Open Thread with a Topic

Or you can talk about something else. I did this in early August also. As I said before, this used to be a weekly process and sometimes was very successful.

As a subscriber. I am posting part of a Paul Krugman commentary from the past. It may interest you. You can always use your own topic and start of a discussion too.

~~~~~~~

In the 1950s only a tiny fraction of men in their prime working years — around 2.5 percent — were out of the labor force. That percentage has now more than quadrupled, to around 11%. That is, more than 1 out of 10 men of prime working age are neither employed nor looking for work.

Who are these non-working men? There was an extremely useful survey by Binder and Bound in the 2019 Journal of Economic Perspectives, which included the following chart:

Source: Binder and Bound

The basic point should be clear: The rise in the number of non-working men is overwhelmingly, although not entirely, accounted for by men with lower levels of formal education. This is important for understanding the causes of this disturbing trend.

Binder and Bound also ask an interesting question: What are these non-working men living on? Some are receiving government aid via disability insurance. Mostly, however, they’re being supported by “cohabitants”: Typically they’re living with their parents, or relying on income earned by their wives or other partners.

I find this a disturbing picture, and my guess is that most readers feel the same way. But it’s worth asking why it’s so troubling.

And, Why view non-working men as a bigger problem than non-working women? Krugman’s short answer? Not working is more demoralizing and has more adverse social consequences for men than not working does for women. Not a value judgment, nor a statement of men mattering more (which I definitely don’t believe). Just an empirical observation.

Part of: “Women, Men and Jobs,” by Paul Krugman