Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Thursday fact-checked “The View” and other critics of his Wednesday night segment on declining male income opportunities and the critical role that plays in the decline of marriage and the middle class family.
In a lengthy monologue on Thursday night’s edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” the Fox News host played some of the criticism “The View” co-host Joy Behar and others made of his Wednesday statement, then noted how “no one contested the facts of what we said.”
“America used to be the best country in the world for families,” said Carlson before playing some of Wednesday night’s segment on the “simple economics” behind the decline of the middle class family – the fact that women “don’t want to marry” men who make less than they do, yet income opportunities for men are on the decline thanks in no small part to policies instituted by America’s elites.
“Now let’s be clear about that statement,” said the Fox News host. “First of all, it is factually true, and that’s the essential test of anything.”
Carlson cited several studies proving his point before expressing his desire that it was not the case.
“All we did was tell the truth of what happened,” he said. “Which we did because it actually matters, and that turned out to be too much for the people that believe it is their job to prevent you from knowing why your country is going down the tubes.” MORE
The View. Rather subjective in it self if you have blinders on. If you ignore them, they will go away. Joey Bayheart doesn’t deserve a response to the dumb ass shit she says. So why in Gods Green earth do we keep bringing them up?
While true (and tangentially germane to his topic), calling out “men” ignores the (putatively important) truth. Men’s income has been stolen. But it has not been given to women. Nobody replaces a man with a woman for higher pay. Nobody replaces a citizen with a “guest worker” for higher pay. People are replaced so some portion (ever increasing, with each re-replacement) of their pay can be taken by the aristocracy that orders them replaced.
This all began to take root in the sixties. Women wanted to be fulfilled instead of being homemakers. Thats fair enough but they flooded the job market and mens wages dropped making it impossible to have a one income family.
This is the end result of the womans movement and a big part of why the nuclear family is disappearing.
“You go girl”
@gin blossom January 5, 2019 at 7:41 am
> they flooded the job market and mens wages dropped making it impossible to have a one income family
Yes.
> a big part of why the nuclear family is disappearing
No.
If the government mandated wealth transfer from the middle class to the 1%, had been the sole act, the inability to feed their children would have resulted in (simple) population collapse. (The same as any government engineered famine.) Rather, the aristocracy combined, deliberately, simultaneously, the looting of middle class’ income, engineered hyper-inflation of (especially government created, and controlled) costs of living (e.g. increase in the purely imaginary “cost” of real estate, to align with two, diminished, incomes, rather than one) and government provided (after further taking from the same middle class, skimming for themselves, and further sharing with the aristocracy) single “parent” (though biology, clearly not Science!™, means “single mother”) “social support”.
I think many of the “declining income opportunities” are a deliberate choice by many men. Feminism has been liberating – for men. There is no longer societal pressure to marry and raise a family as women are now empowered to take care of their own needs. Feminists have made sex available to men without the bonds of marriage. Men have no biological clock as it pertains to siring children. The old phrase that “two can live as cheaply as one” was never true, and now men only have to earn one income sufficient to support their own needs.
Feminists are now upset that women really can’t have it all because choices need to be made both by men and women. Culturally, men were supposed to be the breadwinners, but if they only have to worry about themselves then there is less pressure to bring in more and more income. Women were historically in charge of the family, but feminists decided that it was more important for women to succeed in the work force. So feminists did make choices, and it seems to be turning out that the choices they made were not choices they really wanted.
Never confuse Joyless Behar with something as insignificant as fact.
Well Wyatt, “two can live as cheaply as one”, as the old joke goes, is true, “if both parties eat half as much.”
Destroying the family unit has been a goal of the Left for over a century now.