Are We Really Coming Apart? (full session)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 чер 2024
- Two very different scholars of American society look at the United States and the growing gap in values and behaviors among communities and classes within them. What is happening and why? What do we do to restore our sense of common purpose? And most of all, what is at risk? Moderated by David Gergen.
Speakers: Charles Murray, Robert D. Putnam, David Gergen
As a Mexican/Hispanic, I have never felt “left out.” My brothers’ and I were born first generation Americans, growing up as typical Americans and enjoyed a very nice life fully integrated and enjoying everything the USA had to offer. We wish the ‘left’ would abstain thinking “we” need help from government programs.
It’s tiresome and insulting.
Murray's theory of "non-judgmentalism" ruling the day pretty much answers all the concerns voiced here. America, as a civilization, no longer has the confidence to assert that people should get married, should have children, that work has value, that we have duties as well as rights, etc. Even the terms "out of wedlock" and "illegitimate" seem vaguely quaint, or even sinister. Until we regain that confidence, degeneracy will lead to more degeneracy.
Agreed... time to prep! Buy ammo food and water!👌👍😉
And here we are in 2023 and these values are completely
Lost. I don’t even know what we are aiming for these days
What Charles Murray wanted to say but couldn't when speaking about preaching against having children out of wedlock, is that social shaming needs to happen. There is no shame in this world so people behave in destructive ways.
"it is wrong to bring a child into the world that you are not prepared to care for." Yes, it all starts there.
How many people were ever born because ' their parents were prepared to raise them'? If you survived to adulthood and can maintain a family relationship, you're prepared. Raising children has become a matter of money and that alone. Once children are seen as important as the new generation and people who will run the world and their own lives, that's all tje preparation CHILDREN need.
Two prominent sociologists, who do actually important work and not critical theory, talk about the dangerously growing class divide across the country. I personally feel that all Americans should be reading and thinking about this subject, but the viewcount seems to indicate that I'm in a slim minority.
I agree, but perhaps the low view count is partly because there are numerous other youtube videos where he goes over the same material.
True of Putnam, but not Murray. He's not a sociologist (nor an economist, though for some reason his TV appearances list him as one), rather he's a political scientist, one who's long been solely affiliated with a partisan think tank for a couple decades now. The last significant research to his name was two papers on IQ & economic outcomes in 2002 and 2006. Funnily enough, they were both partially based on the old NLSY survey results that informed the controversial The Bell Curve almost twenty years earlier. And last before that was a contribution to a volume on crime edited by James Q Wilson in 1995.
I think Murray's "important work" is not his academic innovation but his ability to speak to a broad audience in "Coming Apart," which discussed the influence of growing economic disparity on elite culture. I found this video while looking for a discussion of these issues with another prominent social scientist.
I've only read selections of Coming Apart & the scholarly reception was less than positive. My point is that Murray has long affected the image of a researcher despite little scrutinized research. And that's ignoring the glaring flaws with The Bell Curve.
Avery Morrow And those who've supported him have a similar dubious reputation. Actually, Putnam himself recently had to file an amicus curiae brief in a Supreme Court case to counter one AEI filed that he said distorted his findings on diversity & trust.
I’m a liberal and it’s a shame this guys gets scorned. clearly he comes from the heart and his ability to elegantly describe what he fears is the nuance we desperately need
The changes in the white middle class are due to the absence of a purposeful and meaningful job, as well as the ability to afford to have a family without going insane trying to keep up with the costs of raising a family. The consequences have been disastrous: Over 200k deaths from opiate overdoses, mass shootings, rampant loneliness, anxiety depression and complete loss of hope for the future.
@faultroy i agree with the evolution of society, as the same conditions which created the united states and the society it had at the time no longer exist. It will take a great deal of society wide adversity to separate the wheat from the chaff and make society whole again.
how come America didn't see all these horrors during the Great Depression when the conditions were much harsher? The problem is not the disappearing jobs. The problem is cultural. These very Aspen elites they are reaching out to have been destroying the very fabric of American society for decades. Deliberately.
At 58:00 minutes Putnam pushes back on the idea that Society condemning the practice of bringing children into the world without the benefit of a family, which is clearly an act which is utterly destructive in every measurable way. Murray is correct when he says the benefits of early childhood education programs and their benefits vs cost is difficult to find. When you control for kids who would do well regardless, due to their home situation, two parents, etc., the positive impact of early childhood ed is elusive to put it kindly. The major factor preventing children from succeeding academically is a result of little or no parental investment. Children who get support from their parent or parents tend to succeed to a high degree.
Murray is right about a lot of things. And for that hes being crucified by the insane left.
Looking back & studying the 60s… you get what you empower. We empowered destruction.
Boomer's failed us
I would suggest a look at leisure time. Leisure time and community go together. 5 Whys: There is no leisure time because people are to busy. People are too busy because it takes 2 incomes to prosper. It takes 2 incomes because the cost of decent home require it. The cost is high because government has distorted markets. Government distorts markets because we want government to as demonstrated in our voting record.
I live poor but thanks to my dad and being in the Marines I'd be able to conduct myself and fit in with the audience. Must be nice living in Aspen.
Earthworm Jim you sound bitter.
Striving to work hard is not a virtue ... the problems with culture are that of not respecting property rights and the individual.. This comes from a state and an immoral law system
+Chris Snyder Also, Putnam wants to double down on education monopolies financed through coercion, which I see as a principal engine of degeneration. I suspect he would have a hard time imagining education provided just like any other good or service, though voluntary exchange among willing participants. He might consider studying the way the education market is evolving in Peru, from pre-school all the way up.
illoominate Believe it or not...the feds are now pushing government boarding schools
Putnam is clearly intelligent, yet so irritating. His fundamental flaw is in his faith that individual rationality can give us sufficient understanding to solve broad-scale social problems through "programs."
As an empiricist, Murray understands that solutions are a bottom-up cultural phenomenon, and that only small improvements in the form of trade-offs can come from rational social policy.
read Sowell's book a conflict of visions
Precisely. Putnam epitomizes what Thomas Sowell refers to as the "vulgar pride of intellectuals." This affliction leads to an unshakeable belief in the ruinous policies that have already wreaked havoc on society.
I'm not sure it's faith in individual rationality as much as it is faith in institutions and bureaucracy. Murray seems to believe in individual rationality more so, with the bottom-up cultural phenomenons you mentioned.
@@george_carlos Right, but don't you think he could be swayed with enough evidence? If he reasoned his way into this pothole, he can be reasoned out of it!
Boom...TRUTH, the sudden swing point is where he says the family of the firefighters kids couldn't find jobs (therefore-cause and effect) they got involved in crack cocaine. Thats a choice based on a personal code of ethics, not a societal failure that should have been abrogated by a social safety net. This is about instantly placing blame on society and culture and (in so many words) stating that the fault lies in those who HAVE. This is an out and out lie, but one readily embraced by the left.
When the Houston woman told her anecdote and then Murray countered her with his, that reminded me so much of Season 4 of the The Wire. So many resources dedicated to a handful of individual kids...yet so few, if any, make it out.
I fight to stigmatize poor behavior all the time. Those within the culture though are rarely, if ever, able to change their paradigm.
In 2000 Myron Magnet wrote a book, the Dream and the Nightmare
www.amazon.com/The-Dream-Nightmare-Sixties-Underclass/dp/1893554023
the idea is that the intellectuals and college educated do drugs, dip their pinkies in the crucible of chaos of the lower class behaviors but it is only temporary, not permanent, then they come to the surface and pop out to show up for work on time and live a normal life. But the lower class stay there permanently with their crack pipe and all the attendant behavioral habits.
In my town in Georgia, there is such a glut of industrial jobs that they are having to import workers from outside the state. At least a dozen prominent manufacturers are here, including Kia, Duracell, Milliken, Kimberly Clark, and others. Even during the depths of the 2008 downturn, unemployment here didn't top 7%. Today, it's about 3%.
Despite all this, the working class in my town is just identical to the Fishtown working class that Murray describes. It's not for want of employment opportunities that people here suffer - not at all. Out-of-wedlock birth, drugs, broken families, social detachment, abuse, loss of any religious mooring . . . all these factors are greatly at play here.
Tanner Pittman it’s hard to switch it around from two to three generations of degrading poverty loss of hope and loss of morality. You almost hv to scratch it clean and start again.
Tanner Pittman the hardest and really quite despicable sight I’ve seen is the police tattooed everywhere, even on their necks. I can accept sailors being tattooed bc it’s almost a long standing tradition, but to see the police and other profession that were always an example of honor and trust for the young all inked up is really hard to take. How American society got to this point of immorality and hopelessness coupled with laziness is a question that I would think could only be answered by all of us admitting that we all had a hand in it. Yes all of us.
Tanner Pittman and to put it plainly: when you remove God from any society you are going to get immorality and that comes with all the other adjectives that have been used in this thread to describe Fishtown examples.
Neither side can accept that people are different, that times change, and that perhaps nothing needs to be done.
Too many government programs can be singled out as part of the problem.
We dont need more government involvement.
We need less.
Dave Ward there are not enough jobs for everyone. If you haven't noticed, the goal line for many field keep moving.
A wealth of knowledge. They’re not sending their best to the presidency. MAKE CHARLES RUN!!!!!!!!
When I hear Bill Gates or Steve Jobs interviews mention about how they dropped out of their educational process, it makes me angry as the comments are thoughtless as to the effect they have. It like an NFL millionaire dropping out of education to get in an early draft process. These comments are sending the wrong message which deludes young children. A one in a million fluke ignores the remaining 999,999.
John James good point
I've never heard them recommend that to anybody...what, do you want them to lie about it?
Easy with the anger. Neither of suggested them that anyone replicate them.
I found myself fast forwarding through Putnam's talking. He is very hard to take. Just look at his body language - sitting upright and facing forward, seldom even looking at the two other people, shouting, '"At least let me finish my sentence!". Jeez. He could be making the best points in this debate, but I just couldn't get past his rigid demeanor.
I often disagree with Murray, but I've never heard anyone beat him on the facts of an issue. As one audience member said, facts are facts and data is data. I especially liked Murray's saying that intervention in the lives of failing students doesn't help. He said the data didn't show any improvement, and when he followed up a year later on 'success stories', all of the students had failed once again... or as he put it, "reverted to the baseline".
Many people don't like Murray and want to shoot the messenger. But he makes his points well. And he's not annoying like Putman lol.
I watched The Bell Curve Revisited, and I was struck by the pain you, Mr. Murray, exhibited in your presentation! I am a black American, part of whose ancestors were African and part Native American. If your findings are true, then, you need not apologize for presenting that truth; however, you suspect, and I know, that there are blacks that do not fit your findings, or rather, what your findings suggest. As a student in a segregated school in Florida, in 1946 and 1947, I had scores of 116 out 120 for an international Latin language test for both years: no other student in Florida was near that score. Another student from my school was a national winner in another scholastic test. How would you explain that? Oh yes, on an IQ test while in the army I scored 115. Please don’t beat up on yourself: we haven’t learned all there is to know about race and IQ.
there are high IQ people of all groups, what murray describes are trends not absolutes.
Hello Mr. Solomon, I'm very interested in having a good faith discussion on the infamous Bell Curve book and hopefully I can attempt to answer in Dr. Murray's stead. The first thing I'd want to put forth is that the novel does not focus specifically (or even largely) on race and IQ, but rather devotes only 2 of its 22 chapters to discussing these observed differences. The bell curve is, as the name implies, a graph which displays probabilities. Murray's own findings do not in any way ignore the existence of those individuals like Thomas Stowell, Ralph Ellison, and yourself, they only suggest them to be less common. My opinion is that Murray makes these points in good faith as in the text, as well as Murray's subsequent interviews, he focuses on the fundamentally unfair nature of innate mental aptitude, and how to remediate the numerous discrepancies IQ causes in peoples lives--never ignoring that difference exists largely between individuals of any gender or race rather than between these groups....The Southern Poverty Law Center has a very different opinion.
You are certainly correct that we haven’t learned all there is to know about race and IQ, and the Bell Curve has faced a wave of criticism, some of which seems and honest well informed while others seem ideologically motivated. It would be an eerie coincidence that half of the books staunchest critics are self-described Marxists, who would have a fundamental precept of their extreme, socially-constructed worldview shattered by such information. I strongly believe our poor understanding of this topic is due to fundamentally repugnant nature of the research. Perhaps those who would be able to research gender or racial differences in an objective manner are turned off by the thought, and those who are willing have presuppositions of racial supremacy or conversely 'tabula rasa' lurking in their mind, which biases their assessment. Researchers from the worlds most esteemed schools like Lawrence Summers, Amy Wax, Noah Carl, and even Stephen Pinker face ridicule from their peers, threats to their careers and livelihood, and the very real possibility of physical assault as happened to Murray. I think the incredibly left leaning nature of academia and the University far exceed this one taboo and spell disaster for a number of scientific fields, the children it educates, and the society it informs
@@hedgefundphil Seems like someone with even an average I.Q would know that.
@@Official_Baba_yaga He has nothing to feel guilty about.
I am an aficionado of intelligence testing being a burnt out school teacher yet I don’t believe in IQ tests. One of the reasons I don’t believe is because I’ve gotten wildly divergent scores myself fluctuating between rank average and being in the top 1%. I think that the Iowa tests of academic aptitude are better and that they should be used to determine whether or not to place secondary students in college prep or industrial arts. In general, people who are avid readers will end up developing astronomically high verbal scores on the GRE especially even if they are dunces at mathematics. Kids growing up in houses with no reading material, where no one reads to them, and where there are no intellectual discussions are pretty much doomed to failure in school. And finally, lower class schools ruin poor kids by treating them as if they are incapable of being civilized by not having disciplinary standards.
In his book "Coming Apart" Charles Murray, without trying do so, essentially foretold the Trump phenomenon.
...and the Biden phenomenon.
"Doing for and doing with.." Yes!!! Yes!!!
Instead of paying for illegitimate children, why doesn't the government pay people to not have children? Tubal ligation is 99% effective as birth control and is reversible.
wow this sounds so much like the normal discourse we hear from CNN and FOX
What a great discussion this was!!
Well. Where are community discussions on these topics?? Here in NW Metro Denver....THEY DONT EXIST!! Politics of Silence!!
Well where are the community discussions on these topics. Here in NW Metro Denver: THEY DONT EXIST!!
The guy on the right of the panel, his solutions are all socially administrative. The kid growing up is going to ask more than where can I fit in. What can I make of myself, basically, how can I *self-actualize* is his yearning. And he wants to lay it out for them, more so than is already laid out to the chagrin of many vocal, and often enough. Start them even earlier he says. People of his stripe always want to tend the garden in this manner. People want to own their lives, and they won't let us be. Stop trying to fix everyone.
Chaos may beget order, order will only beget chaos, but you will not allow even the possibility of chaos, the frontier is truly dead, and it seems only there is ever allowed spontaneous existence.
Funny, the Chinese have a word for the peasants and independent spirited on the fringes of their state, they call them "wild grass". And they will not be content until they have made a golf course of them. But the American liberal is not desperate to control sporadic elements for the security of the state, he does so as matter of religion.
Jacobins... the plague of modern history.
+Damian Sellus If that case,go back to marry your cousin and live in a clan/tribe.
I'm put in mind of a sentence from Shakespeare: his post was a lot of "smoke and fury, signifying nothing."
Putnam looks like he is coming apart!!! body language is aggressive and disrespectful whereas Murray stays eternally chill
DAVID GURGAN............WE KNOW HE VISITS THE BOHEMIAN GROVE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ÚLFHÉÐNAR there’s one or two in every crowd.
The U.S. population has more than doubled since the end of WW2. The worlds population has doubled since 1959. There has been a constant growth in most everything except wisdom. What happens to a balloon when it exceeds its capacity?
Clearly there is significant degree of PERSONAL antagonism from Putnam towards Murray. The studies they produced should make them allies - but clearly that is largely a one way street.
My take - at the half-way mark - is that Murray can be concise whilst remaining impactful. Putnam does not do concise, but does do faux-emotional and does do judgmental - which is strange as he is demonstrably the more status-conscious of the two.
I do NOT see Murray’s take on anything as being “patrician” as Putnam insists - if anything that criticism is much more easy to level at Putnam : my life, and that of my family is wonderful - so I can now AFFORD to indulge my patronising concern for “those people over there”. Typifies, for me, affluent condescending American periscope sociology.
Which is - OF COURSE! - what has driven the acceleration of this polarisation over recent decades.
Hobby socialism.
People are not being left behind. They are falling behind. America is becoming an ever increasingly technologically driven society and people are failing to put forth the efforts to keep up.
Gone are the days of a high school dropout getting a job at the car plant making $25.00 an hour tightening lugnuts.
Only 12% of U.S. adults scored in the highest literacy proficiency levels, and only 9% scored in the highest numeracy levels.
While 52% of Americans score at or below literacy level 3.
Level 3 is equivalent to literacy levels at age 9-11.
Adults with skills below Entry Level 3 may not be able to understand labels on pre-packaged food or understand household bills.
David Gergen likes Bohemian Grove
Shoutout to eugenics 😊😇
school as substitute for family.....NO!
Sounds like, the issue is concern over influence and from where, along with reinforcing positions, more so than the welfare and best interests, of a child, adults, and or present generations as is as well as nto the future.
A very interesting discussion.
Think about the saying, SUPERMAN’S motto, “Truth, justice and the American way,” has since the days that CM is talking about, been rewritten in “Superman Returns” to “Truth, justice and . . . all that stuff.” What Bullshit! I grew up with that ORIGINAL version, still believe in it, and will take it to my grave.
53:50 beginning with the question (kinda strangely worded) and Dr Murray's answer is dead on target.
44:28 what a charlatan get owned by Murray, sophist
I love how all of the audience, whom Murray pronounced as being 'the upper class' are feeling terribly smug, and saying to themselves, 'Thank God I won at the lottery of life, and I am going to do everything in my power to keep it that way'. 😆😆
I also detest smug, complacent people the epitome of which was my Ivy League educated Episcopal rector at my childhood parish presiding as he was over this moribund parish within a dead religion, or world Anglicanism. I told him it made no difference if he didn’t want to recommend me for divinity school because Anglicanism is a dead religion anyway so the job prospects down the line would’ve been slim to none in any event so I was looking into becoming a Buddhist as after all, it’s been proven that Jesus never actually existed in the first place and at least Siddhartha Gautama was indeed a historical figure having been born into the nobility. Today that parish is so anemic that they can’t even find people to sing in the choir. But they’ve got shitloads of money so they entirely rebuilt the office annex.
excellent
One social scientist simply states the facts of the research and his take on possible outcomes...the second brings us deep into the "feeling" zone that we might partake, and be pulled into the fundamental unfairness that the "haves" have perpetrated on the rest of us...without going into (because this is key) the divorce of the good blue collar firefighter whose wife then ends up stripping (two more choices, divorce and stripping) bad remarriage to two dysfunctional spouses (more bad choices) then the hopelesness and despair that goes with those choices...Not the girls fault, but still her responsibility....Our planet has had these stories woven deeply throughout the fabric of existence since Adams first son murdered his second son in order to take his property....No social program will ever change that, what will ALWAYS change that is the same thing that got Adam through it...that gets refugees thru the loss of all they ever owned or knew, that gets the war torn back to living in a state of peace (read The Hiding Place) and that fixes the problems in the heart of all mankind, but remains largely ignored as we seek to fix the problems by placing blame and demanding money from those who have a little more of it than others. Never worked before, won't work now...
Every institution/nation at every point in history has had an hierarchy. It MUST be based on ability amidst competition in the marketplace of ideas. Equality of outcome without equal contribution kills the dreams that fuel innovation. The fruit of ones labor belong to one’s self.
Legend😊😇
Money and love and caring does make a difference
Even if IQ isn’t raised, wouldn’t helping a disadvantaged child have even a small amount possibly improve the quality of their lives and future? Seems worth it to me.
Education segregation has replaced race segregation. Education is the new racism, new bigoted bias. That is the core shift from 1960 to 2010, the take over of America by college graduates, very liberal, global, different. I grew up in North Minneapolis, blue collar, went to college, and have one foot in both worlds. It's a big problem that inflation has benefited the college graduates but harmed the blue collar and high school graduate drop out.
@JackGoldman1 I don't know if that is true. It really depends on what field you're in. I'm a pharmacist and we have seen dramatic changes from the 80's and 90's until now in our job market because the market is now saturated .so we can do well financially IF we find a job
@@nazareehines-starr6297 Thanks for your comment. My comment mainly reflects the abolition of IQ tests which were replaced by requiring a college degree that is expensive and a waste of money for many. I never really used my degree, going into self employment. I wasted the money. Too bad many waste their time and money. Really sad.
Prescient.
Is the question NOT how will we in power sway “things” toward our children? Isn’t this to be expected anywhere? If you flap your arms too much toward MY children. Do you not run an awful risk?
APR 2020: Return to Judeo-Christian values, morals and ethics; Bring manufacturing back to the USA; and Focus on what is best for the U.S.A. (This will, of course, require that Conservatives own the Office of the Presidency, the House and the Senate for the next three or four decades. The Left thrives on class differences.Their policies incentivize dependency on the state/ a welfare state and are destroying this country.
The root cause is globalization. We gave away all our working class jobs to the world and got zip adee doo dah in return. It was great for the stockholders but a loss for the workers. Wages rose with productivity years ago but once the Soviet Union fell and once union membership went from 30% fo the workforce in 1950 to 7% now there was no lever for the working class. Their wages rose 4% while productivity was going up 90%.
The Gini coefficient is at.45, up from.35 in 1960. It measures income disparity. Japan and Germany are still at a middle class friendly.35.
Productivity increased 98% from 1960 to 1973, wages increased 98%. Good, makes sense. Its only fair.
From 1973 to 2010 productivity increased 84%, wages increased 4%. Does not make sense? No.
Why?
Immigration 'reform' in 1965 and 1986, brought in many many low wage workers.
David Gergen can make all kinds of nice multicultural noises but remember these Mexicans think 10 dollars an hour is a King's ransom.
The law of supply(more lower paid workers) lowers the demand(wages) and that is the iron law of economics.
The elite leaders do not care about the working class especially the White working class. They think globalization is good(perhaps it is good for their stock portfolio but not for the regular salaried and hourly American workers).
We should be producing where products are consumed, not shipping them half way around the world. Global shipping is one of the biggest producers of greenhouse gases, and yet everyone is happy to destroy Western economies with environmental regulations that countries like China never follow. We have basically doubled down on the problem. It's insane.
The root cause is that by 1972 the overseas economies had become to recover from the war and our industry had lost its relative monopoly. From about that point on, capital began to move out of this country overseas. By the 1980s, the children of parents who held union-protected jobs and who had left high school expecting to end up as well off as their parents found that the “good”jobs were not there. Unlike their parents who had lived through the depression and the war, they had come to expect a very high standard of living based jobs that were beginning to disappear. So globalization has been a long term process.
Globalization has indeed hurt many communities, but technology has destroyed significantly more jobs than international labor competition.
Verden782 Fifty-eight
Globalization explains part of the problem, but not nearly all of it. There are still decent paying jobs all over the place, even if you didn’t go to college, if you’re willing to work hard. Globalization doesn’t explain why employers all over the country say it is very difficult to find white guys who will come to work everyday, on time, & work hard. The fact that our shoes are made in China doesn’t explain why so many Americans are lazy now.
shane sawyer how hard? I graduated college and found my field preferred illegal people to well educated ones like me. They were cheaper and the work was dumbed down to meet the educational level of these workers. Anything is made possible when you can make more money. I took a job with the Feds and it required 17 hrs a day/ 7 days a week (no days off) with a 10 month commitment. I did this for 11 years. As a result I’ve had:
A total knee replacement
Two meniscus operations
One umbilical hernia
Two torn rotor cuffs
Two bunion surgeries
And two herniated discs
I wonder, did I work hard enough?
They both might be wrong. They are looking at the past through rose colored glasses. When I grew up in the 1950, 60, 70's working class dads often seemed like abusive drunks but their wives had few options and so stayed with them and they worked hard because they hard no options.
It is all relative. Yes, working class dads were often abusive. So were dads at every level of society. But on balance, it was better to stay married then to divorce. When divorce became easy, loads of women began to leave for lesser causes. Men began to see the merit in not marrying.
@@JRobbySh a lot of women seek out abusive men even today
J Oliver the trifecta is:
God
Neighbor
You
It’s not
Marriage
Work
Happiness
Putnam needs to chill. Very uptight
“THEIR kids have to be OUR kids now!!” 🙄Ugh. Putnam has no insight into how narcissistic his icky strain of paternalism is.
Yes, I cringed at that little outburst of hysterics. I can listen to Murray for hours, but ten minutes of Putnam is all I stand.
Typical leftist
@@JoeJoe-ci5fs He's not a leftist. Get out of your bubble.
He needs to try some yoga. His paternalism sounds a bit cringey and preachy, but I'll let it slide if he backs it up with actions.
Money means everything in our social stratification and behavior. Take it away from any group and watch them unwind. Blue collar jobs that provide a decent wage have been decreasing for years. The is the result.
Money provides freedom and choice BUT, it doesn't provide happiness, I know that sounds cliche, but I've had both money and no money and I've realized what matters is good physical health, sanity, and a good friend or two, oh and good food.😀👍
It seems to me that we have decided that we don't want to invest in kids. We want to invest in OUR kids, but we don't want to create a system that ensure some reasonable minimum of opportunity for everyone's kids. That means that you have a system where the children of the wealthy have tremendous opportunity. The children of the middle class have opportunity, but if they don't do well with what they have they'll wind up in the poor class. The poor class have few if any opportunities.
How'd we get here? We decided that government was the enemy. That investment in the middle class and the poor was government hand outs (unlike government hand outs to the wealthy and powerful, those are fine) and create a perverse incentive structure.
People like this will never understand because experience and observation are two different things
Sam Johnson you are sooooo right!!!! They will never understand the pain of your body when you work 6 days a week and 48-50 hrs a week just to make ends meet. And you hv a college degree. You see Mr. Sam, honest work that offers benefits is really the only way you build a Middle Class but the rich want the Serfdom Class bc a middle class has too much power and it makes things balanced so that everyone can hv a happy life. But then there’s no one to service the rich.
I thought that it was all about IQ?🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
It looked like it was turning into a dissertation defense a couple of times there.
Solution - Make adoption quicker and affordable in America
Brilliant author and man. Totally ignorant about the MAGA mentality. His comments about Donald J. Trump are not only destructive but wrong-headed and ignorant.
I hope that Trump's economic policies, and returning factories, will help restore stable neighborhoods. That's definitely part of his plan for "making America great again."
Q: How do you break the generational cycle of poverty?
A: 54:40
Summary: Social programs have extremely limited results. Instead: "It is wrong to bring a child into the world that you are not prepared to care for." Basically, smart people will produce smart kids, stupid people will produce stupid kids. It's actually quite simple.
I don't understand this take on what Murray said, which was about willingness to care for the children you've made. That property may well correlate with smartness, but it's not identical to it.
Assuming your last statement is true (stupid people = stupid kids), how would you even prevent this from happening? Political parties are always going to run on helping the poor, giving out some form of welfare to single mothers, etc. If any political party tries to do what Murray has suggested before, which is give nothing to single mothers, the party will lose the election.
Putnam is an intellectual weasel. Far outclassed by Murray.
Agreed.
He seems like a fumbling spaz
They have parallel ways of folding their arms around themselves, too.14:40
Love the tiger, but love the tiger at a distance with a high powered rifle. Respect the lion but don't pet the lion. The lion will eat me. I must respect reality that educated bubble people don't deal with in the brutal survival of poor cities.
Murray was just plain wrong about the economics. By the 1990s work didn't pay for men at the bottom. 18$ an hour was already too small to pay for a normal life and people knew it. Going from 20 dollars an hour in the seventies to 18 dollars an hour in the nineties while all costs of life went up, it made no sense to invest emotionally in a system that cared more about raising lifestyles in China than keeping them up in America. Everything went down from there. The idea that immigrants will work harder isn't true after a year or so when they get to the truth that hard work doesn't result in better life anymore. The Harvard guy is right on the cusp of understanding but he can't stand the conclusion that his facts show.
41:59
The silent generation and the boomer generation were the ones that ensured cultural decline.
It’s always been about class
People are not being left behind, they are choosing to fall behind.
Teachers should stick to teaching and leave parenting to the parents.
I had to stop listening. Can’t believe that jerk on the left (of the stage that is) saying ‘negro’ 5x in a row. With that accent, he especially should never use that word again.
2021 - the malaise of the lower class structure has spread to the core.....witness harry/megan......just saying
Terrible, terrible question at 54:00.
That cringy silence at the end, ooh boy.
Can us peasants simply revolt? Let's do it, I'm tired of talk and this civilization nonsense. Let's get back to basics. MEN! Grab your pitchforks, onward braves!
I first saw this video many years ago when it was first posted by the AI. I was in management and was on an extended business trip for 3 months. I took my child with me. My husband stayed behind. He was a cashier at a gas station.
When I returned from that trip and every trip, the house was a real mess and the grass needed cutting. This was frustrating because I not only paid **all** of the bills but was also the primary parent, cleaner/cook, and I was the only one who washed clothes.
We have since split. I have heard it said that women are catching up so fast to the average earnings of men, and are ahead of them in college grad rates, and that this is a reason for marriage decline among the working and middle class.
I would challenge that. I think most people, men and women, do not care if their partner makes less, the same, or more. Nor do they care if they are unvenly matched in terms of blue/white collar. But it is natural to do an occasional pulse check and make sure that any partnership is mutually beneficial and not too skewed.
It is normal that societies update their values to be helpful at different rates. For example, Mexico and Rwanda both only stopped valuing the giant family (lots of children) well after they ceased to be so agrarian and in need of all them kids. It had disastrous consequences for Rwanda in the '90s as we all know.
In the US, we accept now that women can get educated and earn. This is a sea change in a couple generations since my granny got fired from her job as shoe girl at a dept store for being "too old" at 26. She was told that she could not get a bank account in the '70s without the title of "Mrs Husband'sFirstName Husband'sLastName".
But we have not adjusted our attitudes toward the expectations of men. I can pay half of the bills like a roommate (as I said I paid all) but it is rare that the man will remain sensitive to the need to do half of the housework or parenting.
My situation is common among my friends. Most make the same or more than their husbands and contribute half or more than half to the household expenses. The new generation of women are seeing this and deciding that a roommate situation looks like less cost, less work and more freedom.
The MGTOW movement has been a push-back against this new reality. They lament a changing job market and economy, but women are living in the same dimension that they are. Upon learning that a woman is successful in her career, a smart man would see that as an opportunity to build financial security with a woman. Instead, many men these days who cannot or will not strive to achieve such success will roll their eyes at these seemingly meaningless achievements and say "big deal; can you cook and clean?" to remind her that, despite being at least an equal contributor to the income of a home, she will be the one taking on the task of homemaker. He will be offended if the same question is asked of him.
Sorry for making this so long but this is why the new generation does not want to marry. Many women have decided that singledom seems like a more attractive option than paying to be a servant. "Enjoy your cats, ladies" is not the threat that the embittered men of our day seem to think it is.
Your experience and the issue that you described has very little to do with the subject. The working class families are getting destroyed not because women begin to earn more than men. It's a rarity in those places Murray and Putnam were talking about. I don't know if the welfare programs play the same devastating role as in the destruction of the Black Family as a societal institution but the other issue - men-children with no sense of responsibility - is obvious.
@@HiddenUsename if you are saying that men do not have a sense of responsibility, wouldn't that seem to indicate that the women are out earning the men in these communities?
@@HiddenUsename I didn't say that this is a reason for communities being destroyed per se. I said it was the end to marriage for the working class. The feminist movement he's done a great job of helping women break glass ceilings professionally but we lag far behind in finding a balance between men and women when it comes to taking care of the home and children. No one wants to be the primary Breadwinner and the primary homemaker and parent when another parent is also there. They would rather just be single. In this way, Vahmurkha, it has everything to do with the subject. It explains why working-class women do not want to marry. Or why they choose to not stay married.
@@RasheedahsWifeSchool why? It does not mean that women are responsible. Having a baby in high school is not a responsible thing to do. Nowadays one can get free condoms easily. Secondly, earning with a little baby on your hands is very difficult. Thirdly, the jobs available in those communities - construction, landscaping, etc - are primarily "male" jobs. I don't buy the whole "job equality" thing.
I could go on but I think it's enough to show that your conclusion has no basis in reality
look at polls, 70% of women admit they wouldn’t marry someone poorer and it’s taboo so surely even more think it but won’t admit. Stop feeding this delusion
(paraphrasing) "You shouldn't have a child you are unprepared to care for." In a world of growing disparities in our economy, and the concretization of class across generation, is such a statement condemning poor people to lives without children? If you are poor you can't procreate? That's dangerous.
+Nikkole Salter No. He said it's wrong (in his opinion) to bring a child into this world that you are not prepared or able to care for. Period.
ztnjv What does "prepared or able to care for" mean? Is not part of being prepared/able to care for a child being able and willing to financially provide for them such that they have what they need to be successful in this world? I say, yes. Which means, in his opinion, poor people should not procreate knowing that they cannot provide a safe place to live, safe reliable transportation, education that prepares them to compete in the market for the best jobs, food that is nutritious and doesn't make them obese, health insurance in case they get sick, additional support in areas they may lag behind, extra curricular and enrichment activities that expose them to the possibilities of the world, and other costs associated with life's milestones? Should you procreate knowing that, because of your economic rank you'd always be either unable to provide financially or always away from home trying to earn enough money to provide, so that your kids spend more time with babysitters and teachers than they do with you? Perhaps he should elaborate on what he means by "prepared or able to care for." In my book, it's definitely a condemnation of the poor... and I still think that's dangerous.
+Nikkole Salter "prepared or able to care for" is not simply financial. It's a complete ability. Poor people who are only poor in money can and do successfully raise children. I think that's the general view that Murray was referring to.
I agree that money is not the only requirement necessary to care for a child. But I feel that it is among the most important things needed to ensure your child is successful in life. I think most parents what that for their children. Most parents don't just want to care for their children, they want them to be successful. They don't want to raise children that are able to do in life better than they have done. That's part of the American promise.
No it's like it has always historically been. In the middle Ages through the French Revolution, peasants had to obtain permission from their feudal lords to marry and have a child. They often had to apprentice their children off and those few who owned their land, if it wasn't vast, had to throw out the sons who wouldn't inherit any land
48:00
This is incorrect indicated by every major city. As I type the region of Burkhead in northern Atlanta is attempting to secede from the city of Atlanta…
The problem with Putnam & Murray is there failure to recognize that the civil rights movement was a complete failure. Couple that with decades of mass immigration… no bueno.
There are two cultures, government employees living large and everyone else who pay taxes to support them.
Marriage costs money. Also the lower/lowest classes tend to produce more children.
becus they have more time to FK up and down.
An actual marriage ceremony can be done at a low cost and being married is an economic boon for a household with two incomes and shared responsibility for child care.
Marriage means two incomes in the family. Welfare permits one person to have children and by making the second income seem unnecessary, and encourages the guy not to think he needs to support his kid.
This whole thing looks like as symposium out of "Hunger Games"; sedated, insulated souls, congratulating themselves; laughing.
+Joel Gehrke I like the convivial and rational discourse.
+Joel Gehrke , a very interesting discussion, yes insular, but all conventions are that way....anyway, what's exactly is your point?
I watched this thing three months ago. I don't remember any ulterior point.
I guess Robert D. Putnam voted for Trump.
as a gen X'er I cannot fathom why anyone would listen to a baby boomer who has an opinion on what should be done to improve society.
@franz stockmann unfunded liabilities will damage future generations.
@franz stockmann www.truthinaccounting.org/
The answer: all parties using the model of Jesus to develop.
Another rich libertarian that feels the need to sow division
Sow division? So speaking facts is racist and divisive? Got it... 😂🤣🖕
How much more blind and in denial could Charles Murry be? His libertarianism, which is simply a word used to mean unfettered, extreme individualism serves as the root cause of the social incivility that he criticizes. Libertarianism conceives of individual liberty as existing outside the context of community responsibility, outside of equality, which opens the floodgates of interpersonal abuse and neglect. Putnam sees the need for a balance, which serves as a restraint. Deny the denial; cover up the cover up. The core problem is Murry's brand of elitist libertarianism.
So racist.
Can you be more specific? Seriously. I've been reading Murray lately, and listening to tons of his talks, and I just don't see why there's a controversy. He makes statistically valid assertions, and NONE of them seem to endorse or support any sort of discriminatory policy. Could you possibly be making a snap judgment? I mean, I did for a long time before I actually read him.
Now I see the controversy as more of an inability of most people to make use of statistical data. There's also a problem with listening: nobody wants to consider anything in this charged environment. Groups may have measurable differences; sure, that's just a fact, but that also says nothing about any of the traits of an individual.
*My group does not measure me; I help to measure my group. *