"Affordable Family Formation" in the USA

Via Kausfiles this morning: an interesting theory. Conservative Steve Sailer makes a very persuasive case that "affordable family formation" has been the key to Republican success. And it will continue to be.

I cannot claim to have any kind of expertise to assess the support for his argument. But anecdotally ("what's the plural of anecdote? Data!") it seems to make sense. Take Dr. B as an instructive example. She and Mr. B. took a job in nowheresville - Red State central - in order to further her career, purchase a home that Mr. B. could work on, and live somewhere where one salary would make this life possible. She seems to be rueing that choice, but we'll see how that turns out.

I know plenty of academics who are having trouble cutting it in San Francisco, Boston, and DC on $40 or even $50 grand a year. Decent homes within a 30-minute commute are moving north of $400K in these citites. Add in a second child, and look out! The second full-time salary becomes a necessity. And what makes it even more annoying - as one grad school friend of mine told me - she looks over at the Chair of her Department and sees somebody who owns a house worth over $1 million, with three children put through college tuition-free, who stopped serious scholarship about fifteen years ago. In the meantime, her school no longer provides a substantial tuition discount (unless her son goes to the huge state university that employs her) and no professor is going to land a mortgage to live in the Chair's neighborhood without substantial family subsidy ("Mommy? Daddy? We need to talk...."). And the Chair - who she is friendly with - pulled her aside last year and asked why she applied for other jobs! (she's t-t and doing quite well).

Frankly, I think many of our senior colleagues have no idea of what is going on. But at least one does. When my wife and I had dinner with her, she estimated that in the 25 years since she arrived at the University salaries have gone from about 20K to about 50k (this is a major urban area we are talking about). But in the same time the cost of a house has risen more than 20 times (the same $100K house in 1977 is a $2 million house today).

O.K., I'll stop bitching. That's Dr. B's perogative. But I'll also note that the people really being screwed in this system - essentially for the rest of their lives - are the childless by choice types and those not permitted to marry and raise kids by the state. Not only do they pay more in taxes and housing, but their political representation gets diluted because they are concentrated in fewer geographic areas.