The Economics of Permissiveness

If you want to enjoy a certain amount of material prosperity the odds are much more favourable if you have a stable and happy family life.  Therefore everything contributing to domestic harmony and good family relationships should be encouraged.  Unfortunately the social climate is not conducive to this as the media and entertainment industry, even education and social legislation, all in some way mitigate against the integrity of the family as a cohesive unit.

Have you ever stopped to think about the role of the family in the creation of prosperity?  Note that the more prosperous races have always, during the period of their ascendency, enshrined the virtues of home and hearth.  The Jews have survived, alone among all refugee races since the earliest of times, despite the fact that until quite recently they had no homeland.  This racial strength can be largely attributed to their strong family ties.  The Bible emphasizes the need to protect the family, but secular economists do not pay much attention to these doctrines and fail to realize just how important families are to prosperity.  As we in New Zealand lose the family life-structure upheld by our pioneering ancestors, so do our national prosperity and prestige decline.

The key to this is time, for when a man marries his view of time changes.  He is less likely to live for the moment, to dissipate his income in riotous living, to leave his job casually to pursue some personal whim.  In short he is more likely to become a respectable, responsible and productive member of the community.  Marriage and especially children, orient people towards the future.  One begins to think in terms of the children’s education, of the family’s material welfare.  Suddenly it becomes important to work, to develop economic skills, produce steady income and save for the future.

Of course not all men do right, economically speaking, by their families.  The world is full of stories of drunken or profligate fathers who squander their earnings while their families suffer.  So marriage and family alone do not make a man a responsible, productive citizen and, of course, there are many single persons who are very responsible and valuable people.  The latter are, in all probability, the children of responsible and stable families.  However, it is a fact of life that a secure family unit is a virtual necessity to lift people from poverty to prosperity.  The main motivation, for a poor man in particular, is to faithfully work and save over a period of years in the context of family responsibility.  One of the prime reasons for the prosperity of Northern Europe, relative to the rest of the world after the sixteenth century, was that men were expected to support their families by themselves.  Consequently people delayed marriage and children until they acquired some economic skill and savings.

One of the key features that distinguish thrifty communities from others, is the greater relative presence of married people.  Poor communities often have more than their share of unmarried people and such people generally live a hand to mouth existence, they are unable to save or even keep a job.  Again the key is time.  Studies in poor people in certain cultures show that they live only for the present, for the now, having no care for the future.  In other, modern, societies women will be attracted towards impecunious men.  It is regrettable that the good family type men are no longer rewarded with good wives because these, through frequency perversion, seek lesser men as marriage mates.

Single people often take little heed of the future.  It takes family responsibilities to make a man future orientated.  The proverbial carefree lifestyles of single men, by contrast, shows their orientation towards the present, the attitude of many being, why forego pleasure today for the sake of an uncertain tomorrow?  Quite a number of happily married men could answer that the only reason would be the expectancy of prospective wives and children.  Surveys in America, among one thousand of the most successful men in the top companies, show that 95.4% of these are still married to their first wives.  This may appear surprising for it might have been assumed that the price of economic success, in such high pressure jobs, would have been a stressed marriage.  The survey also establishes that the men were very selective in their choice of a marriage partner, so herein may be the answer.  A successful businessman requires the exercise of selectivity, discrimination and caution which, no doubt, reflects in the domestic area.  Marriage, of itself, does not create stability, but it does provide a framework in which stability may be established by the right people.  Stable marriages support the efforts of successful men because they create order and give purpose to their lives, a purpose that many unmarried or divorced men do not have.  A stable home life actually liberates drive and productivity in a man because he becomes more future-orientated.  Rising to the top of a great corporation requires a great deal of diligent preparation, patience and steady work performance.  A future-orientated married man is more likely to have these qualities than a single man whose focus is on living today.

A man who is willing to expend the necessary energies to keep his marriage intact, no easy job in these permissive times, is also likely to have the stamina and self-discipline to achieve success in any chosen filed.  Statistics accord with findings of the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin.  The Institute reports that husbands are 50% more productive in their paid employment hours than bachelors with comparable education, skills and age.  A divorced man is more likely, statistically, to take alcohol or drugs, or to commit a crime.  After divorce men are more prone to mental illness, more likely to commit suicide than their married counterparts.  No doubt much of this self-destructive conduct stems from loneliness and shrinking personal horizons.

Of course, the beneficial effects on an intact family and the destructiveness of divorce, are not confined to men.  A result of broken marriages is that women are trying to raise children on their own, despite a growing tendency for divorce courts to award custody of children to fathers.  Illegitimacy has the same effect.  Both lead to the same evil result; aside from the social evils the economic consequences are awful.  Single-parent families are recipes for economic hardship and poverty.  The hard truth of economic life in our society is that a female-headed household will rarely prosper.  Children will tend to make it more difficult for a single mother to pursue her career, or even to make a decent living.  As she must be not only a mother but also a homemaker and breadwinner, such incredible demands on her time and energy cannot help but impair her ability to earn a living.

Illegitimacy and divorce, both the result of irresponsibility and an inability to choose wisely, account for some of the poverty in Western societies today.  For the poor, in particular, such circumstances virtually ensure that they will sink more deeply into the mire of their poverty.  Some races, living amid the host race in Western society, are renowned for their family life and loyalty.  The families prosper because of stability and unity.  Family unity is the key element in prosperity.  If a graph is prepared and studied it will be seen that our country’s standard of living, once well up among the top nations, has declined proportionally to the decline in its moral standards.  Only through keeping the family units intact has any ethnic group ever maintained a certain standard of prosperity.  In communities which are largely made up of single mothers struggling desperately to raise their children on low incomes and of rootless single men who have no purpose in life other than to enjoy the present, there will be grinding poverty.

Read More

« Sex and Sexuality (2) | The Vulnerability of Sensitives »