. There is no way the tax break ever justifies the economic cost of a kid, not even close. The justification for kids is not economic, at least in North American culture.

There are plenty of moms that have kids for additional welfare checks. That is real.

[krnyc2008]

@igor555

^especially for gals

Yep

[system]

Where is Itera and his DCF model illustrating the negative NPV of marriage, kids, and love? It’s coming close to valentines day, he aught to preach straight troof!

[NANA_Hachiko]

@Aether

Dayyyyyym. Come to WC to get some racist jokes to relieve myself of the L3 pressure. All I see is NANA’s threads based on some random Cosmo articles she read.

NANA - most people get married because most governments incentivize (through taxes) the act of getting married. If I was given tax cuts for staying single (and arguably a more responsible human), I’d stay single all meh life.

Taxes are also the reason people justify having kids. Again, the act is incentivized by most governments.

I believe the first thing you said, but not the second.

I do think people do get married for legal reasons, the obvious is immigration and tax benefits, but also housing and medical…

That i know and believe.

But kids? i don’t think so, kids are so expensive!!! whatever tax breaks you get will not justify paying for diapers, formula, tuition, etc.

I think people want kids because they like to have a “mini me”, also probably intrinsic human nature.

a lot of people just want little cute things around the house, like pets!

[NANA_Hachiko]

@isildurrr

@Aether

Dayyyyyym. Come to WC to get some racist jokes to relieve myself of the L3 pressure. All I see is NANA’s threads based on some random Cosmo articles she read.

NANA - most people get married because most governments incentivize (through taxes) the act of getting married. If I was given tax cuts for staying single (and arguably a more responsible human), I’d stay single all meh life.

Taxes are also the reason people justify having kids. Again, the act is incentivized by most governments.

Really?

I would assume most people get married because they don’t want to spend the rest of their life alone. We aren’t island’s, we’re social creatures…you’d really stay single all your life?

I can see the argument where marriage just makes it legally binding though and ultimately the commitment should just remain with 2 people, but if i ever date a girl for 4-5 year’s im putting a ring on her, end of.

Define being single, you can be unmarried but have a long term meaningful relationships, what some gays and lesbians couples have right now, they are practically married to each other, just not legally.

Or do you mean, if you are not married, you will not be able to hold a relationship? i think it’s the other way around, i can be “single” and have mutliple meaningful relationships with people.

[NANA_Hachiko]

@Ramos4rm

My reasoning is I would never propose if there was the possibility she was a lemon. If I propose, it’s for life, good or bad…because presumably I love her…requires some extensive due dilly.

But people change!

physically, mentally… are you the same person as you were 10 years ago? or 20?

[NANA_Hachiko]

@krnyc2008

This. Plus all the social pressure, when if you aren’t married by a certain age, something is wrong with you…

Like i mentioned, there are definitely pressure from family friends and media, you have to get married before 30, or if a man is not married at age 40 he must be gay.

I just want to know how many people get married because of these pressure? and is getting married really a solution or is it just diverting the problem elsewhere?