Why did so many US men quit working? Social status may hold the key, study says

For Americans, vacationing internationally is cheaper than domestic travel, as long as you do it cheaply. To vacation in America, hotel rooms cost an absolute fortune now, eating out costs a fortune (plus the 25% tips now expected), and you need a rental car to go just about anywhere, and those cost a fortune now too (and if you get it from Hertz, you might get arrested).

Instead, you can buy airfare to Europe: eating out is much cheaper, hotel rooms can be had for far, far less money in most places (just don't go to the American-style hotels), and you don't need a car since you can just take public transit for cheap. Plus there's far more interesting stuff to do in cities in Europe; in America, it's all the same boring chain stores everywhere and there's no culture outside of places like NYC (which are horribly expensive to vacation in, even by American standards).

The only way to vacation cheaply in America is basically to go camping in a national forest for 2 weeks, though this still doesn't get around the need for a rental car unless you can get a ride somehow.

Some examples of the net not being representative of the majority: if you asked the internet if Trump was going to win presidency, or if Britain would leave the EU, the resounding opinion was absolutely not.

I'm extremely critical of the feminists who pushed #killallmen, that was one of the major things that pushed my brother to kill himself.

There is an extreme power imbalance going on, and I suspect a vast amount of average men have noticed and are checking out. Who knows what messages little boys are unconsciously or consciously receiving. I've been a accused of being a helicopter or tiger mother, just because I'm keeping very tight control of media my son watches.

My understanding is that many first-generation Asian immigrants in the US immigrate to the US through visa programs, which tend to select for highly motivated, educated people. This in turn leads to their children having better outcomes, including financial ones.

People who are generally better off financially tend to live in nicer areas, and those nicer areas are less policed. This tends to lead to a change of perception of a given group of people -- most Asian people they know are smart and well off, so they use that as a heuristic.

Many black people in the US are descendants of slaves who were brought to the US against their will and had very little access to property, leading to generational poverty. Poorer areas are generally policed more aggressively, leading to more crime being prosecuted, and thus a heuristic is built that leads to even more aggressive policing (eg. stop and frisk in NYC was very racist as a result).

I don't think there are any innate qualities that Asian people have that black people don't that would lead to Asian privilege, and the two groups face racism in different ways across the US. Asian people are victims of racism in different ways even if they generally aren't as targeted in policing.

Recommend reading more about the model minority concept as well, as from what I've seen from my Asian friends and loved ones, is a concept that places a lot of pressure on them. Holding up Asian people as an example of a minority that does really well or is expected to do really well can mitigate their own accomplishments.

Quite to the contrary I don't think ADHD diagnoses/prescriptions have ever been easier. They literally have online pill mills that will get you an ADHD diagnosis and an Adderall prescription within a week.

I went the more traditional route with an actual psychiatrist office, but after the initial appointments and testing, I just have one appointment every 3 months with my psychiatrist which basically amounts to "hey is everything still going alright" "yup life is good" and they write me the scrip for the next 3 months. It's literally a 10 minute televisit most of the time unless we get sidetracked talking about some tangent like we do occasionally.

I'm not female, so I can only offer limited insight here, but what I've observed with single women over 40 is that they basically don't need men, though many of them lament that they didn't get to have children, and many even keep talking about having some up until about 50, which seems to be the point they usually give up. However, aside from that, they seem to have healthier social lives than single men in the same age group: they're much better about cultivating friendships (normally with other women, but not always) and pursuing extracurricular interests. At some point, they realize that finding a partner is actually not in their best interest, because if you're a 50 year old woman, it's likely only 55+ and usually 60+ men will be interested in dating you, and for a woman that means a guy who's probably very conservative (likely a Trumper), which doesn't appeal to as many women, and worse than that, a guy who she's basically going to have to take care of pretty soon since he'll be older and likely in poor health. So it's really not worth it unless he's got one foot in the grave and one on a banana peel and has a lot of financial assets that she stands to inherit in exchange for becoming his caregiver for an indeterminate amount of time. So what I've seen is basically a lot of women also opting out of families and marriage (by not settling), and leading individualistic lives with their female friend groups, enjoying their independence, traveling, etc.

>if it's not enabling me to do what I want (buy a house, raise a family...you know standard human things)?

I think, pretty soon, "raising a family" isn't going to be considered a "standard human thing". The current situation is simply unsustainable: not enough people are having kids to keep the population level stable and keep the economy going. So something is going to have to change, in a big way. I predict the society of "Brave New World" is going to become the norm, where the government mostly handles procreation and child-raising.

- Boomers are dying and their highly inflated real estate assets are getting transferred to their children. Imagine one day waking up from your Walmart cashier job and having $$2.5M house on your name.

- Many people invested in stock market and got out just in time to have double or quadruple their money. Many of them went to $1M-3M in cash and now happily living ever after financially free in cheap places.

- Many people have got addicted to buy-now-pay-later and they haven't came off yet.

- Ton of people moved to gig economy, driving taxies and delivering goods. They are hard to account as "employed" but leave a huge hole in available labor force for traditional employers.

No, that's a fallacy you just put forward. Its flawed logic.

> You might need to question your own position more...

I question my position regularly, consistently, and with great vigor, and its stood the test of time with a rock solid foundation.

Being very serious here, I have to ask, do you even know what propaganda is? or is it just some nebulous concept?

Do you know how to concretely recognize it? Do you know what its used for, how and why it works, and the outcomes it causes?

If you can't answer all of those questions in detail, and weren't taught it in school (almost all US public education students weren't), you were taught other things implicitly that you may not even realize or question, and that and its outcomes would fall under ideological indoctrination.

It's not brainwashing like the movies, its far far worse and very subtle.

Here's a project for you, read a book called Influence by Cialdini. It covers the most common psychological blindspots people have (as adults), there are more with children and everyone has them. Be aware that book covers some dark topics but it shows certain areas you need to pay attention to more than others, and you should build an unconscious associative response of critical thinking/alarm when you recognize any one of those being used.

After you have a handle on that subject material, go back and review the material you were forced to cover as a child. Remember details of how it was taught, did they cover the material very quickly, or was it agonizingly slow with the time spent over-allocated for specific material. If you recall, boredom and sitting still as a child are some of the worst forms of suffering they experience today.

Focus your efforts on material taught prior to the age of reason (Age 12). Corroborate what was taught in those books with other historic accounts written by historians, it is not enough to just look at the text itself, you also need to look at the implication the author is making, in whole and by part (they should be the same because children tend to read sentences one at a time). Assume what the author is saying is not true and go prove its true from sources used by historians. If you do this, you will find a consistent pattern that you never realized.

What I describe, is far worse than not OK because that's a direct attack on thought at a time when you didn't have the development or faculties to discern otherwise, and it translates directly into communication and agency.

The most common use of propaganda is in subversion.

The overall goal being to either drain, limit, or remove resources necessary to think, react, or take action. This can be caused by eliciting certain psychological states/responses or through other means such as corruption of cultural/personal/religious/national identity, and/or to indoctrinate others to do the same, its immaterial if they know they are doing it or not. Its about outcomes, and if there is no significant amount of unity, there will be no organized response, and the outcome will be a stall out without responsive action, until the number of people pushing for something outweigh the people in opposition with others unreactive (i.e. a small minority chooses and incites). Its the same fundamental mechanic for the fall of Rome with relation to the Demagogues.

I would suggest you take another closer examination of what capitalism is and what it isn't, more specifically what the primary elements of such a system would have that are not part of other systems (i.e. socialism).

To have any meaningful communication, you have to be talking about the same thing, and you do that by properly characterizing whatever you are examining. You haven't done this.

You have made statements that match existing socialist systems, and then communicated that its capitalism, when it clearly is not. You have a direct contradiction.

It appears, you have confounded, generalized concepts of banking and trading with capitalism.

All capitalistic systems have had trading and banking (that I am aware of), not all collections of trading and banking systems are capitalism.

Socialism/communism have those same elements, and there are important differences, they are not the same.

The second problem you are running into is this, people practice deceit, sometimes without even knowing what they are doing. When practicing deceit, you take part of a truth and then you weave it into a lie because that is when it becomes most convincing to others who may not know about it.

In essence in that act it is an act of corrupting something, calling a small piece of the whole, the same as the whole, and yet its often only a small part that doesn't stand on its own, and when its communicated, used, or taught for any purpose, that may potentially lead to loss at some future date, the act becomes one of the greater evils of the world.

That is why it is so important to properly educate oneself, and to properly communicate. So you don't unknowingly commit great evils on others.

There are many people in this world that do this with intention, malice, and an overall malevolence.