(I strongly suspected that the bishop in Elder Holland's story was exercising unrighteous dominion on the "full tithe payer" question, and it may have been a missed opportunity not to point out that was a possibility, but at least he did not rule it out.)
It felt like an acknowledgment that it is getting much harder to keep afloat financially. The stories were past, but them coming up now at a time when so many are struggling felt significant to me.
It's not that the longstanding councils about avoiding debt and spending wisely were wrong, but things are worse, and not necessarily in ways that can be fixed by individual choice. Just consider the debts that have traditionally been considered acceptable:
- Education - costs have risen in a way that wages have not, making college a far riskier proposition than it should be.
- Homes - theoretically using caution and not being greedy could have saved you from the housing bubble (for all of my problems, I have still never been underwater on the mortgage), but the market fluctuations still have an impact.
Finances can be a threat to the family in two ways. Concerns about being able to provide for a family are a factor in at least some decisions about marrying and children. Church leaders have encouraged us to have faith for years, but that has required less of a leap in the past.
Beyond that, financial stress can tear existing families apart. Going back to those medical bankruptcies, an illness that bankrupts the family is probably severe enough or long-lasting enough that the bankruptcy would be far from the only stress. Some adversity can bring families closer together, but that's not always how it works.
When survival feels like a struggle, you are not your best self. This often means not being a picnic to be around. Spread that around a household, and it is not great for families.
In addition, strong families require time spent together. Our church has historically encouraged having one stay-at-home parent, but they emphasize that less now, presumably because fewer people can make it work. A prominent member of the church and presidential candidate said that modern families needed to have 2-3 jobs to keep going - is that good for families?
There are two important things to note here. One is that when we think of an attack on the family, there may be something alluring about imagining a Hollywood that corrupts people because they are evil and hate families, but it is false. (Which we already covered.)
It is not completely unreasonable to think about these financial stresses as an attack on the family, but it is not helpful to understand it as a personal attack. Unbridled capitalism only cares about getting the money, not whom it's hurting, and there is no one source. There are many, many businesses that will pay as low as possible and avoid taxes as much as possible. It's not just the Walton family or John Schnatter.
Once upon a time there were better wage regulations and unions and programs that did curb the economic inequality. Some reverses should be possible.
Right now Italy's birth rate is at an all time low. There are multiple reasons for that, but I do know that young people are reluctant to marry and have children. Job insecurity plays a role, but also there are traditions where a wedding is expected to cost around 30,000 Euros, which very few people have. Doing it really cheaply would still be 15,000.
Now, it should certainly be possible to break those traditions, and encourage elopements or smaller ceremonies or some ways of economizing. However, doing that still leaves the issues with jobs and doubts about successfully supporting oneself, let alone a family.
Those aren't necessarily easy things to fix, but if you care about people - as individuals and as family units - they need to be addressed. It requires honesty, but it can be done.
There is one other big threat to family happiness, both for people deciding to marry and to stay married. It gets back to that conference talk that started this series.
We will get to that next week.
No comments:
Post a Comment