Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Power Couples & Couple Role Models

#1
RainbowUnicorn Offline
http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/2017111...-cultivate

Quote:It’s obviously not necessary that both have careers,
i dissagree, they cant be a power couple if only 1 of them has their foot to the floor.

holy crap !

Quote:Today about 48% of married couples in the US, for example, are dual income, compared with 25% in 1960.


50% unemployment rate ?!
thats scandalous ! (soo much for a capitalist democracy)


... moving on...

one thing i have noticed about these 'types' of people...
which seems to always be 'missed by many' when they talk about them...
which is quite odd because it seems to be quite important...

mostly, you have 2 super achievers who by chance & or unbelievably busy life style happen to have met each other.

while it may feel nice to bask in the glow of their awesomeness(if you think celebrity status is your thing, or money[mostly always involves money as super achievers tend to rise to the top])

these are the type of people, generally, that put around 3 times the work into the things they do.
Reminds me of The Rocks words "be the hardest working person in the room".
while being the hardest working person at that moment helps, it pays t keep in mind that they are also working twice as hard as the average person on the days you dont see them and while they are not in the room.

statistically the chances of 2 super achievers meeting & falling in love is fairly slim.

i guess this gives them a sense of fairytale status that many people like to fantasise about.
though the fairytale dream never involves the 70 hour weeks end to end for years that these type of people do.

Good statistics
Bad statistics
Random Chance
Low probability
High Probability

Meta-Data illusions ... ?

side note question.... Does Meta-Data make things seem more easy because you can see examples of it easily ?
is there any visualisation process ? possibly though those who are positively motivated by the opportunity to expereince positive encounters probably are going to seek out similar encounters.
the random chances that beat all the odds(keeping in mind these people have spent most of their lives beating the odds day in day by working 3 times as hard as the average person)...

[] Reminds me of a Girl from school. i did not know her as a friend, i was privy to the teachers confidante.
she had stamina and work ethic but failed to pick up the actual knowledge (probably a mix of allergys & visual/spacial cognitive plus a lack of alternate theory systems taught, possibly a mineral &/or vitamin deficiency etc).
All the teachers had a special off the books meeting about her because they did not know how to deal with marking her school reports.
none of them wanted to give her a bad mark, but she simply couold not pass the base 50% standard to hand the teachers the ability to simply move her forward.

1 teacher was effectively depressed by the situation for weeks.(real teachers really care)

all the national education rules said she had to be held back a year to make sure she got to the required standard.
none of the teachers were going to do that. the headmaster over ruled them all by moving her forward with all the other students as an executive descision to avoid the teachers having to put in any official marking process.
though... once she got to high school 14-15 years old, things would be markedly different(i dont know where she went after middle school).



worth a completely different thread the ecconomics of social design & cultural norms
Quote:In Denmark and Sweden, nearly 70% of couples with children are dual earners. In Chile, that figure is 40% and in Mexico, it’s 20%.

effectively what that data says about chile & mexico is that the unemployment rate among women is a national catastrophy keeping in mind 50% in the USA is pretty grim.
Reply
#2
stryder Offline
Some points of interest are how those figures might well factor in.

The 1%(0.0001%)
For instance a stereotypical characterisation of a sociopathic 1%er is someone who is male and likely chauvinistic.  Their tendencies for being this aren't usually considered (I think most people just stop at considering them an A$$hole)  However to that Male Chauvinist, women   erode how much they can earn.  After all in a work where all is equality, where women can equally do the same job as a man and expect the same pay (causing the capacity to dual earn) it reduces the need and logic of why a man should be paid a silly figured salary, since he's no longer supporting a "trophy wife".

Third world and First world Disparity
In third world countries, the civil rights movement might not have secured equality in the same way.  The perceptions of positions (A man being an earner and woman maintaining the home) are likely still mainstream.  In countries where poverty is rife, education is low, dangers are all around when it comes to children (Like playing in raw sewage), so it makes sense that if a parent cares about the nature of their offspring they will actually take time out of attempting to reach goals to look after them.

The way that this time sync of child rearing usually is offset is by people having larger families.  Large families while meaning more mouths to feed, also means potentially more sources of income and a tighter family unit as family members attempt to make better of their hardships by supporting one another.  

The problem with this scenario is the more people available for work, the less the work pays, which in turns drives disparity between those that exploit and those that are just trying to survive and help their family survive.

In First world countries people can "dump" their kids off at a Crèche, Kindergarten or School.  Such places are regulated in an attempt to put parent's minds at easy while alluring them the perception of freewill where the free-time allows them to do a job, while slowly converting their offspring into another corporate drone with temperamental consumeristic tendencies.

This in turn means a mixture of parents spending less time with their kids as other more impoverish countries.  It does question how family ethics evolves or devolves in both social structures.
Reply
#3
RainbowUnicorn Offline
(Nov 15, 2017 06:29 AM)stryder Wrote: Some points of interest are how those figures might well factor in.

The 1%(0.0001%)
For instance a stereotypical characterisation of a sociopathic 1%er is someone who is male and likely chauvinistic.  Their tendencies for being this aren't usually considered (I think most people just stop at considering them an A$$hole)  However to that Male Chauvinist, women   erode how much they can earn.  After all in a work where all is equality, where women can equally do the same job as a man and expect the same pay (causing the capacity to dual earn) it reduces the need and logic of why a man should be paid a silly figured salary, since he's no longer supporting a "trophy wife".

Third world and First world Disparity
In third world countries, the civil rights movement might not have secured equality in the same way.  The perceptions of positions (A man being an earner and woman maintaining the home) are likely still mainstream.  In countries where poverty is rife, education is low, dangers are all around when it comes to children (Like playing in raw sewage), so it makes sense that if a parent cares about the nature of their offspring they will actually take time out of attempting to reach goals to look after them.

The way that this time sync of child rearing usually is offset is by people having larger families.  Large families while meaning more mouths to feed, also means potentially more sources of income and a tighter family unit as family members attempt to make better of their hardships by supporting one another.  

The problem with this scenario is the more people available for work, the less the work pays, which in turns drives disparity between those that exploit and those that are just trying to survive and help their family survive.

In First world countries people can "dump" their kids off at a Crèche, Kindergarten or School.  Such places are regulated in an attempt to put parent's minds at easy while alluring them the perception of freewill where the free-time allows them to do a job, while slowly converting their offspring into another corporate drone with temperamental consumeristic tendencies.

This in turn means a mixture of parents spending less time with their kids as other more impoverish countries.  It does question how family ethics evolves or devolves in both social structures.

interesting to ponder the taxation system differences between a 1st world european countrys & a 3rd world countrys.
potentially instead of a large percentage of income going to bribery & corruption, instead it goes to the government who builds hospitals & schools & universitys.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Article What is your brain’s role in creating space and time? (physics & psychology) C C 5 136 Jul 13, 2023 12:22 AM
Last Post: confused2
  Children of same-sex couples fare at least as well as in other families C C 6 150 Mar 9, 2023 12:37 AM
Last Post: Syne
  Women deciding on competetive situations + Chronic pain: Unexpected role of PNNs C C 0 62 Jul 29, 2022 06:48 PM
Last Post: C C
  Leadership Models RainbowUnicorn 2 566 Nov 22, 2017 11:15 AM
Last Post: RainbowUnicorn
  Ancient role of sacrifices + How disgust affects morality & made humans cooperate C C 0 386 Jun 16, 2016 06:19 AM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)