Skip to comments.Best recession insurance: Marriage
Posted on 05/05/2012 8:57:31 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Economists refer to the economic benefit that accrues to married couples as the marriage premium. A recent CBS television special asked the question, Why is marriage such an economic turn-on? The program MoneyWatch gave three reasons based on a report from the Pew Research Centers report, Women, Men and the New Economics of Marriage:
Economies of scale: Married couples share the cost of necessary expenses, such as health insurance, utility bills and mortgage payments. That is especially significant today when more than two-thirds of men have working spouses and 22 percent of wives make more than their husbands.
Married couples earn more: From 1970 to 2007, the median household income for married couples rose more than incomes for unmarried couples. The mutual support that couples give each other and their mutual stake in the relationship means they work together toward their financial goals.
Married couples invest better: Married women invest in stocks more than unmarried women and, as couples, they invest more, save more and are more future-oriented.
(Excerpt) Read more at p.washingtontimes.com ...
It’s a sad commentary upon our society and culture when marriage is mainly a benefit because both husband and wife are working. Unfortunately it points up the basic failure of capitalism in the 20th century, “that one man cannot afford to support his wife and how ever many children they are able to have.” GK Chesterton. Unfortunately capitalism like Christianity has been tried and found too difficult and has led to the socialist state that we currently have.
Part of the reason marriage has stalled is the insanity of expectations - 22K for the average wedding ceremony, along with 1-2K for a prom. If they adjusted expectations, they could get married for the cost of one month’s car payment, not the cost of a new car.
By setting an overly expensive standard for weddings, marriage seems a costly luxury to those who can simply live together, despite the greater instability of the relationship when they do.
Up until the womens lib movement couples all over the world for the last few thousand years survived off the husband’s income alone. So WTF happened that people can no longer survive on a single income? I have no love whatsoever for the occupy crowd, but they are fueled by an underlying truth.. something is seriously wrong with our wageslave society.
Well,, even though it’s not popular to say. Women flooding into the workforce has doubled the size of the workforce, and this glut in supply, has driven down prices (wages)
Combine this with laws that practically beg women to see divorce and unwed motherhood as very survivable alternatives, (also requiring them to enter the workforce) and you have your answer.
Thats why,,, supply doubled, wages dropped,,and now both must work to create what was possible for one before.
Also,, the absolute flood of central planning and regulation has made it brutal to go into business on your own with a good idea and a work ethic.
PS,, also, look at the houses people lived in back then. Simple, inexpensive, and no more than needed. That has also made surviving on one wage much more challenging.
Capitalism works just fine where it is still being practiced, like in Hong Kong, and among Chinese Generals and Mexican Millionaires.
Capitalism has never failed to allow a man to support his wife. It is just that we have been ever-increasing socialist for 80 years. We haven’t seen pure capitalism in this nation in 50 years.
Do you want pure capitalism. Anybody hiring illegals under the table for cash is practicing pure capitalism. They are maximizing profits and doing well against competitors.
It is the companies who follow the rules and are buried under mountains of oppressive government regulations who are not and have not had the chance to exercise capitalism in decades.
Look at GM. When the employees in one small obscure plant that supplies axels for all of their cars, shut that plant down with a strike, it brought GM to their knees. That is not capitalism. Capitalism is they fire the lot and the next people think twice before striking.
Capitalism is Reagan firing all of the striking air-traffic control workers and replacing them.
We haven’t been a capitalist nation in decades upon decades. Your evaluation of the merits of capitalism are completely off base.
After you take into consideration the costs of daycare, taxes, commuting, professional wardrobe, eating out, and other work expenses for a working mom, take home pay may be less than a third of her actual salary. You can give up that amount of income.
The government elites want women to work - more tax money to give themselves a raise, no women at home to see what goes on in public schools.
Plainly, it costs way more to be married....(just in terms of clicker control if nothing else)....and what about the numbers....?
I’m a CPA from vegas....and an expert at odds...i do not want any part of any ‘deal’ where the odds are 50-50 the deal will disintegrate in a fiery end...and after it does crash and die the odds are 100 % that you lose 50% of every cent you’ve made up until that point. Addtionally the odds are 100 % your squeeze will act sort of crazy every 28 days during the Anschluss and around ages 58 thru 67 she’ll act crazy almost 50% of all the days of your blessed togetherness....
Lastly, ask yourself this question ‘would you board a plane knowing the odds were 50-50 that plane would crash and devastate your net worth and credit rating?’....BEST BUY A DOG..and date casually.
After 37 years, I respectfully disagree.
it must be a lack of self esteem for these young women to put up with this...
I know a nice young woman who lived with her boyfriend for 7 yrs....and then she got pregnant and had a baby....within a year, he was gone...no real committment...
we thought we could have it all...calm, peaceful family, and two working parents bringing in all the money....
what a lie....
Let me repphrase what I was attempting to say. Capitalism, the way it has been practiced for the last 100years has been an admitted failure and has led to socialism. The fact that one man cannot support his wife and as many children as they want is evidence of the admission of it’s failure. When all the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few it doesn’t amtter what you call it, be it communism of capitalism, there is no difference. The government started decades ago favoring big business over small and we have the inevitable result: socialism. Check out Chesterton.org
You are exactly right. Check out chesterton.org. He was way ahead of the curve on everything.
I think I stumbled across the answer to your observation this morning in 2 Timothy 3, especially verse 6, but read it in context of vs 1-9.