Scary new suicide statistics

[bsjkki]

I’ve seen many threads that seem to try and tie the church’s lgbtq policies to increased suicides in Utah. In most of these threads, it seems, the statistics do not support the premise. 

The statistics from the CDC support the premise that there is a large increase in suicide across the country as outlined in this article. https://www.wsj.com/articles/youth-suicide-rate-rises-56-in-decade-cdc-says-11571284861

”The suicide rate among people ages 10 to 24 years old climbed 56% between 2007 and 2017, according to the report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The authors do admit they do not know why.

In a recent Adult Stake Conference session depression and suicide among the youth was the concern discussed in a question and answer segment.

Most felt social media/smart phones were the main cause. The comments in the WSJ article were the same. One commenter did include statistics that anti depressant use in youth increases their suicide risk. 

I also happened to read this speech on religious freedom today. https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-william-p-barr-delivers-remarks-law-school-and-de-nicola-center-ethics?mod=article_inline

We are trying to raise religious kids in a secular society. It’s a challenge, in part, due to the conflicting teachings of home and church vs the rest of the world. 

Bill Barr "But today – in the face of all the increasing pathologies – instead of addressing the underlying cause, we have the State in the role of Alleviator of Bad Consequences. We call on the State to mitigate the social costs of personal misconduct and irresponsibility.

So the reaction to growing illegitimacy is not sexual responsibility, but abortion.

The reaction to drug addiction is safe injection sites.

The solution to the breakdown of the family is for the State to set itself up as the ersatz husband for single mothers and the ersatz father to their children.

The call comes for more and more social programs to deal with the wreckage. While we think we are solving problems, we are underwriting them.

We start with an untrammeled freedom and we end up as dependents of a coercive state on whom we depend.

Interestingly, this idea of the State as the alleviator of bad consequences has given rise to a new moral system that goes hand-in-hand with the secularization of society.  It can be called the system of “macro-morality.”  It is in some ways an inversion of Christian morality.

Christianity teaches a micro-morality. We transform the world by focusing on our own personal morality and transformation. “ 

Our kids are caught up in the shifting/conflicting morality of our day and I think, some of it’s first casualties.

 

[Metis_LDS]

Please do not be offended. The fault maybe mine.  I do not understand your post.  I will come at it from what I believe.  Growing up I was failed by those in authority over me in major ways.  Not the Church as I joined at 17 years old.  Now as an adult I hate relying on the government for anything.  Sadly I do understand that some changes in society need to come from government. This makes me despair and I must admit with some shame to having given up on getting good government here in the western nations.  So I will settle for government that works,  having settled just for what works even that now seems to be too much to expect.  I look to building Zion as a last hope.  We almost waste time listing the problems in society because we cannot find the will to make solutions work.  You know the idea about studying history so that we do not repeat it.  That does not work because every new generation thinks they know better and can make things work that in the past have failed.  The only thing that I am proud of my post war baby boomer generation is that we have not had World War Three.  Even this maybe reaching too far and is perhaps only due to Nuclear Weapons.  

Edited October 17, 2019 by Metis_LDS
clarity

[bsjkki]

41 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

Please do not be offended. The fault maybe mine.  I do not understand your post.  I will come at it from what I believe.  Growing up I was failed by those in authority over me in major ways.  Not the Church as I joined at 17 years old.  Now as an adult I hate relying on the government for anything.  Sadly I do understand that some changes in society need to come from government. This makes me despair and I must admit with some shame to having given up on getting good government here in the western nations.  So I will settle for government that works,  having settled just for what works even that now seems to be too much to expect.  I look to building Zion as a last hope.  We almost waste time listing the problems in society because we cannot find the will to make solutions work.  You know the idea about studying history so that we do not repeat it.  That does not work because every new generation thinks they know better and can make things work that in the past have failed.  The only thing that I am proud of my post war baby boomer generation is that we have not had World War Three.  Even this maybe reaching too far and is perhaps only due to Nuclear Weapons.  

Not offended. My brain may be linking two very disparate issues. Statistics show there is a higher rate of youth suicides. The question is why? 

Is it technology? Is it a secular society? Is it social media and smart phones? Is it anti depressants? In the church, I have anecdotally witnessed, our youth are not immune from this rising suicide trend.

The combination of a conflict between the values of school, friends, home, media, entertainment seems increased. Smart phones make it so children and youth are increasingly connected to information that undermines the teachings from the home. 

I imagine this is tough to navigate. 

After conference and studying President Nelsons speech at BYU in September, I had an increased testimony of the commandments. That absolute truth=divine law=the commandments=a great cheat sheet for a happier life. It all brings home the “wickedness never was happiness.”

I think society/government is trying to treat an ever growing crisis of symptoms while refusing to diagnose the disease.

Edited October 17, 2019 by bsjkki

[Metis_LDS]

23 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I think society/government is trying to treat an ever growing crisis of symptoms while refusing to diagnose the disease.

What I see in the UK is that both the people and the government are going in different directions. A disturbing example is the government combines three childhood vaccines into one to save money so the people responded with anti vaccines movements. (perhaps what anti vaccine feeling was already there was amplified by the government combining the three).  The point is the country cannot function without trust.  The people need to go easier and the government needs to show that trust is sacred.  So the first question show be will combining three vaccines erode trust, once that is dealt with then look at any cost savings.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Metis_LDS
punctuation

[BlueDreams]

I think we often like to take the suicide, depression, and anxiety stats (but particularly suicide) and rope it into our own paradigm. So for those who see the church’s stance on lgbt concerns as a serious issue, religion must be causing suicides...even though when you dig for information that doesn’t seem to be fitting and if you think about it, you’d expect the rates to be falling as there’s more awareness, less repression, and more acceptance of secular living. But that’s not happening.

likewise i think Barr and some of this reads into beliefs with minimal stats to back it up. IIRC, social media is a factor only if they’re already prone to anxiety, depression, or comparisons. But we blame it because it’s the thing we see the most as a social shift. If barr were correct, we’d assume that communities with fewer government safety nets are more resilient to suicide and depression. Instead the opposite is also found in the stats. Red states are more often on the list for higher rates and the population where it’s shot up the most are middle age white men in rural areas. Which likely has to do with a number of factors converging: socioeconomic downturns, higher access to lethal and effective means for suicide, cultural handicaps (such as beliefs about what real men do and the acceptability to turn for help from others and talk openly about mental illness), Access to mental healthcare, etc. Understanding some of this in full would likely take more data to nail down. 
 

(Some of this comes from the APA article others from suicide prevention training course work) 

 

with luv, 

BD 
 

 

[MustardSeed]

I spoke at a fireside Sunday on this topic.  

Interesting feedback from the young adults.  Will share more later. 

[Ahab]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

The statistics from the CDC support the premise that there is a large increase in suicide across the country as outlined in this article. https://www.wsj.com/articles/youth-suicide-rate-rises-56-in-decade-cdc-says-11571284861

”The suicide rate among people ages 10 to 24 years old climbed 56% between 2007 and 2017, according to the report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The authors do admit they do not know why.

I think there are many reasons but the most likely common denominator behind it all is some kind of depression. Some probably kill themselves because they think life is better on the other side, so maybe hey're just daring enough to go and find out for themselves, but most are either just fed up or not up to having to face the many challenges that are common to living life in this world.  It's not all kicks and giggles. I thought about killing myself when I was younger but decided to stick it out and think of it as some kind of adventure.,. to boldly go where I had not gone before.  Even though that meant having to get a "job" and work most of my life away with relatively little time to do what I actually enjoy doing with my life, putting up with ALL of the bad stuff just to get a little time to enjoy doing the good things I am able to do.

[The Nehor]

I put a lot of the blame on porn though not all of it. We are seeing the first generation that lived their teen years with instant access to Porn of every kind and the method of consumption has changed to rapid switchovers. It messes with the brain’s reward centers.
 

Another cause in my opinion is fundamental insecurity. I am a gen Xer and we went through college being told that our economic prospects were dim compared to that of our parents and they are right. Millennials have it worse. Boomers scoff at the younger generations as listless babies wanting everything handed to them while they grew up in the post war era where the rest of the world was rebuilding and the United States survived mostly unscathed as one of only a few major industrialized powers to have an intact economy leading to unparalleled prosperity and convinced they earned it instead of their parents who fought the war and then truly united the United States with vast post war infrastructure projects that built the nation up and tied it together (the greatest generation might actually deserve the title). I am doing pretty well financially but I look at my retirement account and realize I will not likely be living a really good life should I get to that age. My dreams of going on couple missions may be just a dream (also requiring me to be part of a couple so it may not even be needed). I have friends living as best as they can and are not living paycheck to paycheck but they are keenly aware that if they get seriously sick or one of their kids has an expensive disorder they can be wiped out in months. Employment security is low in many parts of the world and many jobs are awful and that does not seem likely to change. The educated are a little better off but the increase in wealth inequality is leaving many angry. Last time inequality was this bad it led to a depression. There is also the question of increasing automation. Is full employment even going to be reasonable in a few decades? What will we do then? Yell at people to get a job when there are no jobs? Cut hours for everyone? The two parent working family is the norm and because it is the norm expenses often make it a necessity. On the other hand now that boomers are retiring en masse if automation does not match the hype we may face a shortage of labor but a lot of it will just be to support the retiring boomers, many of whom will have almost no money. If you have no soul and want to get rich there will be big money to be made in no frills retirement homes.

Beyond economic security children feel like their families may be gone tomorrow. Relationships are less stable. Divorce is not shooting up but the number of people in fragile relationships replicate the same effect. More people are socially isolated. When you do not have confidence that you have a future you behave differently.

With that insecurity and no real reason for most to hope that things will get better I am not surprised suicide is on the rise.

[MustardSeed]

In general it is my opinion that people suicide not because they want to die but rather because they just can’t go another day feeling XYZ. 

We have not taught our youth coping skills in this era of electronics- instead, young people have turned to computers to numb.  Unfortunately the cure is often the source for the pain, and round we go. 

Anecdotally the top three reasons the young adults gave me Sunday for excessive risen rates of depression and anxiety in the past ten years are 1. Social media 2. Pressure to excel and 3. Too much immediate exposure to trauma and chaos in the world. 

Obviously this crowd was not a fair sample of youth everywhere. I however was glad to have the conversation with this particular group.  I had “several” pull me aside later to talk. 

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

In general it is my opinion that people suicide not because they want to die but rather because they just can’t go another day feeling XYZ. 

We have not taught our youth coping skills in this era of electronics- instead, young people have turned to computers to numb.  Unfortunately the cure is often the source for the pain, and round we go. 

Anecdotally the top three reasons the young adults gave me Sunday for excessive risen rates of depression and anxiety in the past ten years are 1. Social media 2. Pressure to excel and 3. Too much immediate exposure to trauma and chaos in the world. 

Obviously this crowd was not a fair sample of youth everywhere. I however was glad to have the conversation with this particular group.  I had “several” pull me aside later to talk. 

I wonder what they meant by social media. Peer pressure, or something like that?  I see Facebook as a bragging board, full of "look where I'm going on vacation" or "look what I just got" or "look at how well I am doing". 

So your #1 reason is directly connected to the #2 and #3 reason.  Keeping up with the Joneses, basically, is just too much pressure for some people who for some reason or another feel like life is a competition.

[Calm]

8 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Too much immediate exposure to trauma and chaos in the world. 

It may be mostly personality, but I think a great deal is how my daughter experiences the world mostly through tech (due to her health issues).  I share with her significant anxiety and a sense of responsibility towards others (I am probably much more developed in that, in fact, given my mother), but the crisis out there in the world feels tons more personal to her than it did to me at her age.  I had much less direct exposure to those having the crisis/disaster as there might be interviews after the fact or short videos on some occasions of the trauma, but it was confined to a few minutes of TV a night and me reading one newspaper for another few minutes.  Just the percentage of my life processing others' major disasters was much less than hers growing up.

Edited October 18, 2019 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

We are seeing the first generation that lived their teen years with instant access to Porn of every kind and the method of consumption has changed to rapid switchovers.

What does the bolded part mean?

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

What does the bolded part mean?

Badly worded, my apologies. Reports show that many younger people who use porn now hop from video to video very quickly. Many are basicalily tricking their brain to imagine dozens of sex partners and our brains are not built for that.

[MustardSeed]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Badly worded, my apologies. Reports show that many younger people who use porn now hop from video to video very quickly. Many are basicalily tricking their brain to imagine dozens of sex partners and our brains are not built for that.

Porn creates other illusions, that sex is on demand, sex is unlimited, my preferences and demands are available to me any time. 

Reality does not measure up. 

I don’t think that most people have pornography issues ( imo ) but too many do.  It doesn’t help today’s emotional climate . 

[rodheadlee]

I believe it's due to the prophets of Doom with the climate change people. Look at the protest of school-age children . They demand that something be done now before the Earth gets killed by the previous generation. Every generation blames the one before. 

There is a group that refuses to have children until climate change is stopped. 

Instead of protesting and becoming politicians and demanding we fall back our power consumption I wish they would concentrate on becoming scientists and develop solar stations in orbit to beam power down to earth. We could develop fusion reactors among other methods of power generation .

I believe there is a sense of hopelessness among the youngest Generations. 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by rodheadlee
ad ifo

[Robert F. Smith]

34 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

................................

There is a group that refuses to have children until climate change is stopped. ...........................

I believe there is a sense of hopelessness among the youngest Generations. .......................

You are almost, but not quite there.  There has never been a time in recorded history when the rate of marriage in America has been so low.  Who can afford to marry with such huge student debt?  Couples aren't even just living together anymore.  They just live alone at the highest known rate.  Woman are now in higher ed in greater numbers that men, who are dropping out.  Women can't find suitable partners (equal in income, etc.) to date or marry.  White men are supposed to be "privileged," but it isn't clear what that privilege is.  However, they are held in contempt and get blamed just the same.  Dual-parent families are now in a minority.

We might look at successful families and groups to determine what works, but no one really wants to do that -- it might be embarrassing to find out that the best results come from politically incorrect sources (practices and beliefs now considered déclassé).

[Calm]

https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2020/2/10/21131800/utah-suicide-lgbtq-gay-youth-suicidality-behavior-study-pediatrics-cdc-yrbs-data

Having problems copying, so encourage to read the article as there is quite a bit of info in it outside the studies' results.

Quote

Raifman and her colleagues analyzed data from the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey in seven different states including Maine, Illinois and North Dakota. They found the number of high school students in those states who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or unsure doubled between 2009 and 2017, from 7% to 14%. During that same time period, suicide attempts among those kids declined from 27% to 20%. 

 

[Islander]

On 10/17/2019 at 10:25 AM, bsjkki said:

I’ve seen many threads that seem to try and tie the church’s lgbtq policies to increased suicides in Utah. In most of these threads, it seems, the statistics do not support the premise. 

The statistics from the CDC support the premise that there is a large increase in suicide across the country as outlined in this article. https://www.wsj.com/articles/youth-suicide-rate-rises-56-in-decade-cdc-says-11571284861

”The suicide rate among people ages 10 to 24 years old climbed 56% between 2007 and 2017, according to the report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The authors do admit they do not know why.

In a recent Adult Stake Conference session depression and suicide among the youth was the concern discussed in a question and answer segment.

Most felt social media/smart phones were the main cause. The comments in the WSJ article were the same. One commenter did include statistics that anti depressant use in youth increases their suicide risk. 

I also happened to read this speech on religious freedom today. https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-william-p-barr-delivers-remarks-law-school-and-de-nicola-center-ethics?mod=article_inline

We are trying to raise religious kids in a secular society. It’s a challenge, in part, due to the conflicting teachings of home and church vs the rest of the world. 

Bill Barr "But today – in the face of all the increasing pathologies – instead of addressing the underlying cause, we have the State in the role of Alleviator of Bad Consequences. We call on the State to mitigate the social costs of personal misconduct and irresponsibility.

So the reaction to growing illegitimacy is not sexual responsibility, but abortion.

The reaction to drug addiction is safe injection sites.

The solution to the breakdown of the family is for the State to set itself up as the ersatz husband for single mothers and the ersatz father to their children.

 

 

This is a topic that I have explored extensively and work with daily. I work for a very large non-profit social services agency in a city of over 500K people in the Mid-West. The "problems" outlined on the original post are but the symptom of the underlying issues, These issues have been studied for half a century but the political operators refuse to see the results of their own  social experiments and fight (to no avail) to deny what research, time and again shows. The single, largest point of correlation with non-chronic depression is trauma in the family of origin. Be it parental/filial abuse, divorce or violence; those are the strongest indicators of depression. Followed closely with environmental dissonance; what you believe/want/desire in your mind and for your life does not work/happen/is achievable in real life. 

People grow up in isolation (physical or psychological). They withdraw and detach from the family or origin. Frustration, lack of satisfaction and fulfillment are rampant in today's society. No one is happy and everybody wants more. Being cut off from the family, either as a self-imposed measure or due to fragmentation, some people drift away with no real, meaningful, long-lasting relationships. They engage in transient, short term, "disposable", serial relationships in an attempt to fill the void. But they are basically alone. And it is impossible for us to live and thrive alone 

The egocentric philosophy and cult of personality that currently reigns in the West is also another contributor to the current human catastrophe. The media and the social environment feed this poisonous message that "I am the most important person in the world which as a consequence should revolve around me." "I am entitled to ___________ (fill in the blank) and to be and do who and what I want; this is who I am -- take it or leave it,...this is me!" That attitude becomes the prelude to disaster; psychologically and socially, when reality does not match personal expectations. In fact, it leads to despair, depression, despondency and for some even death. Because such an approach to life prevents us from developing, nurturing and enjoying true, meaningful relationships. Therefore, without deep rooted emotional connections based on love, affection, support, growth and shared daily life experiences there is no meaning to life. So, when life storms come and people find themselves without an emotional anchor and no one to turn to for support and help they fall into despair. A profound sense of worthlessness and helplessness where death, it seems, is the only way out and end to such pain. Very similar stories accompany those in the grips of addictions and (non-mentally ill) homelessness.

Thinking that you are the most important person in the world sooner or later collides with reality. You will push away those that do not share your self-centered construct and thus you find yourself alone in a crowd. We are faced with a whole generation that has grown up completely ignorant of what it is to have true meaningful relationships. They discover they are not nearly as important as they thought they were. That they are not as pretty, popular, funny or, smart. And unable to achieve the fantastic goals they conceived in their minds for themselves; they are unable to be and do as they please because of social or economic constraints, they see no reason to continue living. With their vision of the future crushed by reality, without meaningful attachments and without God, they seek death as the means to end their lives and the pain of existence.

My apologies for the long post. I thought the subject deserved a proper discussion.

[JAHS]

On 10/17/2019 at 8:25 AM, bsjkki said:

Interestingly, this idea of the State as the alleviator of bad consequences has given rise to a new moral system that goes hand-in-hand with the secularization of society.  It can be called the system of “macro-morality.”  It is in some ways an inversion of Christian morality.

Can't remember who it was but a church leader once said,  "The new morality is nothing more than the old immorality"

[Ahab]

On 10/17/2019 at 8:25 AM, bsjkki said:

The solution to the breakdown of the family is for the State to set itself up as the ersatz husband for single mothers and the ersatz father to their children.

Another way of saying Big Brother, I suppose.  One who doesn't seem to mention that we all have a Father in heaven that we can all turn to.  But a Big Brother isn't bad in and of itself.  We all need a good Big Brother, too, one who tries to do the will of our Father in heaven.

On 10/17/2019 at 8:25 AM, bsjkki said:

The call comes for more and more social programs to deal with the wreckage. While we think we are solving problems, we are underwriting them.

Better than doing nothing good at all with our tax money.  Our government Big Brother seems to be trying to help, in worldly way, but what we all need is the help of our Father in heaven to actually fix the roots of the problems.

On 10/17/2019 at 8:25 AM, bsjkki said:

We start with an untrammeled freedom and we end up as dependents of a coercive state on whom we depend.

... for support, and that support often does help at least a little bit.  But it isn't enough and I think our government Big Brother realizes that it isn't enough.  It's pretty much all he can do though because even he can't force us to follow our Father in heaven.

On 10/17/2019 at 8:25 AM, bsjkki said:

Interestingly, this idea of the State as the alleviator of bad consequences has given rise to a new moral system that goes hand-in-hand with the secularization of society.  It can be called the system of “macro-morality.”  It is in some ways an inversion of Christian morality.

Christianity teaches a micro-morality. We transform the world by focusing on our own personal morality and transformation. “ 

Our kids are caught up in the shifting/conflicting morality of our day and I think, some of it’s first casualties.

They just need to learn who to turn to for the support and the help that they need, and then turn to him for that support. Identifying who they should follow is something they need to do, though.  We can't force them to accept who we know they should follow.

[Meadowchik]

One thing that became very apparent to me as a Mormon growing up in the very Baptist Bible Belt, was that secularisation protected me in places like Texas and it protects non-Mormons in places like Utah. Secularism is good for maintaining religious freedoms, for creating common ground for people of all beliefs, including atheists and agnostics.

Many wonderful things have happened around the world due to education and access to birth control to women, billions rising out of extreme poverty and poverty in developing nations is a compelling example. 

I would say the rising income inequality in many developed nations strains mental, emotional, and physical health of most in their populations. Parents have a more difficult time addressing their children's needs when they have more trouble feeding them, providing an education and health care. Lots are trying their best but are dealing with difficult conditions.

So how about we make income inequality an issue of family health? 

[smac97]

31 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

One thing that became very apparent to me as a Mormon growing up in the very Baptist Bible Belt, was that secularisation protected me in places like Texas and it protects non-Mormons in places like Utah.  Secularism is good for maintaining religious freedoms, for creating common ground for people of all beliefs, including atheists and agnostics.

Agreed, I think secularism ("separation of the state from religious institutions") and religious liberty are important principles.

Quote

Many wonderful things have happened around the world due to education and access to birth control to women, billions rising out of extreme poverty and poverty in developing nations is a compelling example. 

I think free market capitalism deserves the lion's share of the credit.

Quote

I would say the rising income inequality in many developed nations strains mental, emotional, and physical health of most in their populations.  Parents have a more difficult time addressing their children's needs when they have more trouble feeding them, providing an education and health care.  Lots are trying their best but are dealing with difficult conditions.

With respect, I disagree.  The quality of life we have today is essentially the best we've had in all of human history.  That is not to say that we don't have substantial problems to work on.  Rather, I think it is problematic to lay these problems at the feet of "income inequality."

I care very much about poverty.  "Income inequality" is, IMO, a political gimmick for justifying governmental interventionism, socialism, punishing success, and more.

Quote

So how about we make income inequality an issue of family health? 

I think not.  "Income inequality" is essentially code for growing government, and punitive and confiscatory taxation, regulatory, and commerce policies.

Rather, I think we should focus on reducing governmental intrusion into commerce.  Let the rising tide of free market capitalism raise all boats.

I think this video explains things well.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 12, 2020 by smac97

[Meadowchik]

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Agreed, I think secularism ("separation of the state from religious institutions") and religious liberty are important principles.

I think free market capitalism deserves the lion's share of the credit.

With respect, I disagree.  The quality of life we have today is essentially the best we've had in all of human history.  That is not to say that we don't have substantial problems to work on.  Rather, I think it is problematic to lay these problems at the feet of "income inequality."

I care very much about poverty.  "Income inequality" is, IMO, a political gimmick for justifying governmental interventionism, socialism, punishing success, and more.

I think not.  "Income inequality" is essentially code for growing government, and punitive and confiscatory taxation, regulatory, and commerce policies.

Rather, I think we should focus on reducing governmental intrusion into commerce.  Let the rising tide of free market capitalism raise all boats.

I think this video explains things well.

Thanks,

-Smac

Do you have any evidence correlating an increase in free market capitalism to those poverty decreases?

I think income  inequality can be an indicator of corporate exploitation of capitalism and a lack of good regulatory practices. Good government regulations help make workers safer and help improve the ability to earn a living wage. Bad ones worsen conditions and often create welfare packages for companies that betray the interests of their workers and consumers.

Capitalism can come in very many forms, and we must have some level of government intervention to avoid exploitation of the less powerful. I favor an effective balance to improve the chances of Joes and Janes to advance economically.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

Do you have any evidence correlating an increase in free market capitalism to those poverty decreases?

Yes.

See, e.g., here:

See also:

• The Data Is Clear: Free Markets Reduce Poverty
• 5 Statistics Showing How Capitalism Solves Poverty
• Extreme Poverty Rates Plummet Under Capitalism
• Economic Freedom Enables Great Escape From Poverty
• Inequality, Poverty, “The Free Market” and Capitalism: the story of a wonderful success
• Free markets lead to prosperity

To be sure, the government has a role to play in all of this.  The above video suggests five main ingredients in the success of free market capitalism in moving people out of poverty:

• Globalization - "Globalization means the ever-increasing ability to move goods, people, and ideas from one distant location to another."
• Free Trade - "Free trade is open access to markets and people from all over the world with few, if any, barriers."
• Property Rights - "Property rights is ensuring that what belongs to you can’t be taken away on a whim by the state."
• The Rule of Law - "The rule of law safeguards contracts, assuring that they will be respected and lived up to whether the deal is made in Peru or Poland."
• Entrepreneurship - "{E}ntrepreneurship is the creativity of free people to dream up new products that we never knew we wanted or needed."

Note that the role of government here is not to own the means of production, or to enact confiscatory/punitive measures against those who create wealth, or to pick and choose "winners" and "losers" in the economy.  Rather, the role of the government is, or should be, to mostly "grease the skids," to allow individuals and groups freedom to find ways to make money, to preserve the rule of law, to protect property rights, and so on.

Quote

I think income  inequality can be an indicator of corporate exploitation of capitalism and a lack of good regulatory practices.

I think "income inequality" is a rhetorical gimmick intended

• to foment animosity and resentments between different segments of society;
• to buy votes ("Vote for me and I'll fight 'income inequality!'") so that a self-selected few - who feign concern for "the poor" as a pretext - can accumulate power and control for themselves;
• to justify increased amounts of governmental intrusion into and control over our lives;
• to punish politicial opponents and reward political allies; and
• to punish success.

I also think "corporate exploitation" can happen.  But in a free market, those feeling "exploited" can quit and go find a better job.  Or else start their own business.

Quote

Good government regulations help make workers safer

Sure.

Quote

and help improve the ability to earn a living wage. 

Not really.  The free market does a far better job at creating wealth.  The government absolutely stinks at it.

Quote

Bad ones worsen conditions and often create welfare packages for companies that betray the interests of their workers and consumers.

That can happen.  This is why I am befuddled at the notion that "more government" and "more regulation" and confiscatory/punitive measures (such as are intrinsic in the ideology of those who constantly emphasize "income inequality") will create more wealth and opportunity for individuals.

Quote

Capitalism can come in very many forms, and we must have some level of government intervention to avoid exploitation of the less powerful.

I don't know what "exploitation" means in this context.  Again, free market does a far better job at creating wealth.  The government absolutely stinks at it.

Our society is full to overflowing with "government intervention."  What makes us think that more interventionism will improve things?

Quote

I favor an effective balance to improve the chances of Joes and Janes to advance economically.

I don't know what "effective balance" means in this context.  I suspect it means, well,  "more government" and "more regulation" and confiscatory/punitive measures.

I have a good friend who is very entrepreneurially-minded.  He has had a wide array of business ventures, almost all with substantial success.  However, he does not grow his businesses.  He keeps them small by design or, if they grow, he just sells his interest and starts over with something else.  He also keeps the number of employees he has to an absolute minimum (through automation, outsourcing, etc.).  He has explained to me that he does this because, in his view, providing employment opportunities is too big a headache.  Too much governmental intrustion/intervention.  Too much overhead and expense.  Too much risk.  Too many headaches.  Hiring people is just not worth it to him.  Thanks to governmental regulations.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 12, 2020 by smac97

[rongo]

On 10/17/2019 at 11:46 AM, The Nehor said:

I am doing pretty well financially but I look at my retirement account and realize I will not likely be living a really good life should I get to that age. My dreams of going on couple missions may be just a dream (also requiring me to be part of a couple so it may not even be needed).

I don't get this sentiment (and you're not alone, by any means). My parents have served two couples missions in Eastern Europe, and they only have Social Security (no pensions or retirement savings). It is definitely possible to serve couples missions without a "retirement account," provided the house is paid for or you have someone living in and making your house payment.*

I also don't get the obsession with having a fat retirement account so that you can live the dream in retirement (an obsession most have today, driven by financial planners). My family is a single income family of six (Arizona teacher's income, to boot), so my retirement prospects are bleak by most people's standards. But we don't see it that way at all, and when I look at my parents (again, only on Social Security), they have a good retired life. Maybe people need to manage their wants/needs cost/benefit and opportunity cost analysis better? I think a lot of people think that retirement without extensive travel or costly leisure pursuits (not just leisure suits --- pun intended ) is a fate worse than death. I'm looking forward to retirement (in, like, 25 years), but not only if I can live my retirement dream and travel a lot.

*We've stumbled into couples mission house-sitting as a sort of cottage industry. I say stumbled, because we've never sought it out --- we've been asked and then it snowballed from there. In our previous ward, we lived in an enormous house while a couple served in Malaysia for two years, and then have house-sat for my parents while they served their mission. They got home Tuesday, and we have been asked by another couple in that same previous ward to live in their house and make their house payment while they serve in Portugal. Then, our current RS president (a widow) has us lined up to live in her house while she serves a mission when they get back. This has enabled us to live for ca. eight years well below market rate for housing, simply because we can be trusted to make payments and take good care of the house and property (a big incentive is not having to put your things in storage). There is actually a big "market" for this, as this is a major thing that holds a lot of people back from serving a mission (what do we do with our house and things?), and in many cases, they **do not** want kids or grandkids living there.