Posted on 11/06/2025 8:47:10 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The Rothschild own a 21% stake in the economist
The Agnelli family of Italy own almost 50% and are the dominant force behind the board.
The Agnellis are big Meloni supporters. Own Ferrari, Stellantis, playboy lifestyle, anti-tax, pro NATO with a hint of globalist. A 180 year blue collar Kardashion family.
The simple fact is that women now earn as much, or more, than men of their own age.
Studies show that women tend to look for a partner in better financial shape than themselves... for security reasons...
Today, their pool of potential mates has shrunk in a large way... but their desire has not changed...
Thus, 90% of women pursue 10% of the men.
For the 10% of men in question, they really have no need to settle down... they know today’s liberated women will sleep with them regardless of a relationship being in place... so most women will be used and cast aside...
As for the 90% of men, they will lose hope after being rejected, used and/or ridiculed for their lack of abilities and/or ability to provide... Many will just stop trying...
Congratulations women, you’ve come a long way... it’s now time to be more realistic when it comes to marriage... or learn to like cats...
The Rothschilds have controlled it for decades: https://www.economist.com/britain/2022/11/10/remembering-evelyn-de-rothschild-chairman-of-the-economist-for-17-years
Here’s the deal: https://www.politico.eu/article/agnellis-rothschilds-close-in-on-economist-magazine-sale-pearson/
And Meloni ain’t what she appears to be (as is not Trump).
I don’t think anything there is inconsistent with what is reported elsewhere.
Angellis have a near 50% stake, one of the Rothschild families with 20% (there are 5, sone pathetic leftists, some just out for a buck, and few really decent people). I don’t know which this is.
Why should the husband automatically have to earn more than the wife?
You presented no additional information (e.g.: "Husbands totally neglect domestic duties, refuse to rear children, etc."), so given only what you've said - i.e., that the women outearn the men - I see no problem!
I have always been the main breadwinner in my family. Until our (two) children were grown up and out of the house, I allowed my wife to complete her Master's, raise our children until they reached school age, then futz around teaching 4 or 6 hours per week at the university (earning comparable to what an earlier generation of wives would have referred to as "egg money").
Now I'm retired - and my combined pensions dwarf her salary as a half-time teacher of Ukrainian refugees.
Yet I would never refer to her as a "worthless jerk," just because she earns less than I draw through my pensions.
As long as the combined incomes of the two spouses suffice for a comfortable living - what does it matter that the man does only "off again, on again" jobs?
Regards,
Ridiculous first paragraph. Had to ditch it.
From what I've seen, they chose worthless jerks who are "losers" over guys who are boring but very responsible.
Because usually they have charisma. And women tend to respond to that.
RE; Ridiculous first paragraph
What’s so ridiculous about it, I thought it was an accurate observation regarding history.
Whenever this topic comes up, men completely ignore the influence of No-Fault Divorce, which allowed men to trade in their aging housewives for younger models. Do you remember the phrase “Trophy Wife?” Men have contributed to this greatly. It wasn’t just feminism that convinced women to go out and earn their own keep. It was fear that they’d be discarded once they were middle-aged.
Sure, women went out and had children with multiple fathers because they were afraid a husband they never had was going to discard them in their middle age in order to trade them in for younger model, using No-Fault Divorce.
I will pin a lot of the blame on Hugh Hefner and his “Playboy Philosophy”.
Many young people are so detestable who can blame them for being repulsed by each other.
That was the first thing on the list!
First rule in coupling up
Have same goals and the bonus round same interests.
I don't know of a time when successful men were able to dump their wives for cheap. I've never seen it in my lifetime. Women earning a salary/having a career is fine. Both of my big sisters are doctors. The problems are 1) when women prioritize career over finding a mate and let their youth slip away in the process because obviously men have always greatly prized youth in a potential wife and 2)while men have no problem marrying a woman with less education or who earns far less than he does, women have a huge problem with that. So the more educated a woman gets and the more she earns, the more potential husbands she rules out.
Yes its great and all if the above description doesn't fit you and/or doesn't fit your friends. Those are anecdotes. In a large majority of cases, those descriptions DO fit. Thus the decline of marriage in the last couple generations.
I'd say have the same values and either have the same goals or at least be able to accept it if the other person has different goals. For example if she doesn't want to stay home and wants to continue working even when the children are younger...is that something you can accept? Or if its the opposite, can you accept that you're going to have to tighten your belt financially for a few years as she stays home and takes care of the kids?
Fear not, you are an eternal being.
Deep States everywhere are waging a war on the healthy, happy, intact nuclear family.
And Deep States are winning.
In this sad sad world, possibly by being lonely. ;-D
What a world.
“What the article assiduously avoids admitting is that fully HALF of all women are themselves “mediocre” - or worse!”
If you look at pictures of women of the 1950s and 1960s in crowd pictures—and then look at them today—the difference is shocking.
A “5” in that time period is an “8” or “9” today.
That means the competition for the more attractive women is very difficult for young men.
It is hard to blame the men for refusing to “settle”.
P.S. Young women were more pleasant to be around in those days—on top of the physical attractiveness issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.