What's wrong with "parasite singles"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ribozyme
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

ribozyme

Guest
washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-02/10/101r-021000-idx.html
They travel. Miki, who earns about $28,000 a year, frequently makes quick shopping trips to Korea, has been to Hawaii three times and to Malaysia and Egypt as well–all with girlfriends.
Click to expand...
They can afford this lifestyle because they have jobs, live with their parents and treat most of their income as spending money. They have also been less affected by Japan’s economic downturn. While the recession pushed the average unemployment rate to 4.7 percent last year and hardships caused by company restructurings are widespread, the number of contract and part-time jobs, usually filled by women, has been increasing. Fewer women than men are out of work. Visitors to Tokyo looking for visible signs of recession are struck by the crowded department stores and the bustle on streets lined with luxury boutiques–a phenomenon due in large part to spending by single women.
Click to expand...
I know Catholics will oppose “parasite singles,” but I frown on how the “parasite singles” spend their money too. However, I do believe the “parasite singles” are sustainable because the Japanese have a low birth rate and it allows a relatively amiable environment for them to live with their parents.

If I were a parasite single in Japan, I would spend most of my free time (if I am overworked, I’ll take modafinil so I could have more free time) on 2channel going into long rants about oncological pathways instead of travelling. Do you think having a low birthrate can lead to a higher quality of life?
 
Suggestions of parasitism aside, the single state can be a vocation.
 
ribozyme said:
Do you think having a low birthrate can lead to a higher quality of life?
Click to expand...
Ribozyme, I think the quest for a higher quality of life is why most developed nations have a low birth rate. Adults want to have leisure time and multiple children require more time. I can’t comment on whether multiple children reduces the quality of life since I do not have any kids. :o

I agree with Leopard that the single state can be a vocation. Being single allows a person to devote much more time to increasing the welfare of others via prayer and volunteer activities.
 
ribozyme said:
Do you think having a low birthrate can lead to a higher quality of life?
Click to expand...
i don’t know if traveling for the purpose of shopping necessarily adds to one’s quality of life. best research on other sites Japan’s looming demographic dilemma as fewer young workers will assume the burden of supporting an aging population.
 
puzzleannie said:
i don’t know if traveling for the purpose of shopping necessarily adds to one’s quality of life. best research on other sites Japan’s looming demographic dilemma as fewer young workers will assume the burden of supporting an aging population.
Click to expand...
Maybe Japanese universities will devote a larger proportion of their resources on basic senescence research and maybe Aubrey de Grey’s “work” (I see it as a form of activism instead) would come to fruition solving the “aging” population problem.
 
Leopard said:
Suggestions of parasitism aside, the single state can be a vocation.
Click to expand...
Yes. It’s also often second best. If you can’t afford to buy a house you might as well live with your parents rather than give rent money to a stranger. If you work then that means plenty of beer money, since you’ve nothing much else to spend it on.

Miko earns 28,000 dollars a year. By developed country standards, that’s a pretty low wage. You can’t get a property in Britain for much less than 200,000 dollars, which means an unachievable 7-8x salary mortage for her. What else is she expected to do?
 
ribozyme said:
washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-02/10/101r-021000-idx.html

I know Catholics will oppose “parasite singles,” but I frown on how the “parasite singles” spend their money too. However, I do believe the “parasite singles” are sustainable because the Japanese have a low birth rate and it allows a relatively amiable environment for them to live with their parents.

If I were a parasite single in Japan, I would spend most of my free time (if I am overworked, I’ll take modafinil so I could have more free time) on 2channel going into long rants about oncological pathways instead of travelling. Do you think having a low birthrate can lead to a higher quality of life?
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with a “parasite single”?

Well… I would imagine they’re insufferable to be around, the type that wont share their box of cookies with you and insist on holding the TV remote.

Higher quality of life? How does one define that?

I don’t think these “singles” are really very happy… I would imagine their parents are a little concerned too?
 
Mr.Bee said:
What’s wrong with a “parasite single”?

Well… I would imagine they’re insufferable to be around, the type that wont share their box of cookies with you and insist on holding the TV remote.

Higher quality of life? How does one define that?

I don’t think these “singles” are really very happy… I would imagine their parents are a little concerned too?
Click to expand...
Do you think they would be happier in American culture?
 
Wow…she can do all that on only $28000? I think I’m impressed.

I’m also not married, and live with my father. He owns the house and pays the utilities, etc, and I buy most of the groceries. I make a lot more than $28000 but I couldn’t be doing those things. Plus we’re old people, 57 and 77.

That’s over $13 an hour…bank tellers don’t make anywhere near that kind of money here.

Not important, but there are my thoughts.
 
Mr.Bee said:
When people arrogantly parade their lifestyles over the internet, I think I can judge.
Click to expand...
And what is wrong with their lifestyle? If the parent didn’t want them at home they have every right to kick them out. Otherwise it is a mutually agreed upon living arrangement. The child is then free to spend the money the way they want to. I don’t have anything against “parasite” singles and am not about to throw around the term.
 
goofyjim said:
And what is wrong with their lifestyle?
Click to expand...
They’re selfish.

The problem is: Not these individuals per se, but the way it’s being presented by the media. It becomes a representation of the way people are, or should be.

And yeah, she’s her mothers problem. And when she turns 35 and decides it’s time for her to have a baby, I expect that’ll be her mothers problem too?

I’m judging the big picture here.
 
Mr.Bee said:
They’re selfish.

The problem is: Not these individuals per se, but the way it’s being presented by the media. It becomes a representation of the way people are, or should be.

And yeah, she’s her mothers problem. And when she turns 35 and decides it’s time for her to have a baby, I expect that’ll be her mothers problem too?

I’m judging the big picture here.
Click to expand...
And who isn’t a little bit selfish? Society has become that way in general. We need our computers, luxury car, you name it. And noone said she had any plans to have a baby. She may feel quite content to remain single and they she and her mother may have a mutual living arrangement. IT IS NOT ours to judge. I take offense at the OP assuming there is something morally wrong here. We’re not all obligated to move out of our parents home at any point if our parents agree to let us stay there.
 
Just look at the wages people earn these days. Several years ago it was better, much less before. Before, people would have families by mid-twenties. These days, after graduation people work not for a house and a family, but for mere subsistence independent from parents. That way they can’t stand on their feet economically and guarantee a family’s welfare before they’ve finished 30. At that age some are burnt out. This is a tragedy.
 
Hey, I am 46 years old, not married and I live with my mother.

Is that a problem? Does that me a parasite single?

(Of course, my ex-wife divorced me about 18 months ago. My mother is 83, blind, a recent widow, no longer able to live by herself and moved into **my **house in August and I have to suffer the indignity of her forcing me accept a “rent” payment from her. 😛 )
 
goofyjim said:
And who isn’t a little bit selfish? Society has become that way in general. We need our computers, luxury car, you name it. And noone said she had any plans to have a baby. She may feel quite content to remain single and they she and her mother may have a mutual living arrangement. IT IS NOT ours to judge. I take offense at the OP assuming there is something morally wrong here. We’re not all obligated to move out of our parents home at any point if our parents agree to let us stay there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, exactly! We’re all a little bit selfish, but I don’t think it’s right to encourage it, like the article seem to be doing.

And: The article specifically mentions that Miki eventually wants to get married and have a baby. The way it’s presented suggests that getting married and having children is something she can engineer on her own terms.

I will conceed that I shouldn’t judge her living arrangement with her parents, in fact many cultures encourage living with parents and family until marriage, I don’t think thats morally wrong.

I do however, not like the article and it’s message. which is selfishness is good.
 
chevalier said:
Just look at the wages people earn these days. Several years ago it was better, much less before. Before, people would have families by mid-twenties. These days, after graduation people work not for a house and a family, but for mere subsistence independent from parents. That way they can’t stand on their feet economically and guarantee a family’s welfare before they’ve finished 30. At that age some are burnt out. This is a tragedy.
Click to expand...
It’s a huge problem. The economy has shrunk but the older generation won’t accept a drop in living standards. With the result that young people simply cannot afford to start families. The final nail in the coffin is working wives. Single income twenty somethings with young children have got to compete for housing in the same market as 40 something dual income couples.
 
Malcolm_McLean said:
It’s a huge problem. The economy has shrunk but the older generation won’t accept a drop in living standards. With the result that young people simply cannot afford to start families. The final nail in the coffin is working wives. Single income twenty somethings with young children have got to compete for housing in the same market as 40 something dual income couples.
Click to expand...
How can that happen when people are spending all their money on consumer goods? It seems that the spending of the parasite singles prevents that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top