mayonesa comments on "NRx" vs. "Prog" Assumptions: Locating the Sources of Disagreement Between Neoreactionaries and Progressives (Part 1) - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Matthew_Opitz 04 September 2014 04:58PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (340)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: mayonesa 08 September 2014 02:24:20PM 2 points [-]

By improving working conditions and monetary value so that a home needs only one working parent.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 08 September 2014 04:57:46PM 3 points [-]

Time was when a home did need only one working parent (that is, working to bring in money). If things are always getting better, and they seem to be (in the developed world, e.g. the Internet, etc.), what changed?

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 08 September 2014 05:15:05PM 5 points [-]

Recently answered in detail on State Star Codex. Basically, two-income families are competing against each other for housing in good areas, driving up prices, and seeing no benefit in disposable income.

Comment author: Azathoth123 09 September 2014 12:18:26AM 5 points [-]

Ok, now taboo "good area".

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 09 September 2014 10:18:55AM *  0 points [-]

Area with good school.

Comment author: jaime2000 09 September 2014 01:53:04PM *  6 points [-]

"Good schools" is a euphemism.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 09 September 2014 01:42:29PM 3 points [-]

And a good school is the sort of school that those families want to send their children to. I don't know anything about how high school education is organised in the US — why is the market not supplying this need?

Comment author: jaime2000 09 September 2014 02:08:12PM *  6 points [-]

The goodness of a school is not a property of the school's organizational structure or teaching methodology so much as it is a property of the students who attend the school ("a ghetto/barrio/alternative name for low-class-hell-hole isn't a physical location, its people"). Discrimination on the basis of anything but money is illegal, so good schools are either public schools in areas in which it is expensive to live, or private schools which cannot be attended without paying expensive tuition.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 September 2014 04:15:36PM 2 points [-]

I don't know anything about how high school education is organised in the US

http://lesswrong.com/lw/jra/innovations_lowhanging_fruits_on_the_demand_or/amd5

Comment author: RichardKennaway 09 September 2014 06:42:52AM 2 points [-]

SSC is sceptical about whether the effect claimed in the book he's reviewing is big enough to account for the problem.

Comment author: [deleted] 08 September 2014 07:32:21PM *  2 points [-]

Part is what TheAncientGeek says, part is that present-day children have higher living standards than children a while ago, and if they were OK with earlier children's living standard (and didn't care about status signalling) they could probably get it with one parent's income (see also).

(Both Mr. and Mrs. Money Moustache and Julia Wise and Jeff Kaufman are raising children on a tight budget.)

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 08 September 2014 04:14:25PM 1 point [-]

Well, that's certainly ambitious...