JSM on Female-driven old-time charity v the Welfare State

Posted On: Wednesday - May 31st 2023 6:31PM MST
In Topics: 
  Humor  Socialism/Communism  Female Stupidity

From iSteve commenter JSM, I read this great comment about welfare vs charity in recent American history, under a recent Steve Sailer post. This is the one with the NY Times (of course!) story of Uber corporate D.I.E. idiocy that we've already blogged about twice*, Uber Suspends Its Asian DEI Boss for Objecting to the "Karen" Ethnic Slur.

Here is the entire comment with its humorous and somewhat gyno-jaded take. Only 2 asterisks were added.


Why has America become so dysfunctional? Why is it considered rude to talk about “the deserving poor” and the “undeserving poor” as if they’re all deserving, when clearly they’re not?

It’s because the Welfare State took away the occupation and entertainment of the good old middle-aged meddling busybodies, who now have nothing to do but get involved in politics.

In the good old days, once the kids were raised, middle-aged women looked around to see what else there was to do. And noticed the neighbor family that the dad fell off a roof and broke his back. The children! The poor children! Look at the rags they’re wearing! They haven’t any chalk for their slates! And upon beholding this injustice, the crone straightened her girdle, lifted her skirts and marched into her husband’s and male neighbors’ businesses and demanded they donate to her charity! Which, of course they did handsomely cuz who’s got the nerve to tell THAT old biddy no?

Such bush-beating for money took effort, and consequently the old dear held the charity’s purse strings very tightly. ONLY the deserving poor! The drunkards? the floozies who got pregnant during a one-night stand with the traveling sports hero? No money for you! Scolding is what YOU get.

But then came the Welfare State. Thanks Lyndon Johnson!** And no longer was Mrs. Buttinski kept busy as part-time Auxiliary Moral Standards Enforcer, much-loved and appreciated by the City Fathers, who acknowledged her as the heroine that she told you she is.

Nope. Instead, Mrs. B.’s volunteer career was turned into a paid gig by Fed Gov, and given to the sweet young things fresh out of college — who OUGHT to have been occupied competing for the attentions of her son but were instead busy collecting “clients.” And, fed gov jobs being what they are, the more clients, the more secure SYT’s jobs were. So the incentive to hold tight purse strings and give scoldings generously was GONE. More clients, more job security! “Hey bowery denizens, come on in!”

So, bored, these old bats looked around and saw, AH HA! I know JUST what I’ll do! I’ll run for Congress and make speeches like all about how Black Lives Matter!! and how loved the trannies are, and give scoldings to Sweet Young Things for flirting with young men instead of their true calling as social workers on the bums


I can't recall anything but common sense truth out of this lady, JSM. Thank you, JSM, for letting Peak Stupidity use this great essay of yours!

* See This is no way to operate a country. and Big Business and small-scale corruption.

** Our asterisks, to exclaim Fuckin' A! regarding the destructive Socialist bastard Lyndon Johnson.

[UPDATED 06/01:]
Mr. Hail corrected me on the sex of commenter JSM. She is a woman. Her very last comment on The Unz Review says that directly, but I hadn't read that. Fixed.

Friday - June 2nd 2023 5:06AM MST
PS: Oh, and thanks for the book links again, Adam. I hope you'll keep using that handle (in "YOUR NAME") for these ones.
Friday - June 2nd 2023 5:05AM MST
PS: Mr. Smith, those economic incentives matter very much.

As far as actually having the children, the stats probably overestimate them, just based on my knowledge from a friend working at H&R Block about made-up dependents during tax time. (That was all from Hispanics.)

ADHD seems like a made-up ailment to me. I know of one kid who is perfectly fine, yet his step-Dad mentioned he had this. No, it's about him not wanting to sit down for longer to get his damn homework done! He's a pretty smart kid. It's not about the money from Uncle Sugar or the State in this case, as his parents aren't like that. They just baby him like crazy.
Friday - June 2nd 2023 5:01AM MST
PS: Mr. Hail, thanks for that illuminating, yet depressing, data. I looked for your new post on this, a decade after your last one (which I'll check out anyway), but it's not up as of the time of this comment. I am looking forward to reading it.

No, I don't think the violent druggie reprobate George Floyd needs celebration on this, YEAR 3, AF. Maybe the Lyin' Press agrees now ... I kid!

Peak Stupidity Book Club
Thursday - June 1st 2023 2:28PM MST
PS: Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf by Edward Albee


Thursday - June 1st 2023 1:41PM MST
This woman has been seen before. Edward Albee depicted this type of scathing, bitter, childless woman in the complex “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf.” Elizabeth Taylor played Martha in the 1966 film, striking-out, in the poverty of her self-hatred. Richard Burton played poor George. (Yes, George and Martha, just like the Washingtons; the play was not only about the couple, but about America.)
Peak Stupidity Book Club
Thursday - June 1st 2023 11:23AM MST
PS: Charles Murry Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010


Adam Smith
Thursday - June 1st 2023 11:14AM MST
PS: Good afternoon,

Mr. Hail noticed that “lower-class (lower-socioeconomic status) Whites are not getting married.”

Many lower status white mothers do not get married because they would lose their “government” benefits if they did. It can be quite lucrative to be on the “government” teet. I hear that many children who are “on the spectrum” and some who are diagnosed with ADHD receive SSI benefits. These SSI checks for children average $650 each month.

These SSI checks and other “government” benefits (EBT, WIC, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program, etc.) provide a strong incentive for mothers of all races to have children out of wedlock.

It also provides strong incentives for illegals to wade across the Rio Grande and drop that anchorbaby in our magic soil.

Thursday - June 1st 2023 10:12AM MST

Thanks for the comment-space, as usual. Will be back tomorrow.

Happy Three-Year Anniversary of the peak of the George Floyd nightly riots.
Thursday - June 1st 2023 10:11AM MST

See also:

"Total Fertility Rates by Race in the USA, 1980-2013"


Back in the early 2010s, nowhere was to be found a simple graph depicting U.S. TFR over time by race, including all racial groups. I created three such graphs based on digging up raw-data, and these graphs were all very successful in the 2010s, widely cited and shared. By the late 2010s, the rate of views and shares was way down (in line with the Big Tech suppression of all my website material), but occasionally is still comes up.

We are now in an interesting "social experiment" zone in which all our young, core-age, and mid-age people knew nothing but a world of low White fertility (see blue line on graph), and the White women products of this system are generally are of a type described by JSM.

This has basically held true throughout the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s, and so far in the 2020s. In earlier decades there were some "holdouts" in among conservative-Christian and rural White types, but even this had weakened substantially by circa-2020.
Thursday - June 1st 2023 9:58AM MST

(note -- the below comment is based entirely on the CDC release "Births: Provisional Data for 2022," CDC, June 1, 2023. Part of the "Vital Statistics Rapid Release" series, Report No.28.)



- Marriage and births in the CDC data -

Another interesting finding in this CDC data-series is the long-term stabilization in the share of Unmarried-Mother Births.

The share of births to unmarried-mothers has been stable at around 40% since 2009 (25%--30% among Whites).

This metric was of great interest to Charles Murray in the early 2010s, in his lament-of-the-decline-of-White-America opus, "Coming Apart." Marriage, once a universal institution and rite-of-passage, became something almost like classifiable as boutique conspicuous-consumption item, in that lower-class (lower-socioeconomic status) Whites are not getting married.

Since marriage and "wedlock-births" are, for various reasons, not the social force they once were, the real question we are interested in is not marital-status of the mother as of the day of child's birth, but degree of relationship-stability with the baby's father; how many of those 40% unmarried-mother births are to women still with the baby's father in 5 years?, 15 years?, etc. This was always a weakness in Murray's approach.

Murray is now over eighty years old but still active, and in recent years is something of an out-of-the-closest Sailer fan, which is only allowed him (Murray) due to his age and prestige.
Thursday - June 1st 2023 9:41AM MST

- on U.S. births, the position of White women, and political policy -

(the below is related to JSM's themes; I intend to re-post later to the traffic-suppressed HailToYou.wordpress.com; this is fresh data that will probably be commented upon in the Sailer-sphere and adjacent places in coming days)




The provisional birth data for the USA for 2022 is finally out today... (see note)



2022: 3,661,220 -- TFR: 1.665

2021: 3,664,292 -- TFR: 1.664


Share of births, by race of birth-mother:

50.05%: White non-Hispanic
25.5%: Hispanic
13.9%: Black non-Hispanic
6.0%: Asian
0.7%: American-Indian
0.3%: Native-Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
3.5%: Multiracial or n.o.c./other

51.5%: White non-Hispanic
24.2%: Hispanic
14.1%: Black non-Hispanic
5.8%: Asian
0.7%: American-Indian
0.3%: Native-Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
3.4%: Multiracial or n.o.c./other

The only really big story in 2022 vs. 2021 is the rise in births to Hispanic mothers (+49,000 births). The Hispanic birth-gain offsets the net-loss in White-mother births (-55,000 births).

Probably this Hispanic birth-increase comes down to Migration-and-Nationality policy. I expect the sum of +50,000 births to Hispanics in 2022 was driven by cross-border migrants. The same momentum may also have driven the smaller increases in Asian-mother (+5,000) and Multiracial-mother and not-otherwise-classified-mother births (+6,000) -- just as Black and White births both declined (-7,500 and -55,000, respectively; 2022 vs. 2021). Quite a lot of this net-gain of 60,000+ births to Hispanic/Asian/Other mothers in 2022 is going to be anchor-babies to illegal border-crossers -- waved in and released by policy.

The overall-USA TFR remained exactly the same in 2022 as it had been in 2021 (1.665 +/-), but this was -- in other words -- (probably) because of the Biden-team's Migration-and-Nationality.

TFR -would have- dropped to around 1.635 without the rise in births to non-white, non-blacks (Hispanic and on and lesser-scale Asian and Multiracial/n.o.c.). This native -0.03 TFR-point-loss in one year not a "big deal" in Corona-Panic sense or late-1960s-early-1970s sense.

In the case of the 1960s-70s native fertility loss, the magnitude was -0.125 TFR-points/year, every year for fifteen years (1962-1976), before the new-normal period that remains today. A native-loss of -0.03 TFR points in 2022, in one year, is only one-quarter of that magnitude, but starts on a much-lower base, already decades-long and sub-replacement as it is, unlike the early-1960s TFR of circa 3.5 (!). The 2022 loss-style native TFR loss, sustained over ten years, is a net of -0.3 TFR-points, which starts to be really noticeable --- especially for post-modern TFR totals in the 1.0 to 1.6 range, such as ours. with 2022-style losses sustained over ten to fifteen years, the full-White TFR could fall to near 1.0.

By the "Full-White TFR," I refer to what may be the all-important figure for the future of the USA, the number and share of births to full-white mothers whose babies' fathers are also full-white, both of whom basically identify with the West (Christians). The full-White TFR (both parents of White-Christian origin) is now at or maybe a little below 1.4. In other words, a random group of one-hundred young White woman in the USA are now expected to give birth to only 140 White children. Since some of our hypothetical hundred young White women will have two or more, the implication is that more than a few young White women will never have even one White child in their lifetimes.

Against these 140 White children, other-race women and out-breeding White women will give birth to a total of 170+ children, nonwhite and mixed-race total.

-- note - (the 2022 data is "provisional," but is expected to be very-near the final data, which is to be released later; provisional vs. final is an expected change of no more than 0.1%. None of the findings here will change, although it's possible the symbolic-threshold of 50.05% births to White-mothers may fall below the 50.000% mark again.)
Thursday - June 1st 2023 6:11AM MST
PS: Mr. Hail, thanks for the correction. Alden is a woman all right, something one can tell just from the monthly episodes of that "Men of Unz" stuff. However, she has largely very good information in her comments, taken from what she knows from her employment.

I am very glad the commenter Rosie has given up.

Thanks for the interesting comment on the change in WW's political attitudes. The old womanly thing was to stay the heck out of politics. I know women want nothing to do with it and will proudly tell you that's a men's thing. That is rare, though, as you explained, because they are being indoctrinated through many years of "schooling" that they must care and be a part of it.
Thursday - June 1st 2023 6:06AM MST
PS: Dieter, they couldn't make a post that big. ;-} (I just looked around for Socialism "memes" - maybe not the best one.)

Alarmist, no, there is no free lunch. Sometimes, there's wasted lunches that make it a negative sum game(?). I.e., the bureaucratic jobs often pay salaries for work that is not productive or even counter-productive. In the meantime, a working man with a family and stay-at-home wife could have been getting paid that in some other capacity to get stuff done.
Thursday - June 1st 2023 3:33AM MST

While JSM's comments are excellent in a descriptive sense, there is something missing. Let me take a stab at what's missing:

Something ideological has happened, in the past fifty years, with White-Western women. I don't think it's explainable by some government bureaucrats in the 1960s adjusting a welfare-state knob up a certain number of notches and the result cascading down. It is something that is ideological. The ideology is a complex mix of both cause and effect vis-a-vis the "Welfare state."

The ideology reached a wide 'spread,' and full maturity, by maybe the 2000s and 2010s, but its impact was felt earlier in many places. It is by now (in the 2020s) so easily recognizable that even the most-casual observer can see it. It's among the easiest identifiable phenomena in U.S. politics -- the Woke White-Woman phenomenon.

It's been pointed out that, traditionally, young women were the LEAST 'political' or ideological demographic cohort, generally taking no real interest in it, but that now (among this broad class of Western-women) they are among the MOST 'political' cohort.

It happened, frankly, under Jewish influence, leadership, guidance --- the Women's Liberation movement of the 1970s, from which the standard-issue young women's politics of our time descends (and from which the Woke White Female archetype of the late 2010s and 2020s is recognizable), that movement resembled Jewish political movements.

The end result? As Martin Stephan (one of the right-wing Natural Law Institute fellows) says: the White-Western Woman type to which I refer, she thinks of, regards, treats, and deals with White Males in the same way that Jews regard, treat, and deal with "Goys." This was not always the case; if it were, none of us would be here, as the family-units populating our family-trees would not likely have formed.
Thursday - June 1st 2023 3:15AM MST

Interesting in that JSM is a woman. I guess she might be of similar age and background to Alden, the most prolific openly-female Steve Sailer commenter.
The Alarmist
Thursday - June 1st 2023 2:29AM MST

Oddly enough, sweet young things in the bureaucracy are one reason why two-income homes are now a necessity.
Dieter Kief
Thursday - June 1st 2023 1:46AM MST
the state is a multi-faceted beast and .h.a.r.d. to analyze (maybe the hardest to analyze subject of the sum total of all sociological subjects - whe in doubt: study Max Weber, Niklas Luhmann (!), John Stuart Mill...) - - -but at first glance: It sure does not live on the expenses of everyone. - Hm - the poster seems not to be quite 100% accurate.
WHAT SAY YOU? : (PLEASE NOTE: You must type capital PS as the 1st TWO characters in your comment body - for spam avoidance - or the comment will be lost!)