Advertise here. Contact randall dot parker at ymail dot com
2011 May 25 Wednesday
Poor Guys Making Babies

Guys with poor prospects are knocking up women.

Los Angeles, CA (May 23, 2011) With teen moms being debated heavily in popular culture today, it's easy to neglect the effects of fatherhood. However, recent research shows that young, disadvantaged men also affect a family and society. In fact, by age 30, between 68 and 75 percent of young men with a high school degree or less are fathers.

What is wrong with America: It is beyond the pale to tell poor young men to delay making babies. Really, we can't afford the rising costs of irresponsible reproduction. America is going to get poorer. When will our intellectuals face the need to address root causes?

A "perfect storm of adverse events":

A new issue of The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (published by SAGE) called "Young Disadvantaged Men: Fathers, Family, Poverty, and Policy," examines how poverty and lack of education are creating a "perfect storm of adverse events".

What makes this perfect storm possible. Many harmful changes in norms contributed. Pregnancy out of wedlock used to be beyond the pale. It was rare. It was strongly disapproved of. Social programs did not enable it. Political rhetoric about single motherhood was not morally neutral, let alone approving. Celebrities did not make babies outside of marriage if they wanted to remain famous and liked. That's all changed.

So many things have cut into lower class incomes: Automation, outsourcing factories to less developed countries, and immigration have all kicked the supports out from under wages for less skilled workers. Their relative standing in the economy has dropped. Dumber guys aren't making much money. Hey, sorry guys. But we also need you to make fewer babies too for the common good.

So far all the trends continue to point in the direction of a widening gap in earning power between the most and least cognitively able. Machines do routine work. Smart people designs stuff that cuts their need for the labor of dumber people. Mainstream discourse phrases this in terms of low educational achievement rather than IQ. But we need to be real. All the spin isn't going to change the root causes.

Today almost half of all kids are being raised by at least one parent with a low educational background (high school degree or less by age 30) and a poor expected economic future. Additionally 62 percent of fathers with a high school degree or less earned less than $20,000 in 2002. These issues combine to create a roadmap to failure for young, disadvantaged dads.

A recent Pew Research Center report on the decline of marriage underscores the extent to which the decline of marriage is very class-based. Smarter and more affluent people are more likely to raise kids within the institution of marriage.

The Class-Based Decline in Marriage. About half (52%) of all adults in this country were married in 2008; back in 1960, seven-in-ten (72%) were. This decline has occurred along class lines. In 2008, there was a 16 percentage point gap in marriage rates between college graduates (64%) and those with a high school diploma or less (48%). In 1960, this gap had been just four percentage points (76% vs. 72%). The survey finds that those with a high school diploma or less are just as likely as those with a college degree to say they want to marry. But they place a higher premium than college graduates (38% versus 21%) on financial stability as a very important reason to marry.

What is going on here? Do lower class women see their men as less than assets? Has lower IQ male earning power dropped so far that lower IQ women just see these men as more trouble than they are worth? Do they decide to get knocked up by the guys anyway in order to satisfy instinctive desires for babies? Are they getting knocked up by guys who are above their league for permanent relationships?

Given trends this picture is going to get worse.

A point I've made previously: while today older generation married grandparents are raising out-of-wedlock babies the future grand parents will be single losers. So who will raise the illegitimate following generation? Once responsible people are the minority how to keep things working well? The social capital of the United States is on the decline. The nation's prospects are poor.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2011 May 25 08:28 PM  Civilizations Decay


Advertise here. Contact randall dot parker at ymail dot com
Comments
JCJ said at May 25, 2011 10:36 PM:

#1. Talking about this without talking about race is dishonest, the problem isn't poor people having babies the problem is non-whites having babies. The problem is genocide, not economics. Most of the whites will turn out OK, a huge chunk of the non-whites will end up in prison. (See Sweden) #2. Women control birth, they want to have the overwhelming majority of these babies - you're asking these men to forgo sex. Ain't gonna happen. #3. A fish rots from the head down. Nothing rotten in this country, nothing that's killing us, comes from the (white) lower classes, it all comes from the top. Even the attacks on marriage (and on the economy that makes lower class marriage so much more difficult) come from the top. This is the same class that pushes multi-racialism/culturalism while they live in quasi-segregation; racial policies for which they alone are responsible but which the lower classes foot most of the bill for, a bill that includes rape, torture, terrorism, murder and economic displacement.

Mthson said at May 26, 2011 12:13 AM:

JCJ, true, of course. One note: it seems more accurate and more effective to say NAMs (non-Asian minorities) rather than non-Whites.

A.Prole said at May 26, 2011 12:25 AM:

What an incredibly stupid report!
The percentage of fathers 'with High School degree or less' by age 30 is, in fact, no higher than the percentage of such men in the general population who are fathers.

CamelCaseRob said at May 26, 2011 10:16 AM:

The Liberal/collectivist answer to this is to basically remove children from the care of their parents except for a few hours a day. The state will supply 3 meals a day, healthcare, education, and supervised play time. Children will be delivered "home" only for sleep and a little bonding time with parents.

Lono said at May 26, 2011 12:24 PM:

Don't worry yourselves... We Mensans are just waiting for the remainder of the Densans to finally be too ignorant to even successfully govern themselves.

The we shall step into the resulting power vacuum and kick start the Second Renaissance.

You will all be compassionately uplifted in the fullness of time.

California kid said at May 26, 2011 4:42 PM:

"The Liberal/collectivist answer to this is to basically remove children from the care of their parents except for a few hours a day".

Right, but this depends upon there being enough white people to act as surrogate parents. Where do you propose getting all these whites ? Especially considering that Latinos outbreed whites at least 10:1 by my estimate and that whites are fleeing Latino dominated states.

In said at May 26, 2011 8:23 PM:

Once responsible people are the minority how to keep things working well? The social capital of the United States is on the decline. The nation's prospects are poor

Randall
A possible solution that could happen is to prevent responsible people from becoming the minority by keeping them alive longer with new technologies. Older people are wiser http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/03/23/1001715107.

Also I think that demographic trends are more complex than simply "we are declining". There may be positive trends (e.g. demographics could be moving towards less innate violence or aggressiveness... more very high IQ people due to mate selection) that are harder to see.

Further something I noticed when people on blogs like this talk about demographics like this is that it leads to unnecessary racial animosity and discussion that would be offensive to large numbers of people. See JCJ's comment. It is not that it is out in left field (though I don't necessarily agree with it), but more that it isn't useful to frame it that way and closes the minds of people in the main stream. I would propose it is better to talk about aggregate levels of talent than to point out which skin color contains the most or least amount of talent. People who like to put whites on pedestals don't seem to acknowledge or understand the simple fact that there are large numbers of black people that are higher IQ, more productive, better behaved, etc than large numbers of whites. Hell I could go on and on, it just seems to me that many involved in the right blogosphere just as many erroneous things as liberals who want us all the be equal. They won't be taken seriously until balance is brought to the fore.

In said at May 26, 2011 8:30 PM:

I just read "California Kid's" comment. That is exactly the sort of straw-manning of human capacity bull shit that I'm talking about. As if there are no Latinos that could take care of children. What's that noise I hear?? Sounds like a neoliberal whispering "racist" under his breath and Joe six-pack nodding his head in agreement.

Randall Parker said at May 26, 2011 9:36 PM:

JCJ,

The people who think this is all a problem with non-white races are missing what is going on with lower class whites. Over a quarter of white babies are born outside of wedlock. That number is rising. Yet white liberals are more concerned about gay marriage than the are about two married parents for babies. Marriage exists (or at least should exist) for child-rearing.

In,

Agreed. Some Latinos (who really are at least 3 different races) get married and stay married to raise kids. Good for them I say. Does anyone really think that Cuban Spanish upper middle class married people raising kids in a Miami suburb are a threat to the American Way? The problem really is a class thing. That the races are not distributed the same across the classes is besides the point.

I grew up with a lot of lower class whites and I've got no illusions about them. The selective pressures on white social classes described in Gregory Clark's Farewell To Alms did not go on long enough to eliminate the kinds of attributes that are all too widely found in the white lower class.

California kid said at May 27, 2011 12:43 PM:

My comment was in response to the white liberal's self-image as saviors and protectors of NAMs. If you live in the Los Angeles area as I do and read the L.A. Times, you will see this attitude expressed very often. The typical article will show a photo of latino kids munching on a free breakfast in L.A. City schools. It then explains how "their performance is much better" in school. What are they saying ? They're saying latino parents don't feed their kids breakfast. I'm not saying this. White liberals are !

I'm saying that very soon, there won't be enough whites left to supply free breakfast or
whatever to these 10's of millions of latinos. The liberal pipe dream comes to an end.

Anon said at May 27, 2011 9:52 PM:

The Idiocracy is nearly complete as other people's money runs out and anyone with a brain is leaving the US for safer waters. Hear that sucking sound, it is all the rich Americans leaving their country to the stink and rot brought to you by your friendly neighborhood leftist. Yes, there are more poor white folks, and they are being trampled under foot byu the powers that be along with all the brown peoples. What happened in CA is happening across the country, the rich are leaving high tax and leftist states (CA, NY, IL) for the low/no tax states. Businesses are hiring more pliant illegals and moving things around to keep ahead of the labor movements, now labor is joining with the politicos and businesses to bilk the remaining poor as best they can before it explodes.

Check It Out said at May 30, 2011 2:53 PM:

O.K. Who wants to make babies?

ASPIRANT said at May 30, 2011 10:35 PM:

>The Liberal/collectivist answer to this is to basically remove children from the care of their parents except for a few hours a day. The state will supply 3 meals a day, healthcare, education, and supervised play time. Children will be delivered "home" only for sleep and a little bonding time with parents.
Honestly that might not be a bad idea. Lots of parents raise their kids to be religious. Lots of them raise their kids to live in cults, or sell drugs around them. Parents really shouldn't have the right to direct a new however they want just because it dropped out of them. Lots of unhappy people are that way only because of their parents.

Requiring a license to breed is another good solution.

Besides, pinning extreme arguments on leftist straw-men isn't a good idea, since they may just resemble your own ethos. (and be good ideas)


>Yet white liberals are more concerned about gay marriage than the are about two married parents for babies. Marriage exists (or at least should exist) for child-rearing.
A real left-wing based on ideology doesn't even exist in this country anymore. It's all a status-signaling crock perpetrated by SWPLs. Honestly most left-wingers are at their core even more racist than your average republican bumpkin. They're the smartest and most educated elites. They discuss Chaucer and behavioral linguistics on Facebook. They make enough money to live in gated communities before they're out of their 20's. They KNOW they're better than the minorities, and they show their superiority through compassion. And they expand that to compassion for gays blahblahblah what ever issue of the month we're supposed to get all uptight about. They don't think about the realistic problems of mankind because they know, deep in their apricot-scrubbed souls, that when boots come to nuts they'll be alright.

Most god-fearing republicans don't have that sense of superiority. Coming from America's heartland without a lot of mental stimulation, they don't have such a clear cognitive advantage over minorities they meet. Whites, where they're aware enough of their surroundings to care about these things at all, regard minorities not as piddling little human lumps to be fake cared for like dolls, but as a clear threat that may replace them.

REN said at June 3, 2011 2:05 PM:

There used to be a lot of social approbrium regarding "bastards." As we know from the book "bowling alone" by Putnam that social capital is diminished with high levels of immigration. The "others' are seen as others, and thus social friction is born. Since there is social friction, it is not appropriate for a White to admonish a Hispanic, or somebody from another race.

http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/econ/archive/wp2029.pdf

With very high levels of immigration, there is little outmarriage rate, and the immigrants tend to cluster and import their behaviors. Since the bulk of our immigration is from Mexico, then a lot of third world Mexican behavior is imported. That behavior includes high birth rates, but in America it is high birth rates without Dad around.

Interestingly, in Mexico, the birth rate is way down, proably due to high stress from gang/drug shootings and poor economic performance of the country. In the U.S. Latino women are still having high birth rates; the culture says its ok, and besides anchor babies make it nearly impossible to eject an alien immigrant.

I would like to see any data that correlates IQ to out of wedlock births. In other words, is IQ predictive of "future awareness" and self denial type behavior? I don't know.

We need to limit immigration to prevent friction. Low IQ immigrants (from any race) are likely a problem, and since we have high illegal immigration, we cannot screen out the dummies.


Advertise here. Contact randall dot parker at ymail dot com
Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright