Commenting on the same article by Don Peck that I commented on yesterday, David Brooks notes:
It’s pretty easy to take these economic facts and draw stark cultural consequences. Long-term unemployment is one of the most devastating experiences a person can endure, equal, according to some measures, to the death of a spouse. Men who are unemployed for a significant amount of time are more likely to drink more, abuse their children more and suffer debilitating blows to their identity. Unemployed men are not exactly the most eligible mates. So in areas of high unemployment, marriage rates can crumble — while childbearing rates out of wedlock do not.
The present recession has already lasted longer than any post-war economic downturn. The recession of the early 80’s or that of the 1970’s won’t be good models for the lasting psychological, social, economic, and political outcomes.
If, as I expect, the present sluggish economy persists over a period of years, there will be consequences, of that have no doubt. The European economic turmoil that followed World War I fostered the conditions under which Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin all came to power. The Great Depression of the 1930’s completely altered the political landscape here, changed the economy, and, for good or ill (I think for ill) put an end to limited government here forever. When things are bad enough for long enough people are willing to listen to all sorts of things if they promise to make things better.
However, I’m skeptical that we’ll see much good coming from the federal government. Our present crop of politicians has been raised in the hothouses of careers in government work for the most part. They’re mostly lawyers, bureaucrats, and career elected officials. They turn to examples from the 1950’s or 1960’s for models of reform and those days are as dead as Carthage.
