The 'Quiet Catastrophe' Of Men Choosing To Not Seek Work

Investors Business Daily ^ | 10/06/2016 | GEORGE F. WILL

[expat_panama]

The "quiet catastrophe" is particularly dismaying because it is so quiet, without social turmoil or even debate. It is this: After 88 consecutive months of the economic expansion that began in June 2009, a smaller percentage of American males in the prime working years (ages 25 to 54) are working than were working near the end of the Great Depression in 1940, when the unemployment rate was above 14%.

If the labor force participation rate were as high today as it was as recently as 2000, nearly 10 million more Americans would have jobs.

The work rate for adult men has plunged 13 percentage points in a half-century. This "work deficit" of "Great Depression-scale underutilization" of male potential workers is the subject of Nicholas Eberstadt's new monograph "Men Without Work: America's Invisible Crisis," which explores the economic and moral causes and consequences of this:

Since 1948, the proportion of men 20 and older without paid work has more than doubled, to almost 32%. This "eerie and radical transformation" -- men creating an "alternative lifestyle to the age-old male quest for a paying job" -- is largely voluntary.

Men who have chosen to not seek work are two and a half times more numerous than men that government statistics count as unemployed because they...

...Only about 15% of men 25 to 54 who worked not at all in 2014 said they were unemployed because they could not find work.

For 50 years, the number of men in that age cohort who are neither working nor looking for work has grown nearly four times faster than the number who are working...

...The "economically inactive" have eclipsed the unemployed...

...Eberstadt does not say that government assistance causes this...

...America ranks 22nd, ahead of only Italy, in 25 to 54 male labor force participation...

[kearnyirish2]

Especially considering my overtime pay was $0...

[kearnyirish2]

That’s right; at this point life on the dole gets you the same standard of living, in the same ghettos, as people working low-wage jobs (and they just end up tired). I believe that is what is driving the push to increase the minimum wage; rather than cut freebies (political suicide in some areas), they’d rather just make it worthwhile for someone to work low-wage jobs by giving them a slightly better standard of living than the gibsmedats.

[kearnyirish2]

Take your analogy a step further: When you stop feeding bears that can’t feed themselves. they attack the people that used to feed them - like in Ferguson, Baltimore, etc.

[MSF BU]

I know a pair like you (and me) and their solution to this was to buy a good size convenience store and operate it between themselves. The long days are divided by two and they have put together a good team of mostly older white people as staff. The two younger children working the place are family members of the staff.

[AC86UT89]

Modern marriage is a trap for men, which is why fewer men are bothering. And with no wife and kids to feed, it’s relatively inexpensive to live a comfortable life outside of high stress, low quality of life work environments.

And frankly if you are a white male working for a large company, you will hit the diversity ceiling soon enough, so better be prepared.

[wastoute]

See the irony? Libtards don’t. It is funny that the SAME PEOPLE who insist on putting up “Don’t feed the bears” signs are the same folks who keep increasing welfare benefits.

[Boogieman]

“After 88 consecutive months of the economic expansion that began in June 2009, a smaller percentage of American males in the prime working years (ages 25 to 54) are working than were working near the end of the Great Depression in 1940...”

Because the “expansion” is a conjurer’s trick. Whatever growth there is has been fueled by money pumped into the stock market by the government, not by wealth and job creation.

[wastoute]

Go look at the photos I posted links to on the healthcare thread. It ain’t a diversity ceiling, it is a diversity SLAB.

[MSF BU]

What these numbers don't take into account is the number of men who are very industrious but simply working in the black economy or without wages. An example might be somebody who manages his rental units and does not take any pay but reimburses himself generously for 'expenses' each month. It is easy enough to do. Likewise how many men do you know who 'retire' then go right back to work for cash only in landscaping, light construction, transportation, etc.? I know quite a few men & women who fall into this category.

As regards Will's statement "The collapse has coincided with a retreat from marriage ("the proportion of never-married men was over three times higher in 2015 than 1965"), which suggests a broader infantilization.": This is no doubt partially true, but it's also the case that people never meet the right person. They're not interested in what they can get and they can't get what they want thus no marriage. If they're is a solution to that I'm not aware of it.

[Buckeye McFrog]

I have a family member who worked for a small manufacturing company that had some government contracts. They were always under the Affirmative Action gun. Did everything in their power to recruit and retain minorities, with little success.

It seems every time they hired a black woman she would leave for the weekend on Friday and then never be able to answer the bell Monday morning.

[yoe]

"......Only about 15% of men 25 to 54 who worked not at all in 2014 said they were unemployed because they could not find work."

Last time I checked the unemployed could live very well on government subsistence....and probably other handouts from their communities. Americans have been weaned off the work ethic; Political Correctness has removed any shame or humiliation for not working. That may be an over-simplification but sure as heck part of the problem.IMHO.

[Bryanw92]

>>I am sorry you have had a bad relationship or three. However, the problem is not that, as you put it, “ marriage and children are a sucker bet,” the problem is the destruction of the family and the removal of God and His saving grace from our society. If men followed God’s plan for our lives then there would be no problem.

I haven’t. I’ve been married for 35 years. But I’m looking at the experiences of those who are younger than me and if I was their age and single, I’d definitely stay single. I’m also becoming more Deist in my beliefs, so I don’t think God really worries about some guy getting married.

[HLPhat]

>>Sociobiological fitness is a dream.

Maybe to a generation of neutered poodles.

But to the cultures that, throughout history, managed to compete because they were able to produce multiple generations of reproductively viable offspring - evidently not so much.

The generation that won WWII did so because of the reproductive fitness that was self-evident throughout the American heartland.

[PapaBear3625]

It’s all tied to marriage. When American men realized that marriage and children are a sucker bet, they didn’t need to worry about chasing the “American dream” anymore.

Feminists have spent decades trying to rip down "the Patriarchy", with most not really realizing what that would do. Note that "patriarchy" does not mean "rule by men", it means "rule by fathers".

Men would strive to become educated in order to become big earners. They would strive to become big earners in order to be able to attract a good woman, and be able to raise a family, and become fathers. This desire motivated men to go work the uncomfortable, physically demanding, and dangerous jobs that need to get done in order to keep civilization running.

In an environment where getting married is for suckers, where men can be stripped of their assets in divorce court, and their children alienated from them by bitter ex-wives, increasing numbers of men are opting out.

A man doesn't need a high paying job to support just himself. He doesn't need to be able to make a mortgage on a big house. If he's just spending for himself, he can get by on occasional work, and have lots of leisure time to go to the gym, pick up girls, play video games, or whatever he desires for personal fulfillment in the post-marriage environment.

[Boogieman]

No, but they are better off single and supporting themselves than divorced and supporting a woman who hates them.

[JPJones]

“Let’s see, for three decades we have been told we have to do this thing to help females and that thing to help females and spend a billion dollars to promote females and then, one day, we suddenly notice that males have been screwed? Astounding levels of brilliance from folks who consider themselves smart. Intellectuals, even. Morons, the lot of them.”

Ding!

Sociology 101: white males are to blame for all current societal problems.

Marxism 101: The bourgeoisie (middle class) needs to be destroyed.

Why is Will (the putz) so surprised? The plan is proceeding right on schedule. He should be happy.

[cgbg]

The key issue is the economic concept of marginal utility.

While not everyone will act strictly in their economic self-interest a large number will be heavily influenced by it.

Kids more expensive than not having kids?

Marriage more expensive than not being married?

Differences between handouts and wages smaller and smaller?

All of these affect behavior at the margin.

If you think of economic behavior as a Monte Carlo simulation and create policies that have these affects then millions and millions of people will be shown to have changed their behavior.

We are suffering the consequences of eighty years of government incentives not to work, not to marry, and not to have kids.

It is just that simple—and just as easy to reverse.

Bottom line: Trump 2016!

[expat_panama]

Happy Thursday --stocks are up & metals are crashing not as bad as before!   Our 'confirmed uptrend' continues as major stock indexes rose a half % in rising volume.  Not only do futures traders say they'll be up another half %, they also say they'll go down today (?!).  Gold & silver are doin' the dead-cat-bounce now at $1,267.50 and $17.79.

Today's reports:

7:30 AM Challenger Job Cuts
8:30 AM Initial Claims
8:30 AM Continuing Claims
10:30 AM Natural Gas Inventories

Elsewhere:

Four Crucial Areas of Unfinished Business - Barack Obama, The Economist
Why Working Class White Men Earn Less Than in '96 - Tami Luhby, CNN
Good Truck Drivers Hard to Find as US Job Market Tightens - Bloomberg
Global Debt Hits a Staggering $152 Trillion - John Grgurich, Fiscal Times
Jeff Gundlach Thinks Economic Policy Pivot Is Coming - Linette Lopez, BI
Markets Struggle to Price Three Uncertainties - Mohamed El-Erian, BV
Stock Market 'Complacency' Is About to End - Tim Clift, MarketWatch
Economists Think Trump Trade Policies are 'Lunatic' - Thomas Edsall, NYT
Despite Brexit Turmoil, British Politics Is Healthy - Peter Apps, Reuters
TBTF? The Real Concern Is Banks Too Weak to Survive - Greg Robb, MW

[Boogieman]

“Their number was estimated around 42% the last election...”

Yes, estimated poorly. That number includes ALL beneficiaries, including elderly social security recipients and people getting veteran’s benefits, who aren’t all that likely to vote Democrat.

[sparklite2]

I had to read the article. It’s amazing how they can bring Trump into that.

---

It’s George Will. He’s anti-Trump.