Naisia kuoli tuolloin synnytyksiin eikä jatkuva raskaana olo luulisi sekään terveellistä olevan. Näyttää kuitenkin mielestäni yllätyksellisesti, että naiset elivät jo 1800-luvulla miehiä vanhemmiksi.
Miksi vähän koulutetut miehet eivät lisäänny Suomessa?
Re: Miksi vähän koulutetut miehet eivät lisäänny Suomessa?
Re: Miksi vähän koulutetut miehet eivät lisäänny Suomessa?
Ei minusta. Riskikäyttäytyminen on miesten hommaa ja duuni oli aika riskaabelia ennen. Mad hatter jne.
Make Keke Great Again
Re: Miksi vähän koulutetut miehet eivät lisäänny Suomessa?
This is what being an elite is about, after all. It’s not about money, although money plays a crucial role. It’s not even about education, though education plays a large role as well. It’s more about the set of behaviors and dispositions that indicate a person to be a member of the elite — which center around wanting to change the world. Recall we discussed the leveling and importance game: Wanting to change the world hits the sweet spot because it shows how important one is (you can afford worrying about the planet and not your rent), while also highlighting one’s empathy (wanting to take care of the less fortunate).
Which is the whole point of being an elite. It’s what separates a person from simply being a bourgeois. Aristocrats want to *matter*. Bourgeoisie just want comfort and safety. Meanwhile proletariats just want to put food on the table.
It’s worth noting, however, that the elites have evolved in one key respect: our elites are in denial that they’re elite. 100% of our present aristocratic oligarchs think aristocracy is evil and that they personally are fighting for the little people.
Pareto called this the aristocracy of lions vs the aristocracy of foxes. Lions are proud, forceful aristocrats who explicitly own their position as leaders. Foxes, however, are humble servants who will forever deny that they’re in charge. While lions want to run the world, foxes want to save the world.
https://eriktorenberg.substack.com/p/th ... -of-elites
Miettikääpä vaikka Sanna Marinia.
E: Äh. Linkin takana on linkki jossa puhutaan siitä miksi rikkaat tekevät enemmän lapsia. Kyse on tuloeroista. Rikkailla on enemmän rahaa/rikkaita on enemmän jolla ostaa palveluita köyhemmiltä lapsiaan varten.
Which is the whole point of being an elite. It’s what separates a person from simply being a bourgeois. Aristocrats want to *matter*. Bourgeoisie just want comfort and safety. Meanwhile proletariats just want to put food on the table.
It’s worth noting, however, that the elites have evolved in one key respect: our elites are in denial that they’re elite. 100% of our present aristocratic oligarchs think aristocracy is evil and that they personally are fighting for the little people.
Pareto called this the aristocracy of lions vs the aristocracy of foxes. Lions are proud, forceful aristocrats who explicitly own their position as leaders. Foxes, however, are humble servants who will forever deny that they’re in charge. While lions want to run the world, foxes want to save the world.
https://eriktorenberg.substack.com/p/th ... -of-elites
Miettikääpä vaikka Sanna Marinia.
E: Äh. Linkin takana on linkki jossa puhutaan siitä miksi rikkaat tekevät enemmän lapsia. Kyse on tuloeroista. Rikkailla on enemmän rahaa/rikkaita on enemmän jolla ostaa palveluita köyhemmiltä lapsiaan varten.
Make Keke Great Again