tag:theconversation.com,2011:/institutions/monmouth-university-1242/articlesMonmouth University2023-10-16T03:37:23Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2126762023-10-16T03:37:23Z2023-10-16T03:37:23ZBertahan atau putus? Alasan mengapa orang-orang memutuskan hubungan menurut ahli<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/545828/original/file-20210211-15-158vmy7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=275%2C351%2C4028%2C2621&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Apakah kamu merasa 'berjodoh' atau 'selamat tinggal' dengan hubunganmu?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/heart-shaped-conversation-candies-background-copy-royalty-free-image/1200840322">Christine_Kohler/iStock via Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Di mana kamu melihat dirimu dalam lima tahun ke depan? Ini adalah pertanyaan standar saat wawancara kerja, tapi pertanyaan ini juga baik ditanyakan pada diri sendiri tentang hubungan asmara yang kamu miliki.</p>
<p>Orang yang kamu ajak bicara, berkencan, tinggal bersama, bertunangan, menikah, putus, atau bercerai - semuanya terserah kamu. Kamu memegang kemudi penuh dalam menentukan arah hubunganmu.</p>
<p>Seringkali, kamu mungkin melaju dengan kendali otomatis (<em>autopilot</em>), mempertahankan kondisi yang sudah ada. Namun, sesekali, ada sesuatu yang mengganggu keseimbangan itu dan membuatmu merenungkan nasib hubunganmu dengan serius.</p>
<p>Pada titik tertentu, kebanyakan orang menemukan diri mereka menghadapi keputusan yang rumit, apakah akan bertahan atau berhenti. Meskipun ada banyak hal yang perlu dipertimbangkan saat kamu merenungkan situasi itu, mengetahui bagaimana orang lain menghadapi keputusan penting dalam hidup tersebut mungkin akan membantu. Penelitian terbaru, <a href="https://www.littlebrown.com/titles/gary-w-lewandowski-jr-phd/stronger-than-you-think/9780316454704/">termasuk penelitian saya sendiri di bidang ilmu hubungan</a>, telah mengeksplorasi bagaimana orang membuat pilihan-pilihan ini.</p>
<h2>Faktor-faktor saat menimbang sebuah hubungan</h2>
<p>Rasa-rasanya, jumlah alasan mengapa seseorang memutuskan untuk mempertahankan atau mengakhiri sebuah hubungan, sama banyaknya dengan jumlah hubungan yang ada.</p>
<p>Untuk mempelajari lebih lanjut tentang apa yang sebenarnya dipertimbangkan oleh orang-orang, para peneliti psikologi seperti <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=3lKgR-QAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Samantha Joel</a>, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xji4sRAAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Geoff Macdonald</a> dan <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=VhP69dEAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Elizabeth Page-Gould</a> bertanya kepada lebih dari 400 orang yang tengah mempertanyakan hubungan mereka: “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617722834">Apa saja alasan</a> yang mungkin diberikan seseorang untuk tetap bersama atau meninggalkan pasangan romantisnya?”</p>
<p>Dari semua situasi yang ada, muncul 50 tema umum.</p>
<p><iframe id="kAJzE" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kAJzE/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Orang-orang memberikan 27 alasan utama untuk bertahan dalam hubungan. Alasan-alasan tersebut berfokus pada komponen-komponen hubungan utama seperti ketertarikan, keintiman fisik dan emosional, serta dukungan. Orang-orang enggan kehilangan waktu dan usaha yang telah mereka investasikan serta takut sendirian. Mereka mempertimbangkan nilai tambah, seperti aspek-aspek yang diinginkan dari kepribadian pasangan mereka dan seberapa banyak kesenangan yang mereka miliki bersama. Mereka juga mempertimbangkan isu-isu praktis, termasuk potensi gangguan keluarga dan implikasi keuangan.</p>
<p>Para peserta juga mengemukakan 23 alasan umum untuk berpisah. Ini mencakup banyak tema yang sama dengan yang disebutkan pada alasan untuk bertahan, tetapi berfokus pada sisi negatif, seperti kepribadian pasangan yang bermasalah, tindakan penipuan atau perselingkuhan, jarak emosional, kurangnya dukungan, dan keintiman emosional atau fisik yang tidak memadai.</p>
<h2>Begitu banyak alasan, apa yang harus dilakukan?</h2>
<p>Membuat daftar tema-tema ini adalah satu hal. Lalu, bagaimana individu mempertimbangkannya dalam keputusan nyata untuk tetap tinggal atau pergi? Untuk mengetahuinya, para peneliti melakukan penelitian lanjutan terhadap lebih dari 200 orang yang sedang mempertimbangkan untuk berpisah atau bercerai.</p>
<p>Sekitar setengah dari peserta ini melaporkan bahwa mereka merasa, secara imbang, lebih cenderung untuk tetap bertahan dalam hubungan yang bermasalah. Hal ini masuk akal karena rasa enggan berubah itu kuat. Bertahan sering kali membutuhkan usaha yang lebih sedikit.</p>
<p>Namun, orang-orang yang sama secara bersamaan memiliki kecenderungan di atas rata-rata untuk pergi, yang berarti mereka menilai diri mereka cenderung untuk berpisah. Di situlah masalahnya. Para peserta termotivasi untuk tetap bersama pasangannya, tapi pada saat yang sama juga termotivasi untuk mengakhiri hubungan. Dan keraguan ini sangat umum terjadi. </p>
<p>Keraguan akan hubungan yang begitu umum dan orang-orang yang sering kali bingung tentang apa yang harus dilakukan adalah hal yang membuat penelitian semacam ini berpotensi membantu. Penelitian ini sedikit membantu dengan mengidentifikasi apa yang paling penting.</p>
<h2>Jalan yang panjang dan berliku</h2>
<p>Keputusan dalam sebuah hubungan jarang sekali sesederhana “apakah saya harus tetap tinggal atau pergi?” Sebaliknya, orang-orang mengalami pergeseran halus dalam komitmen mereka yang terbangun dari waktu ke waktu. Apa yang menyebabkan variasi dalam komitmen ini? </p>
<p>Peneliti hubungan <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=aJgXSyoAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra">Laura Machia</a> dan <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=aCOyAim5Kz4C&hl=en&oi=sra">Brian Ogolsky</a> berusaha mencari tahu dengan <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220966903">mewawancarai partisipan dalam hubungan yang stabil </a>. Pada setiap wawancara delapan bulanan, 464 partisipan mengindikasikan seberapa serius hubungan mereka dengan menilai seberapa besar kemungkinan mereka akan menikah dengan pasangan mereka saat ini - “0% jika mereka yakin tidak akan pernah menikah dengan pasangan mereka atau tidak pernah memikirkan pernikahan, dan 100% jika mereka yakin akan menikah dengan pasangan mereka di masa depan.” Setiap kali persentase “komitmen untuk menikah” mereka berubah dari satu wawancara ke wawancara berikutnya, para peneliti menanyakan alasannya.</p>
<p>Para peserta mengungkapkan banyak alasan, tepatnya 13.598 alasan, yang menyebabkan naik-turunnya komitmen. Para peneliti menyaringnya menjadi 14 tema utama. Alasan yang paling berpengaruh adalah penggambaran positif dan negatif tentang pasangan dan hubungan. Ini termasuk pernyataan langsung tentang pasangan - seperti “dia menyenangkan, perhatian, dan baik hati” - atau tentang mereka sebagai pasangan - seperti “kami mulai menjauh.” Seperti yang bisa diduga, pernyataan positif lebih berkaitan dengan peningkatan komitmen, sementara pernyataan negatif berkaitan dengan penurunan.</p>
<p><iframe id="dkQGK" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/dkQGK/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Alasan yang paling banyak disebutkan berikutnya adalah keadaan yaitu kejadian atau pengalaman yang tidak terduga seperti kehilangan pekerjaan, pasangan jatuh sakit, atau harus pindah. Menariknya, perubahan hidup seperti ini dapat meningkatkan atau menurunkan komitmen seseorang terhadap hubungan. Temuan ini merupakan bukti lebih lanjut bahwa peristiwa itu sendiri - misalnya, pandemi di seluruh dunia - bukanlah satu-satunya penentu nasib suatu hubungan. Dinamika yang ada pada pasangan juga memainkan peran yang besar.</p>
<p>Dari semua alasan yang mungkin mendorong orang untuk menaikkan atau menurunkan skala komitmen, ada satu alasan yang paling menonjol yang dapat memprediksi apakah pasangan akan berpisah yaitu selingkuh. Meskipun ada banyak faktor lain yang membuat orang merasa lebih atau kurang mungkin untuk mempertimbangkan pernikahan, keterlibatan dengan pasangan kencan lain adalah satu-satunya pembunuh hubungan yang sebenarnya. </p>
<p>Di sisi lain, penelitian ini juga mengidentifikasi satu faktor yang meningkatkan komitmen dan mendorong hubungan lebih dekat ke arah pernikahan: pengungkapan diri secara positif. Itulah yang dimaksud oleh para psikolog, bahwa ketika kita saling berbagi informasi yang mendorong perasaan positif, pada gilirannya hal tersebut akan mendukung hubungan kita. Pikirkanlah tentang bertukar cerita tentang masa kecilmu, mengenal satu sama lain lebih dalam, atau berbagi kabar baik. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.904">Pengungkapan semacam ini dapat memperkuat hubungan</a>.</p>
<h2>Cinta adalah sebuah keputusan - dan jarang sekali jelas</h2>
<p>Hubungan itu rumit, dan tidak ada yang tahu pasti apa yang akan terjadi di masa depan. Sulit untuk mengetahui apa keputusan terbaik jika kamu sedang memikirkan apakah akan tetap bersama pasangan atau berpisah. Hubungan terbaik memiliki masalah, sementara hubungan terburuk masih memiliki kebaikan. Meskipun tidak ingin terjebak dengan pasangan yang buruk, kamu juga tidak ingin bersikap terlalu keras terhadap hubungan yang seharusnya menjadi hubungan yang baik. Mungkin dengan mengetahui apa yang orang lain anggap sebagai faktor penting dapat membantu kamu membuat pilihan terbaik.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Rahma Sekar Andini dari Universitas Negeri Malang menerjemahkan artikel ini dari bahasa Inggris</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212676/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.</span></em></p>Setiap orang memiliki banyak alasan untuk bertahan atau mengakhiri sebuah hubungan romantis. Namun, para peneliti telah mengidentifikasi beberapa tema umum yang memengaruhi keputusan besar ini.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1873342022-08-26T12:18:59Z2022-08-26T12:18:59ZChild poverty fell to a record-low 5.2% in 2021 – here’s how it could have been even lower<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/479412/original/file-20220816-21-c98s5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=422%2C100%2C6287%2C3671&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Government benefits can reduce child poverty.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/mother-and-daughters-with-their-backs-turned-go-royalty-free-image/1337955441">DBenitostock/Moment via Getty Images</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The U.S. government’s most accurate measure of <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-277.html">child poverty fell to 5.2%</a> in 2021, the lowest level on record and a decline of 4.5 percentage points from a year earlier. This sharp reduction was due, in large part, to <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/01/27/1075299510/the-expanded-child-tax-credit-briefly-slashed-child-poverty-heres-what-else-it-d">generous government benefits</a>. Our research suggests that although policies reduced child poverty by nearly half in 2021, the decline would have been even larger had the government made it easier for families to receive those benefits.</p>
<p>One way the federal government responded to the economic upheaval that accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic was to boost the <a href="https://www.irs.gov/coronavirus-tax-relief-and-economic-impact-payments">money Americans got as benefits</a> - and to distribute those benefits to people who didn’t previously get them. </p>
<p>Starting in the spring of 2020, for example, most Americans received a series of <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/coronavirus/assistance-for-american-families-and-workers/economic-impact-payments">economic relief payments</a>. Those funds had already helped reduce child poverty to <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-275.html">9.7% in 2020 from 12.6% in 2019</a>, according to what’s known as the “<a href="https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-275.html">supplemental poverty measure</a>.”</p>
<p>The government data, released on Sept. 13, 2022, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2022.2107017">confirms expectations</a> <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/author/Pressman%2C+Steven">that</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zQIzkdYAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">we</a> and <a href="https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/104603/2021-poverty-projections_0_0.pdf">other economists</a> had based on <a href="https://www.nber.org/papers/w30371">previous research</a> regarding the share of American children living in poverty in 2021. One key policy change brought about this decline: The government temporarily <a href="https://theconversation.com/millions-of-american-parents-will-soon-get-a-monthly-allowance-4-questions-answered-156834">expanded the child tax credit</a>, boosting the incomes of nearly all families with children.</p>
<p>We have determined, however, that child poverty would have plunged much more had the government done a better job ensuring that all who qualified got the credit.</p>
<h2>Child tax credit</h2>
<p>Unlike the <a href="https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/about/history-of-the-poverty-measure.html">official poverty rate</a>, the supplemental poverty measure accounts for government benefits, such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/snap-benefits-are-rising-for-millions-of-americans-thanks-to-a-long-overdue-thrifty-food-plan-update-167876">Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program</a>, or SNAP. </p>
<p>The supplemental poverty measure has been consistently lower for children than the official poverty rate since its launch in 2011.</p>
<p>One reason for this is the <a href="https://www.childtaxcredit.gov/">child tax credit</a>. It began in 1998, with a maximum possible credit of $400 per child. The amount families could get was <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/search/#/?termsToSearch=the%20child%20tax%20credit&orderBy=Relevance">limited by the income taxes they owed</a>. Since low-income families either don’t pay any income taxes or owe very little, this did them little good. Subsequent reform measures increased both the amount of the credit and made some of this benefit available to families that paid no income tax.</p>
<p>A large federal spending package enacted in 2021 increased the credit further and made it available to all but the wealthiest families with children. Between July 2021 and June 2022, most received up to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/us/politics/child-tax-credit-payments.html">$3,600 for each child under 6 and as much as $3,000</a> for kids between the ages of 6 and 17. The Internal Revenue Service distributed half this money in monthly payments between July and December 2021, and the rest at tax time in 2022.</p>
<p><iframe id="OoHDY" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/OoHDY/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>3 million fewer children in poverty</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.urban.org/research/publication/how-permanent-expansion-child-tax-credit-could-affect-poverty">Many economists</a> <a href="https://www.jainfamilyinstitute.org/assets/full-refundability-of-child-tax-credit-without-expansion.pdf">predicted</a> that this <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/temporarily-expanding-child-tax-credit-and-earned-income-tax-credit-would">benefit would help millions</a> of children escape poverty. </p>
<p>And, according to the Census, <a href="https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-277.pdf">2.9 million fewer U.S. children</a> were living in poverty because of the child tax credit, including its temporary expansion. This policy reduced child poverty by 4 percentage points.</p>
<p>But we estimate that the child poverty rate could have fallen even further had the government ensured that more eligible families received the expanded child tax credit last year.</p>
<p>As we explained in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2022.2107017">Journal of Post Keynesian Economics</a>, an academic publication, we reviewed detailed 2019 data to estimate what would have happened to child poverty that year had all eligible families received the 2021 tax credit expansion. </p>
<p>We estimated a supplemental child poverty rate of around 5.2%, in line with what actually happened. But our modeling was based on a few assumptions, such as that the expansion would last for a full year and that there would be no other pandemic-related benefits. These two factors came close to balancing each other out, leading to an estimate of child poverty that was close to what was reported.</p>
<p>Based on our calculations, we believe that the supplemental child poverty rate could have declined 2.2 percentage points more in 2021 than what the Census found had every eligible family gotten the child tax credit. This would have lifted another 1.6 million children from poverty.</p>
<p>Many low-income families <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/us-households-paying-no-income-tax/">didn’t file a tax return</a> in 2019 or 2020, because they didn’t owe federal income taxes. To get monthly child tax credits from the IRS, these families <a href="https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/advance-child-tax-credit-payments-in-2021">needed to file a return</a>.</p>
<p>Alternatively, families could log in to the IRS website and apply for the child tax credit. That was hard to do for many low-income people who <a href="https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/private/pdf/263601/internet-access-among-low-income-2019.pdf">lacked internet access</a>.</p>
<h2>Lack of awareness</h2>
<p>Surveys by a research team at <a href="https://socialpolicyinstitute.wustl.edu/employment-financial-wellbeing-effects-2021-ctc-report/">Washington University in St. Louis</a> support our theory. It found that 29% of low- and moderate-income Americans knew little or nothing about the child tax credit expansion – or even that they were eligible to receive it.</p>
<p>Specifically, 78% of those surveyed who did not file a 2020 tax return didn’t know much about the credit. Furthermore, some journalists found that the IRS website people must use to apply for benefits when they didn’t file a tax return was not user-friendly, and <a href="https://prospect.org/coronavirus/poor-arent-getting-help-democrats-want-to-give-them/">no Spanish version was available</a>.</p>
<p>These findings, together with the official <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-277.html">child poverty statistics for 2021</a>, show that expanding the child tax credit can greatly reduce child poverty. They also point to the need for increased outreach efforts to ensure that all low-income Americans can obtain the benefits for which they are eligible. </p>
<p>And now that the Census Bureau has released its 2021 poverty statistics, we expect that calls for this benefit to be restored on a permanent basis will spread.</p>
<p><em>This article was updated on Sept. 13, 2022, to reflect that the official Census Bureau’s child poverty data for 2021 had been released.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/187334/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A tax credit expansion played a big role in child poverty reduction. But the government’s failure to reach all eligible Americans meant many families never got that temporary benefit.Steven Pressman, Part-Time Professor of Economics, The New SchoolRobert H. Scott III, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Finance & Real Estate, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1806512022-04-08T12:33:44Z2022-04-08T12:33:44ZWhat is a 529 college savings plan? An economist explains<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/456925/original/file-20220407-14-wjb0pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=60%2C0%2C6649%2C4466&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A 529 plan can pay for up to $10,000 a year for tuition at K-12 schools.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/father-and-son-counting-money-at-home-royalty-free-image/924565162?adppopup=true">MoMo Productions/DigitalVision via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The college savings plan known as a “529” is often touted as a <a href="https://smartasset.com/investing/529-investment-strategy-by-age">smart way to save</a> for a child’s college education. But these plans involve more than just putting away money for college. Here, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zQIzkdYAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Robert H. Scott III</a>, an <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2017.1320911">expert on 529s</a>, shines light on how the plans work.</em></p>
<h2>What are 529 plans?</h2>
<p>A 529 college savings plan is an investment account that families can open to save for college by investing money that grows tax-free. The name of the account comes from <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/529">Section 529</a> of the U.S. tax code.</p>
<p>The money can be used for <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/what-you-can-pay-for-with-a-529-plan">qualifying education expenses</a>, such as tuition, room and board, textbooks, computers and travel. </p>
<p>People can add money to a 529 account whenever they like, or set up automatic withdrawals from their checking account.</p>
<p>At the end of 2020, Americans had invested a
<a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/246233/savings-plan-assets-of-american-households/">total of US$425 billion</a> in 529 plans. In 2020, <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/average-529-plan-balance-how-do-you-compare">the average 529 plan had $25,644</a>, but average balances <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/average-529-plan-balance-how-do-you-compare">vary by the age of the child</a>. This amount is almost exactly the total cost of only one year at an <a href="https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college">in-state, four-year college</a>. The average total cost of one year at a private school is more than double that amount.</p>
<p>When money is placed into a 529, it’s not as if the money is just sitting there. You will have several possible investment options to choose from that comprise stocks, bonds or a combination of the two. There are usually preset investment portfolios based on a child’s age. When a child is young, these portfolios are mostly stocks and are invested more aggressively. But as the child ages, the portfolio automatically transfers more money to bonds, which are usually less volatile. So the effectiveness of a 529 plan depends on how well the stock market performs.</p>
<h2>Is the money only for the first four years of college?</h2>
<p>It is also possible to use 529 plans for graduate school. So if a child earns a full scholarship as an undergraduate, then the money from the child’s 529 plan can be saved for graduate school.</p>
<p>A recent change in 529 plans allows them to be used for education before college. More specifically, they can be used to pay up to $10,000 per year for tuition at K-12 schools. </p>
<p>For college, however, there are no limits on how much can be withdrawn to cover education expenses.</p>
<h2>Do 529 plans vary by state?</h2>
<p>Every state in the United States, plus Washington, D.C., has its own 529 plan. However, not all plans are the same. For that reason, it is important to research which plans have the lowest fees, the best investment options and the <a href="https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1062917/the-top-529-education-savings-plans-of-2021">best overall returns</a>.</p>
<p>There are no residency requirements. In other words, you don’t have to live in a particular state to invest in the state’s 529 plan. However, if a state offers a tax deduction for investing in its 529 plan, then you have to live in that state to get the deduction.</p>
<h2>What if the beneficiary of the 529 doesn’t go to college?</h2>
<p>It is possible to move funds in 529 plan accounts from one beneficiary to another. Beneficiaries who do not use their 529 plan funds can even transfer the account to their own children or another family member without penalty. </p>
<p>The biggest problem with 529 plans is that money not used for qualified education expenses incurs a 10% penalty on investment earnings. Those earnings are also subject to federal and sometimes state income taxes if they are not used for education expenses that qualify under a 529 plan.</p>
<h2>Who should invest in 529 plans?</h2>
<p>Families unable to qualify for financial aid are the target investors for 529 plans.</p>
<p>A 529 plan account with a large balance could keep a student from being eligible for financial aid, even if the balance is much less than the overall cost of the degree. So, in cases like this, a 529 plan could cost families money rather than help.</p>
<p>Grandparents whose grandchildren are unlikely to qualify for financial aid <a href="https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/tips-for-grandparents-using-a-529-plan-to-save-for-college">are also common investors</a> in 529 plans. </p>
<p>Parents, grandparents or anyone with the ability and desire can contribute up to $16,000 each year if a child’s parents are not married – or $32,000 if they are married – and not pay gift taxes. People can contribute up to this maximum amount each year for each beneficiary. So, if a grandparent has two grandchildren whose parents are married, they can contribute $32,000 in one year to each child’s 529 plan.</p>
<p>Each state has different rules on how much someone can contribute over a lifetime to any one 529 plan, but <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/maximum-529-plan-contribution-limits-by-state#:%7E:text=Annual%20529%20plan%20contribution%20limits,the%20annual%20gift%20tax%20exclusion.">it ranges</a> from $235,000 in states such as Georgia and Mississippi to $550,000 in Missouri.</p>
<h2>Do 529 plans work?</h2>
<p>Yes. They are a way for families to invest money in the stock market and, if all goes well, enjoy financial gains that they can withdraw for their children’s education without paying taxes. They work best under several conditions. </p>
<p>First, if a family is unable to qualify for financial aid, 529 plans offer an effective way to save for college because the money is invested in the stock market and can grow faster than other options, such as savings accounts. Plus, the gains are not taxed as they would be if invested in a non-529 plan investment account. </p>
<p>Second, because the investment time horizon is short – possibly less than 18 years – your money does not have much time to grow, so you have to invest early. There is no age limit for beneficiaries of 529s. You can start one for yourself or someone else at any age.</p>
<p>Third, if you live in one of the states that offer a tax deduction for investing in a 529 plan, that <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/how-much-is-your-state-s-529-plan-tax-deduction-really-worth">is a factor to consider</a>. Specifically, a 529 holder should look at whether the value of the tax deduction is large enough to outweigh the fact that there are fewer or worse investment options.</p>
<p>[<em>Like what you’ve read? Want more?</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-likethis">Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>Fourth, anyone can contribute to a person’s 529 plan, so it makes a great gift that will not end up being broken or thrown away.</p>
<p>Fifth, grandparents or other relatives, and even family friends, can set up 529 plans for grandchildren, stepchildren, nieces and nephews. In general, it’s probably more efficient to have one 529 plan, but some people like to retain some control over the plan they invest in, so some kids may have several. For instance, I have 529 plans for both of my kids, but their grandparents have 529 plan accounts for them, too.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/college-savings-penalties">There are other situations</a> that allow you to withdraw 529 plan funds and not be subjected to the 10% penalty, such as when a beneficiary dies, becomes disabled or earns a full scholarship. Relatives might find this type of saving <a href="https://hbr.org/2021/08/why-are-we-so-emotional-about-money">more emotionally rewarding</a> than gifting money now or giving a larger inheritance at death.</p>
<h2>Are there any drawbacks?</h2>
<p>There are two primary problems with 529 plans, even for families that might benefit from them the most. </p>
<p>First, timing when to withdraw money is more challenging than, say, for retirement. For example, if the market is having a down year, but a beneficiary is in college and you need to pay tuition, then the benefits can be <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/market-timing-doesnt-work-well-for-529-college-savings-plans">smaller overall</a>. Say you have $50,000 invested in a 529 plan, and the market falls 10% right before you withdraw the money. If that happens, then you would only have $45,000 to withdraw. On the other hand, if the market increased 10% right before you needed the money, then you would have $55,000 to withdraw. </p>
<p>Second, your investment options are limited. If your state offers a tax deduction for investing in a 529 plan you might choose to invest in your state’s plan even if that plan might not be very good, such as if it has <a href="https://www.savingforcollege.com/529_fee_study/">expensive fees</a>. Alternatively, you might choose to invest in another state’s 529 plan and lose the state tax deduction, but have more investment options and fewer fees. This could save you more money in the long run.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/180651/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert H. Scott III does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>College savings plans – known as 529s – can be effective for certain families. Still, it pays to know the ins and outs of how the plans work, an expert says.Robert H. Scott III, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Finance & Real Estate, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1754222022-02-09T13:24:04Z2022-02-09T13:24:04ZPartnering up can help you grow as an individual – here’s the psychology of a romantic relationship that expands the self<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445285/original/file-20220209-16-129wbzh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=443%2C474%2C3884%2C2981&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Following a partner's lead in an activity they enjoy can foster growth for you.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/young-woman-leading-boyfriend-up-a-mountain-trail-royalty-free-image/1283508188">The Good Brigade/DigitalVision via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s common to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43747-3">want to become a better version of yourself</a>. Much like the desires to eat, drink and avoid harm, human beings also experience a fundamental need to learn, grow and improve – <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398694.013.0005">what psychologists call self-expansion</a>.</p>
<p>Consider your favorite activities. Things like reading a book, spending time in nature, volunteering with a new organization, taking a class, traveling, trying a new restaurant, exercising or watching a documentary all broaden the self. Those experiences add new knowledge, skills, perspectives and identities. When who you are as a person expands, you enhance your competence and capabilities and increase your ability to meet new challenges and accomplish new goals. </p>
<p>Of course, you can achieve self-expansion on your own by trying new and interesting activities (like playing Wordle), learning new things (like advancing through a language app) or working on a skill (like practicing meditation). Research confirms that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2012.746999">these kinds of activities help individuals expand themselves</a>, which encourages them to put forth more effort on subsequent challenging tasks.</p>
<p>Interestingly, romantic relationships can also be a key source of growth for people. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=v2ai_5wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">As a relationship scientist</a> for over 20 years, I’ve studied the effects all kinds of romantic relationships can have on the self. Today’s modern couples hold high expectations for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415569274">a partner’s role in one’s own self-development</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="man and woman with musical instruments sit on couch" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445301/original/file-20220209-16-xdvsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">You can hold onto what makes you your own person while learning from a partner’s strengths.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/panoramic-view-of-woman-receiving-musical-course-in-royalty-free-image/1215994594">beavera/iStock via Getty Images Plus</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Growing in your relationship</h2>
<p>Falling in love feels good, and spending time with a romantic partner is enjoyable, but love’s benefits run even deeper. People tend to value partners who help them become a better version of themselves.</p>
<p>One way to optimize self-growth in your relationship is by sharing in your partner’s unique interests and skills. When “me” becomes “we,” partners <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02399">blend their self-concepts and include the other in the self</a>. That merging encourages partners to take on each other’s characteristics, quirks, interests and abilities to some extent. Romantic partners inevitably have different life experiences, knowledge bases, perspectives and skills. Each area is an opportunity for growth.</p>
<p>For example, if your partner has a better sense of humor than you do, over time, yours will likely improve. If they have an eye for interior design, your ability to put together a room will evolve. A partner’s differing views on climate change, politics or religion will grant you new perspectives and a deeper understanding of those topics. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.241">Your relationship helps you become a better person</a>.</p>
<p>This isn’t to say that individuals should try to completely merge, running the risk of losing themselves. Rather, each person can maintain their own identity while augmenting it with desirable elements from their partner. </p>
<h2>Relationship consequences of more or less</h2>
<p>The science makes it abundantly clear that couples with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398694.013.0005">more self-expansion are better relationships</a>. Specifically, people who report more self-expansion in their relationship also report more passionate love, relationship satisfaction and commitment. It’s also associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407519875217">more physical affection, greater sexual desire, less conflict and couples being happier with their sex life</a>.</p>
<p>Because self-expansion is so critical, when expanding relationships end, participants describe <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00120.x">feeling like they have lost a part of themselves</a>. Importantly, when less-expanding relationships break up, individuals <a href="https://youtu.be/Cw2qD87KDHc">experience positive emotions and growth</a>.</p>
<p>When a relationship provides insufficient expansion, it can feel like it’s stuck in a rut. That stagnant malaise has consequences. Research finds that married couples who at one point indicated more boredom in their current relationship also <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02332.x">reported less marital satisfaction nine years later</a>. Insufficient relationship self-expansion also encourages people to have more of a wandering eye and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510382321">pay more attention to alternative partners</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.146.4.389-403">increases susceptibility to cheating on one’s partner</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000148">lowers sexual desire</a> and comes with a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518768079">greater likelihood of breakup</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="man and woman relaxing on couch" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445302/original/file-20220209-13-pkvsbx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The self-expansion provided by a strong relationship has benefits for the relationship itself.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/husband-and-wife-embracing-on-couch-royalty-free-image/1300319639">MoMo Productions/DigitalVision via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How does your relationship measure up?</h2>
<p>Maybe you’re now wondering how your own relationship is doing on this front. To provide some insight, <a href="https://www.garylewandowski.com/post/sustainable-marriage-quiz">I created the Sustainable Marriage Quiz</a>. On a scale from 1 to 7, with 1 being “very little” and 7 being “very much,” answer these questions:</p>
<ol>
<li>How much does being with your partner result in you having new experiences?</li>
<li>When you are with your partner, do you feel a greater awareness of things because of them?</li>
<li>How much does your partner increase your ability to accomplish new things?</li>
<li>How much does your partner help to expand your sense of the kind of person you are?</li>
<li>How much do you see your partner as a way to expand your own capabilities?</li>
<li>How much do your partner’s strengths as a person (skills, abilities, etc.) compensate for some of your own weaknesses as a person?</li>
<li>How much do you feel that you have a larger perspective on things because of your partner?</li>
<li>How much has being with your partner resulted in your learning new things?</li>
<li>How much has knowing your partner made you a better person?</li>
<li>How much does your partner increase your knowledge?</li>
</ol>
<p>Before adding up your score, know that these categories are generalizations. They suggest where your relationship may need attention, but also where it’s already strong. Relationships are complicated, so you should see your score for what it is: one small piece of the puzzle about what makes your relationship work.</p>
<ul>
<li>60 and above – Highly Expansive. Your relationship provides lots of new experiences and helps you reach new goals. As a result, you likely have a more fulfilling and sustainable relationship.</li>
<li>45 to 60 – Moderately Expanding. Your relationship has produced some new experiences and additions to your self-concept, but you have some room for improvement.</li>
<li>Below 45 — Low Expansion. Currently your relationship isn’t creating many opportunities to increase your knowledge or enhance you. Consequently you likely aren’t improving yourself as much as you could. Consider making an effort to seek out more new and interesting experiences with your partner. You may even rethink if this is the right partner for you. </li>
</ul>
<p>What makes a relationship great? While there are many factors to consider, one area deserves more attention: how much it helps you grow. A relationship that fosters self-expansion will make you want to be a better person, help you increase your knowledge, build your skills, enhance your capabilities and broaden your perspectives.</p>
<p>[<em>More than 140,000 readers get one of The Conversation’s informative newsletters.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-140K">Join the list today</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/175422/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It almost sounds like a paradox, but pairing with the right person can help you grow as an individual as you blend your interests with theirs and learn from their strengths.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1569302021-03-10T23:18:19Z2021-03-10T23:18:19ZThe US delivers $1.9 trillion jolt of economic relief: 4 essential reads<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388914/original/file-20210310-24-1cb33ek.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=188%2C152%2C5802%2C3781&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Democrats celebrate passing the first big legislation of the Biden presidency.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/VirusOutbreakCongress/c46ebad82fdb43c6905e3ca84ba48c85/photo?Query=1.9%20trillion&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=298&currentItemNo=1">AP Photo/Alex Brandon</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The U.S. economy and millions of people struggling because of the pandemic are about to get a US$1.9 trillion jolt of stimulating relief. </p>
<p>On March 10, the House of Representatives approved a version of President Joe Biden’s coronavirus package that barely squeezed through the Senate. Both votes were almost entirely along party lines. Biden <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-signs-covid-relief-bill-american-rescue-plan/">signed the bill into law</a> on March 11. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/03/10/house-stimulus-biden-covid-relief-checks/">legislation includes</a> $1,400 relief checks for most Americans, an extension of the $300 supplement for the unemployed, a more generous child tax credit and much more. We turned to our archive to provide some context on this historic legislation. </p>
<h2>1. About those $1,400 checks</h2>
<p>Among the signature – and most popular – features of the package are the $1,400 payments most Americans will soon receive. </p>
<p>There was some wrangling in the Senate about what the level of income at which to phase out the payments, and ultimately the threshold was lowered from what it was for earlier rounds of relief checks so they’re more targeted at lower incomes – $80,000 for singles and $160,000 for couples. But even so, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/economists-bidens-1-400-covid-19-checks-may-be-great-politics-but-its-questionable-economics-156475">checks make little economic sense</a>, argue Monmouth economists <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zQIzkdYAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Robert H. Scott III</a> and <a href="https://www.monmouth.edu/directory/profiles/ken-e-mitchell/">Kenneth Mitchell</a>. </p>
<p>“Research conducted on the first round of checks found that the vast majority of Americans saved most of the money or used it to pay down debt,” they write. “We believe President Biden’s COVID-19 relief bill gets a lot right. … Sending one-off $1,400 checks to people experiencing no economic hardship during the pandemic is not among them.” </p>
<h2>2. Relief or stimulus?</h2>
<p>One of the other heated debates over the legislation has been whether it will overheat the economy by providing too much stimulus. The White House, on the other hand, explicitly refers to it as a “rescue.” </p>
<p>Whether you call this big pot of money a relief or a stimulus package is more than just a question of semantics, because it reflects what is actually ailing the U.S. economy and <a href="https://theconversation.com/relief-or-stimulus-whats-the-difference-and-what-it-means-for-bidens-1-9-trillion-coronavirus-package-155012">what course of medicine the nation needs</a>, writes <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=B744wv0AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">William Hauk</a>, an economist at the University of South Carolina. </p>
<p>“To the extent that a program gets people spending more, it is a stimulus,” he wrote. “To the extent that the same program leads to job creation for the unemployed, it is a relief package.”</p>
<p>Hauk examines what kind of crisis we’re in now and whether the $1.9 trillion is the right remedy.</p>
<h2>3. Why it’s still needed</h2>
<p>But there’s little doubt millions of Americans still need assistance, according to
Harvard public opinion scholars <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mary-g-findling-185284">Mary G. Findling</a>, <a href="https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/john-benson/">John M. Benson</a> and <a href="https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/robert-blendon/">Robert J. Blendon</a>. </p>
<p>They conducted a survey in 2020 after Congress passed the first major coronavirus package and spent a record $2.2 trillion trying to support an economy in free fall at the time. <a href="https://theconversation.com/americans-still-need-a-lifeline-despite-trillions-in-coronavirus-aid-155106">They found that the vast majority of people</a> affected by the pandemic were still suffering despite the $1,200 checks that were sent out and the supplemental unemployment insurance. </p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>“Our findings suggest there is a definite need for further government aid on a large scale for tens of millions of families,” they write. “The pandemic has been an economic disaster for some – particularly low-income and Black and Latino households – more than others. They still need a lifeboat to get them through the storm.” </p>
<h2>4. Reconcilable differences</h2>
<p>Despite the apparent need and the measure’s high popularity in surveys, it passed the Senate by the barest of majorities – 50 to 49 – and Biden’s victory was possible only because of a little thing called “budget reconciliation.”</p>
<p>Congress invented reconciliation in 1974 to reduce budget deficits, but more recently lawmakers have used the process to get around the usual 60-vote requirement for major legislation. For example, Republicans used the process in 2001, 2003 and 2017 to pass tax cuts, <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-using-reconciliation-to-pass-bidens-covid-19-stimulus-bill-violates-the-original-purpose-of-the-process-156195">all of which actually increased the deficit</a>, explains <a href="https://batten.virginia.edu/people/raymond-scheppach">Raymond Scheppach</a>, a public policy professor at University of Virginia.</p>
<p>“Perhaps the most significant negative effect is that it has reduced the rights of the minority party to shape legislation, which often leads to more extreme policies,” he said. “Passing legislation through reconciliation, I believe, exacerbates voter frustration and weakens democracy.”</p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/156930/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Four articles from The Conversation US archive provide context and analysis on the historic legislation.Bryan Keogh, Managing EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1564752021-03-08T13:27:43Z2021-03-08T13:27:43ZEconomists: Biden’s $1,400 COVID-19 checks may be great politics, but it’s questionable economics<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388170/original/file-20210307-19-zp3zq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=99%2C15%2C3190%2C2086&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Most people used the first coronavirus check to pad their savings or pay down debt.
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/ReliefPaymentsDelays/78fab36dfcc54b218ff3df9ae4f5aa38/photo?Query=economic%20impact%20check&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=6&currentItemNo=1">AP Photo/Eric Gay</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The US$1,400 direct checks to people are the <a href="https://www.crfb.org/blogs/whats-19-trillion-house-covid-relief-bill">most expensive</a> and <a href="https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3688">perhaps most popular part</a> of the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package racing its way through Congress right now. </p>
<p>President Joe Biden is expected to soon sign the bill after the <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/10/house-final-passage-wednesday-covid-aid-plan-475047">House on March 10 approved a version</a> of the legislation passed by the Senate a few days earlier. Moderate Senate Democrats, who had voiced concerns about how many people would receive direct payments in the original proposal endorsed by the House, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-passes-1-9-trillion-covid-relief-bill-including-1-n1259795">managed to make them more targeted</a> at lower-income households, which means an <a href="https://itep.org/new-estimates-on-senates-slightly-revised-cash-payment/">estimated 17 million fewer people will get a check</a>. </p>
<p>The coronavirus package <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/06/business/economy/biden-economy.html">contains a lot of provisions</a> that will help struggling Americans, and we understand why the checks are so popular – <a href="https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3688">with 78% support among adults in a recent survey</a>. No one turns down extra money, after all. </p>
<p>But as economists, we also believe that these direct payments make little economic sense – even with the lower income threshold. And this is true whether you think the purpose of the checks is <a href="https://theconversation.com/relief-or-stimulus-whats-the-difference-and-what-it-means-for-bidens-1-9-trillion-coronavirus-package-155012">relief or stimulus</a>.</p>
<h2>Relief needs to be targeted</h2>
<p>First let’s consider the checks as relief. </p>
<p>The purpose of a measure primarily designed as relief during an economic crisis is to help those most affected. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm">latest jobs report shows</a> about 10 million people are unemployed, including 4.1 million who have been without a job for at least 27 weeks. That’s not to mention the millions more who have left the labor force altogether because of the pandemic. These people – mostly workers in the hospitality and leisure industries, disproportionately low-income and people of color – are in desperate need of aid and support, without which destitution and homelessness are real possibilities. </p>
<p>But for the vast majority of Americans, it’s like the pandemic never happened, financially speaking. These are mostly office workers and other professionals who have had to work from home for all or part of the pandemic but saw no change in their income. A <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2021/03/05/a-year-into-the-pandemic-long-term-financial-impact-weighs-heavily-on-many-americans/">recent Pew survey found</a> that 79% of Americans reported their family’s financial situation is about the same as or better than a year ago. </p>
<p>The most pain was unsurprisingly among lower-income households, 31% of whom said they were worse off than a year ago – but even among this group over two-thirds said their situation was the same or better. </p>
<p>The House’s measure <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-vote-biden-s-1-9-trillion-covid-relief-bill-n1258883">would have phased out</a> completely at incomes of $100,000 for single people and $200,000 for couples. The Senate version phases out at $80,000 and $160,000, which <a href="https://itep.org/new-estimates-on-senates-slightly-revised-cash-payment/">would still benefit about 280 million people</a>, including children, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a nonpartisan think tank.</p>
<p>This is a pretty marginal change and still means that checks will go to a lot of people who don’t really need them. </p>
<h2>Stimulus needs to stimulate</h2>
<p>OK, then how about the checks as a stimulus? So even if a lot of people who aren’t in desperate need get a payment, at least they’ll spend it and help the economy recover from the COVID-19 shock, right?</p>
<p>There are two problems with that. The first is that <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/finance/541749-february-jobs-report-biden-economy-coronavirus">it’s not clear the economy needs much stimulus right now</a>. While the jobs report showed millions of people remained unemployed, the <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-05/u-s-feb-payrolls-increase-379-000-est-200-000">February numbers came in a lot better</a> than expected, adding to signs the U.S. economy is in fairly good shape. And there are also <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/inflation-worries-are-back-heres-what-you-should-worry-about-and-what-you-shouldnt-11613594872">growing concerns about inflation</a>, given the sharp rise in some market interest rates, which too much stimulus could accelerate. </p>
<p>The other issue is that past coronavirus checks haven’t been all that stimulative. The government <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/cares/assistance-for-american-workers-and-families">began cutting $1,200 “economic impact” checks</a> for most Americans back in March and sent out <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/coronavirus-stimulus-check-calculator/">another round of checks about half that size in December</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.nber.org/papers/w27693">Research conducted on the first round</a> of checks found that the vast majority of Americans <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/246268/personal-savings-rate-in-the-united-states-by-month">saved</a> most of the money or used it to pay down debt. About 40% of the money went toward purchases supporting industries such as food, beauty and other nondurable consumer products that had already seen spikes in spending before the checks went out.</p>
<p>In other words, the checks weren’t very stimulative. Moreover, a third of likely recipients of the next round of checks <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-11/stimulus-checks-americans-plan-to-save-not-spend-covid-relief-money">said they would save the money</a>. </p>
<h2>A better use of the money</h2>
<p>So you might be wondering, what’s a better way to spend the <a href="https://www.crfb.org/blogs/whats-19-trillion-house-covid-relief-bill">several hundred billion dollars earmarked for checks</a>?</p>
<p>At a minimum, relief payments should be targeted, such as to people who lost jobs or are working fewer hours due to illness. But in our view, a better way would be to increase those supplemental unemployment checks from the $300 lawmakers agreed to to $600, as the first coronavirus relief measure included last March. </p>
<p>Or take the <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/uk-announces-massive-aid-package-for-coronavirus-hit-industries.html">U.K. approach and provide targeted but generous</a> income replacement for workers affected by COVID-19. Another very helpful and focused measure would be to help people pay for their mortgages and rent – otherwise a <a href="https://time.com/5940505/housing-crisis-2021/">massive housing crisis is looming</a> on the post-pandemic horizon. </p>
<p>We believe President Biden’s COVID-19 relief bill <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/14/politics/biden-economic-rescue-package-coronavirus-stimulus/index.html">gets a lot right</a>, such as <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/legislation/2021/01/20/president-biden-announces-american-rescue-plan">significant aid to state and local governments</a>, increased food stamp benefits and additional support for small businesses. Sending one-off $1,400 checks to people experiencing no economic hardship during the pandemic is not among them.</p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/156475/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The $1.9 trillion package gets a lot of stuff right, but the direct payments are not among them, argue two economists.Robert H. Scott III, Professor of Economics & Finance, Monmouth UniversityKenneth Mitchell, Associate Professor of Latin American Politics, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1551302021-02-16T07:37:33Z2021-02-16T07:37:33Z“Harus ada bunga”: riset tunjukkan bunga punya efek besar dalam usaha kencan<p>Baik bunga mawar merah ketika Hari Valentine, atau sebuah buket bunga segar yang dipegang oleh pengantin, bunga selalu identik dengan hubungan. </p>
<p>Namun, apakah kehadiran bunga punya pengaruh dalam hubungan, misalnya saat pendekatan (PDKT)? Ternyata bisa, jika kita merujuk pada hasil eksperimen oleh Nicolas Guéguen dari Universitas Southern Brittany, Prancis.</p>
<p>Dalam <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15534510.2011.561556">eksperimen pertama</a>, Guéguen secara acak meminta partisipan perempuan untuk menonton video tentang lelaki yang membahas tentang makanan.</p>
<p>Saat menonton, para partisipan ditempatkan dalam dua ruangan. Ruang pertama dihias dengan tiga vas bunga (mawar, marigold, dan aster), dan ruang kedua tanpa bunga. </p>
<p>Hasilnya, para perempuan yang duduk di ruangan dengan bunga menilai lelaki di video lebih seksi dan menarik – mereka juga lebih tertarik untuk kencan dengannya. </p>
<p>Berikutnya, Guéguen mengukur apakah bunga akan memberi efek yang sama ketika melibatkan lelaki sungguhan. Ia kemudian membuat sebuah eksperimen bersama 100 mahasiswi dan seorang lelaki yang dianggap menarik. </p>
<p>Masing-masing perempuan muda ini dibawa ke ruangan tempat laki-laki ini yang menunggu. Peneliti menyambut mereka berdua sebagai bagian dari studi, namun – tanpa diketahui partisipan perempuan, si lelaki adalah bagian dari eksperimen. </p>
<p>Dia kemudian menuntun mereka ke kamar terpisah, tempat partisipan perempuan menonton video makanan dan mengira si lelaki itu melakukan hal yang sama. </p>
<p>Ketika partisipan perempuan selesai menonton videonya, dia dipindahkan oleh peneliti ke ruang tempat si lelaki, dan mereka diminta untuk berdiskusi tentang videonya. </p>
<p>Setelah memberikan mereka waktu bicara selama beberapa menit, peneliti kemudian masuk, dan meminta mereka untuk menunggu beberapa menit selagi ia mencetak kuesioner yang harus dilengkapi partisipan.</p>
<p>Selagi peneliti tidak ada, si lelaki – yang menggunakan naskah agar memiliki interaksi yang sama dengan semua partisipan – mengajak perempuan muda itu berbincang, memuji mereka (“kamu sepertinya orangnya sangat asyik …”) dan meminta nomor telepon mereka. </p>
<p>Sekitar 80% dari perempuan yang telah menonton video dalam ruangan dengan bunga memberikan nomor telepon mereka, dibanding 50% dari yang tidak duduk di ruangan berbunga.</p>
<p>Tidak sampai di situ, Guéguen juga ingin untuk memastikan bahwa bunga benar-benar punya dampak besar. </p>
<p>Sehingga, dia melakukan <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224545.2012.683463">eksperimen lain</a> melibatkan seorang lelaki menanyakan nomor telepon pada 600 perempuan muda yang sedang berjalan sendiri di mal. Namun, ia tidak meminta nomor di sembarang tempat – dia hanya meminta nomor di depan tiga toko: toko bunga, toko kue, dan toko sepatu perempuan. </p>
<p>Seperti yang sudah diprediksi, sama seperti penelitian sebelumnya, lelaki tersebut jauh lebih sukses mendapat nomor telepon ketika dia meminta di depan toko bunga. </p>
<p>Meski, dia banyak ditolak, tapi dia berhasil dalam 24% kesempatan di depan toko bunga, dibandingkan dengan 15,5% di depan toko kue dan 11,5% di toko sepatu. </p>
<p>Jadi, sepertinya bunga dapat mempengaruhi persepsi perempuan tentang daya tarik seorang lelaki dan kemungkinan berkencan, baik di laboratorium atau di pusat perbelanjaan. </p>
<p>Pada masing-masing kasus, ada kemungkinan bahwa asosiasi yang dekat antara bunga dan asmara berpengaruh dalam efek yang timbul. </p>
<p>Atau mungkin bunga bisa membuat orang memiliki suasana hati yang baik yang kemudian membuat mereka lebih murah hati dalam menilai orang lain dan perilaku mereka. </p>
<p>“Jangan lupa bawa bunga” adalah saran penting bagi para lelaki yang berharap menemukan pasangan baru – dan eksperimen ini membuktikan saran ini bisa berhasil. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Wiliam Reynold menerjemahkan dari bahasa Inggris.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155130/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.</span></em></p>Riset menunjukan bunga punya daya tersendiri untuk membuat lelalki lebih menarik di mata pasanganGary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1537072021-02-12T13:16:45Z2021-02-12T13:16:45ZShould I stay or should I go? Here are the relationship factors people ponder when deciding whether to break up<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/383885/original/file-20210211-15-158vmy7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=275%2C351%2C4028%2C2621&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Are you feeling more 'soul mate' or 'k bye' about your relationship?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/heart-shaped-conversation-candies-background-copy-royalty-free-image/1200840322">Christine_Kohler/iStock via Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Where do you see yourself in five years? It’s a standard job interview question, but it’s an even better question to ask yourself about your relationship.</p>
<p>The person you talk to, date, move in with, get engaged to, marry, break up with or divorce – it’s all up to you. You’re in the driver’s seat regarding your relationship’s trajectory.</p>
<p>Most of the time, you probably cruise along on autopilot, maintaining the status quo. Every once in a while, though, something disrupts that equilibrium and you seriously ponder your relationship’s fate.</p>
<p>At some point, most people find themselves facing the complicated decision of whether to stick with it or call it quits. While there’s lots to consider when you’re pondering your own situation, maybe it would be helpful to know how others deal with these important life decisions. Recent research, <a href="https://www.littlebrown.com/titles/gary-w-lewandowski-jr-phd/stronger-than-you-think/9780316454704/">including my own in the field of relationship science</a>, has explored how people make these choices. </p>
<h2>Factors when weighing a relationship</h2>
<p>It feels as if there could be as many reasons someone would decide to maintain or end a relationship as there are relationships.</p>
<p>To learn more about what people actually consider, psychology researchers <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=3lKgR-QAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Samantha Joel</a>, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xji4sRAAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Geoff Macdonald</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=VhP69dEAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Elizabeth Page-Gould</a> asked over 400 individuals who were questioning their own relationship: “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617722834">What are some reasons</a> someone might give for wanting to stay with or leave their romantic partner?”</p>
<p>Out of all the specific circumstances, 50 common themes emerged.</p>
<p><iframe id="SHah9" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/SHah9/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>People came up with 27 broad reasons for staying. These focused on key relationship components such as attraction, physical and emotional intimacy and support. People were reluctant to lose the time and effort they had already invested and were fearful of being alone. They considered pluses, such as the desirable aspects of their partner’s personality and how much fun they had together. They also factored in practical issues, including potential family disruption and financial implications.</p>
<p>Participants also suggested 23 general reasons to leave. These included many of the same themes as the reasons to stay, but focused on the negative side – things like a partner’s problematic personality, acts of deception or cheating, emotional distance, lack of support and insufficient emotional or physical intimacy.</p>
<h2>So many reasons, but what to do?</h2>
<p>Listing these themes is one thing. How do individuals factor them into real-life decisions of whether to stay or go? To find out, the researchers did a follow-up study with over 200 people who were contemplating breaking up or getting a divorce.</p>
<p>Roughly half of these participants reported feeling, on balance, more inclined to stay in the troubled relationship. That makes sense – inertia is powerful. Staying often takes the least effort.</p>
<p>However, those same exact people simultaneously had an above-average inclination to leave, meaning they rated themselves as leaning toward breaking up. See the problem? Participants were motivated to stay with their partner at the same time they were motivated to end things. And this ambivalence was very common. </p>
<p>That relationship doubts are so common and people are often conflicted about what to do are what make this kind of research potentially helpful. It lends some order to the chaos by helping to identify what’s most important. </p>
<h2>A long and winding road</h2>
<p>Relationship decisions are rarely as clear cut as “should I stay or should I go?” Instead, people experience subtle shifts in their commitment that build up over time. What contributes to these variations in commitment? </p>
<p>Relationship researchers <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=aJgXSyoAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra">Laura Machia</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=aCOyAim5Kz4C&hl=en&oi=sra">Brian Ogolsky</a> sought to find out by <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220966903">interviewing participants in stable relationships</a>. At each of eight monthly interviews, 464 participants indicated how serious their relationship was by rating how likely it was they’d marry their current partner – “0% if they were certain they would never marry their partner or never thought about marriage, and 100% if they were certain they would marry their partner in the future.” Each time their “commitment to wed” percentage shifted from one interview to the next, researchers asked why. </p>
<p>Participants expressed a lot of reasons for commitment fluctuations – 13,598, to be exact. The researchers distilled them down to 14 key themes. The most influential reasons were positive and negative characterizations of the partner and relationship. These included direct statements about the partner – such as “he was fun, considerate and kind” – or about them as a couple – such as “we were drifting apart.” As you’d expect, positive statements related more to increased commitment, while negative statements were associated with declines.</p>
<p><iframe id="CUdm0" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/CUdm0/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The next-most-mentioned reason was circumstances – unforeseen events or experiences such job loss, a partner becoming ill or needing to move. Interestingly, this kind of life change could either increase or decrease an individual’s commitment to the relationship. This finding is further evidence that events by themselves – say, a worldwide pandemic – aren’t the sole determinant of a relationship’s fate. A couple’s existing dynamics play a large role too.</p>
<p>Out of all the possible reasons that nudged people up or down the commitment scale, there was one that stood out as actually predicting whether a couple would break up: cheating. As much as other factors made people feel more or less likely to consider marriage, involvement with another dating partner was the one true relationship-killer. </p>
<p>In the other direction, the study also identified one factor that increased commitment and pushed relationships closer toward marriage: positive disclosure. That’s what psychologists call it when you share information with each other that encourages positive feelings, which in turn supports your relationship. Think exchanging stories about your childhoods, getting to know each other on a deeper level, or sharing good news. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.904">These kinds of disclosures strengthen relationships</a>. </p>
<h2>Love is a decision – and rarely clear cut</h2>
<p>Relationships are complicated, and no one knows for sure what the future holds. It’s hard to know what the best decision is if you’re thinking about whether to stay with a partner or move on. The best relationships have their issues, while the worst relationships still have their virtues. While you don’t want to get stuck with an awful partner, you also don’t want to be unnecessarily harsh on what could be a great relationship. Maybe knowing what others consider important factors can help you make your own best choice.</p>
<p>[<em>Get our best science, health and technology stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/science-editors-picks-71/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=science-best">Sign up for The Conversation’s science newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/153707/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>People have plenty of individual reasons to stick with or end a romantic relationship. But researchers have identified some common themes that influence this big decision.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1523492020-12-28T13:32:28Z2020-12-28T13:32:28Z7 research-based resolutions that will help strengthen your relationship in the year ahead<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/498728/original/file-20221202-16594-93wqvq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=90%2C98%2C4792%2C3121&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Consider some science-backed ways to keep the home fires burning in 2023.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/senior-couple-holding-numbers-2023-while-royalty-free-image/1431943120">DjordjeDjurdjevic/E+ via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The new year is going to be better. It has to be better. Maybe you’re one of the <a href="https://www.finder.com/new-years-resolution-statistics">74% of Americans</a> in one survey who said they planned on hitting the reset button on Jan. 1 and resolving to improve. Those <a href="http://maristpoll.marist.edu/marist-poll-national-results-analysis-4/">New Year’s resolutions most commonly focus on</a> eating healthier, exercising, losing weight and being a better person. </p>
<p>Admirable goals, to be sure. But focusing on body and mind neglects something equally important: your romantic relationship. Couples with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00393.x">better marriages report higher well-being</a>, and one study found that having a better romantic relationship not only promoted well-being and better health now but that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08952841.2020.1838238">those benefits extend into the future</a>. </p>
<p>The lesson is clear: Your relationship is important. Resolve to get it right. </p>
<p>That doesn’t mean you have to be perfect. But here are seven resolutions based on recent psychological research that you can make this New Year to help keep your relationship going strong. </p>
<h2>1. Set yourself up for success</h2>
<p>Adjust your mindset so you see your relationship as a key <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00373.x">source of positive experiences</a>. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=v2ai_5wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Psychologists like me</a> call this boosting your social approach motivation. Instead of merely trying to avoid relationship problems, those with an approach motivation seek out the positives and <a href="http://peplab.web.unc.edu/files/2020/11/Don-Fredrickson-Algoe-JPSP-In-press-Approach-Paper-In-Press-.pdf">use them to help the relationship</a>.</p>
<p>Here’s how: Imagine a conversation with your partner. Having more of an approach motivation allows you to focus on positive feelings as you talk and to see your partner as more responsive to you. Your partner gets a burst of positivity, too, and in return sees you as more responsive. One partner’s good vibes spill over to the other partner, ultimately benefiting both. After a year when your relationship may have felt unprecedented external strains, laying the foundation to take advantage of any positives is good place to start. </p>
<h2>2. Be optimistic</h2>
<p>While things in the past may not have always gone how you wanted, it’s important to be optimistic about the future. But the right kind of optimism matters. A <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12342">2020 research study</a> from <a href="https://cns.utexas.edu/directory/item/84-human-dev-family-sci/3008-farnish-krystan?Itemid=349">Krystan Farnish</a> and <a href="https://cns.utexas.edu/directory/item/14-human-ecology/259-neff-lisa-a?Itemid=349">Lisa Neff</a> found that generally looking on the bright side of life allowed participants to deal with relationship conflict more effectively – as they put it, better able to “shake it off” – than did those who were optimistic specifically about their relationship.</p>
<p>It seems that if people focus all their rosy expectations just on their relationship, it encourages them to anticipate few negative experiences with their partner. Since that’s unrealistic even in the best relationships, it sets them up for disappointment. </p>
<h2>3. Increase your psychological flexibility</h2>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006">Try to go with the flow</a>. In other words, work on accepting your feelings without being defensive. It’s OK to adjust your behaviors – you don’t always have to do things the way you always have or go the places you’ve always gone. Stop being stubborn and experiment with being flexible.</p>
<p>A 2020 study by <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Karen_Twiselton">Karen Twiselton</a> and colleagues found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12344">when you’re more flexible psychologically</a>, relationship quality is higher, in part because you experience more positive and fewer negative emotions. For example, navigating the yearly challenge of holidays and family traditions is a relationship minefield. However, if both partners back away from a “must do” mentality in favor of a more adaptable approach, relationship harmony will be greater. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="couple calmly enjoying tea together" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When you’re both in a good headspace, it’s easier to keep the relationship moving in the right direction.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/couple-asian-young-adult-feeling-relax-making-and-royalty-free-image/1283799454">skaman306/Moment via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. It’s OK to put ‘me’ before ‘we’</h2>
<p>It’s easy for some people to play the self-sacrificing martyr in their romantic relationship. If this sounds like you, try to focus more on yourself. It doesn’t make you a bad person or a bad partner. When you’re psychologically healthy, your partner and your relationship also benefit. </p>
<p>Researchers have identified <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000231">four main traits that are part of good mental health</a>: openness to feelings, warmth, positive emotions and straightforwardness. These traits help with being more clear about who you are, feeling better about who you are, expressing greater optimism and less aggression, exploiting others less and exhibiting less antisocial behavior. You can see how what’s good for you in this case would be good for your partner too.</p>
<h2>5. Do something for your partner</h2>
<p>But it’s not all about you. Putting your partner first some of the time and catering to your partner’s desires is part of being a couple. A 2020 study by <a href="https://carleton.ca/psychology/people/johanna-peetz/">Johanna Peetz</a> and colleagues found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12357">prioritizing your partner</a> makes you feel closer to them, increases positive feelings, reduces negative ones and boosts perceived relationship quality. </p>
<p>In the new year, look for ways to give your partner some wins. Let them get their way from time to time and support them in what they want to do, without exclusively prioritizing your own wants and needs. </p>
<h2>6. Don’t be so hard on yourself</h2>
<p>So many New Year’s resolutions focus on body image. Aspirations to eat better and work out often stem from the same goal: a hotter body. Yet, research from <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Xue_Lei8">Xue Lei</a> shows that you may not really know what your partner wants you to look like.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12451">Women tend to overestimate how thin</a> male partners want them to be. Similarly, men believe that female partners want them to be more muscular than women say they do. It may seem harmless, but in both cases individuals are more critical and demanding toward themselves, in part based on misreading what a partner truly desires.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="couple embrace while sitting on the grass" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Caring physical contact has a lot of upsides for your relationship.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/gay-couple-latino-and-european-millennial-men-royalty-free-image/1159681114">Drazen_/E+ via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>7. Stay in touch</h2>
<p>I saved the easiest item on the list for last: Touch your partner more. When <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cheryl_Carmichael">Cheryl Carmichael</a> and colleagues followed 115 participants over a 10-day period, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620929164">they found that initiating and receiving touch</a> – things like holding hands, cuddling, kissing – were associated with both a boost in closeness and relationship quality. Importantly, being touched by your partner has the added benefit of making you feel more understood and validated. Who couldn’t use more of that in the coming year?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/152349/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Psychology studies suggest a variety of ways you can strengthen your bond and increase your satisfaction with your partner.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1307362020-02-11T21:27:39Z2020-02-11T21:27:39ZA 4-step maintenance plan to help keep your relationship going strong<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314534/original/file-20200210-109887-3ccocf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=401%2C64%2C3311%2C2520&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There's a little work involved in happily ever after.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/0tkmbWNLm9E">Désirée Fawn/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Early on, relationships are easy. Everything is new and exciting. You go on dates, take trips, spend time together and intentionally cultivate experiences that allow your relationship to grow.</p>
<p>Then, somewhere along the way, life happens.</p>
<p>One study on married couples in their 30s and 40s found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612474938">their marital quality declined</a> over the course of a year, in terms of love, passion, satisfaction, intimacy and commitment. Too often, people shrug their shoulders and convince themselves this is just how it goes. Switching to relationship autopilot feels justifiable when you’re short on time, low on energy and must focus on other priorities like careers and kids. </p>
<p>This is when doubt can creep in and tempt you to hit the reset button.</p>
<p>But maybe you’re being too hard on a perfectly good relationship. Every couple experiences ups and downs, and even the very best relationships take effort. </p>
<p>Rather than getting out, it’s time to get to work. Whether your relationship is already stuck in a rut, or you’re trying to avoid ending up in one, most people need to focus more on what happens between “I do” and “I don’t want to be with you anymore.” <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=v2ai_5wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra">As a relationship scientist</a>, I suggest the following four psychology research-based strategies to kickoff your relationship maintenance plan. </p>
<h2>1. Use boredom as a pivot point</h2>
<p>No one raises their hand and says, “Sign me up for a boring relationship.” But <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/bs3030459">boredom serves a purpose</a>. Like your phone indicating your battery is low, boredom is an early warning system that your relationship needs a recharge.</p>
<p>At different times, all relationships experience boredom. Psychology researcher <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407516660216">Cheryl Harasymchuk and colleagues</a> have explored how people react. For example, to turn things around when you’re bored, do you fall back on things that are familiar and make you feel self-assured, like taking a walk around the neighborhood? Or do you choose growth-enhancing activities – like going for a hike on a new trail in an unfamiliar park – to mix things up?</p>
<p>It turns out that study participants preferred growth-enhancing activities when they were bored, and when given a chance to plan a date, they incorporated more novelty into those outings. Rather than resigning yourself to boredom’s inevitability – “This is just how relationships are” – use boredom as a call to action. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314873/original/file-20200211-146674-1flbsgt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Find something a little out of the ordinary to do together.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/young-man-to-relax-in-the-green-grass-royalty-free-image/1035435738?adppopup=true">Ishii Koji/DigitalVision via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>2. Keep dating</h2>
<p>Rather than wait for boredom to strike, couples would be wise to be more proactive. It’s a simple as continuing to date. Early in relationships, couples prioritize these one-on-one outings, but eventually begin to coast, just when the relationship could use an extra boost.</p>
<p>To recapture that early relationship magic, research shows that couples should <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398694.013.0005">engage in new, challenging and interesting activities</a>. Rather than sitting at staring at your phones, couples should break their routine and try something different. It could be as simple as trying a new restaurant, or even a new dish at a favorite place. </p>
<p>Not only does branching out counteract boredom, but trying new things helps you grow as a person. All of this spills over into the relationship, increasing levels of passion, satisfaction and commitment. </p>
<p>In one study, researchers asked married couples either to play games like Jenga, Monopoly, Scrabble and UNO, or take an art class together. All couples <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12556">increased their levels of oxytocin</a> – the so-called “cuddle hormone” which <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.01.010">helps partners bond</a>. But the art class couples had larger oxytocin increases and touched each other more, perhaps because the activity was newer and further outside their comfort zone. That novelty may encourage them to rely on each other for assurance. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314874/original/file-20200211-146690-1j4c9ch.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Laughing together and talking about a rom-com’s central relationship is beneficial.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/laughing-aged-couple-man-woman-watching-1374918218">fizkes/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>3. Movie nights</h2>
<p>Not looking to dig out your oil paints? Here’s a lower key option: Grab a spot on the couch and have a couples movie night. Over the course of a month, researchers asked some couples to watch and discuss a romantic comedy such as “When Harry Met Sally,” while others did an intense relationship workshop. Fast forward three years, and the movie watchers were <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034209">less likely to have broken up</a>.</p>
<p>It probably isn’t just taking in any film, but rather that watching a romantic story gives couples a less threatening way to discuss relationship issues. It may also help them see their relationship differently. That’s important, because research from psychologist <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=kRbhk4oAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Eli Finkel</a> and others shows that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612474938">viewing your own relationship through completely neutral eyes</a> helps couples hold off declines in marital quality.</p>
<h2>4. Finding the bright spots</h2>
<p>Activities are great, but you also need to do daily maintenance.</p>
<p>There’s an old adage in psychology research that “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323">bad is stronger than good</a>.” For relationships, that often means focusing on what’s wrong, while overlooking what’s right. Talk about self-defeating.</p>
<p>Of course, you can just as easily find the ways your relationship is thriving. Be more intentional about noticing your relationship’s bright spots. Not only will you appreciate your partner more, but you can <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12524">use what’s going well to help improve less bright areas</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/314545/original/file-20200210-109930-14ux37p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Focus on what’s actually going well.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/VUZVlZs0hLs">AllGo/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Too often, people wait for something to break before trying to fix it. Adopting a maintenance mentality can more proactively help your relationship.</p>
<p>One new study tested a way to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2925">help couples in already healthy relationships</a>. The researchers’ intervention had couples complete research-based positive psychology activities over four weeks such as:</p>
<ul>
<li>Write the story of their relationship, focusing on the positives, then share with their partner</li>
<li>Write a letter of gratitude to their partner</li>
<li>Identify their partner’s strengths and their strengths as a couple</li>
<li>Create a list of positive moments or activities partners want to share with each other. Pick one, and plan a time to do it</li>
<li>Create a desired happiness chart and discuss what small relationship tweaks can help make it a reality.</li>
</ul>
<p>At the end of the month, compared to couples on the study’s waitlist, participants reported more positive emotions, better relationship functioning and improved communication. Another month later, their average relationship functioning remained better than that of the comparison group. </p>
<p>Few people enjoy cleaning, doing laundry or mowing the lawn. Yet, if you neglect those tasks, life quickly falls into disrepair. Your relationship is just the same. Rather than thinking about replacements when your relationship shows signs of wear, invest the time and energy into a little maintenance. Using any or all of these easy-to-implement strategies should not only help a relationship survive, but hopefully even thrive.</p>
<p>[ <em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/130736/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After the intensity of early courtship, even a healthy, happy relationship can feel lackluster. Psychology researchers have ideas for what can help you perk up your relationship rather than give up.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1233132019-10-18T11:24:52Z2019-10-18T11:24:52ZHow Mister Rogers’ faith shaped his idea of children’s television<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297396/original/file-20191016-98670-7w4guv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Fred Rogers rehearses with some of his puppet friends in Pittsburgh,.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Parenting-Media-Guidelines/1aab55e6009549f994d1c85126f614ab/221/0">Gene J. Puskarg/AP </a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The beloved children’s television icon Fred Rogers – who is played by actor Tom Hanks in the upcoming film “<a href="https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/09/10/a-beautiful-day-in-the-neighborhood-review-mr-rogers-movie">A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood</a>” – entered the world of children’s programming during an era of massive political and cultural upheaval. </p>
<p>In the 1960s, Americans <a href="https://www.cnn.com/shows/the-sixties">were witnessing the horrors of war</a> from within their homes for the first time, on television screens. <a href="https://www.uncpress.org/book/9780807856604/a-stone-of-hope/">Civil rights activists</a> such as Martin Luther King Jr. were fighting for racial and economic justice, and these protests were often violently suppressed. The feminist <a href="https://time.com/4008060/women-strike-equality-1970/">movement</a> was also seeking equal rights and freedom for women.</p>
<p>As a scholar of <a href="https://www.benjirolsky.com/">American religion, politics and popular culture</a> I’ve <a href="https://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/confessions-of-a-hollywood-liberal-american-sitcoms-and-the-culture-wars-from-norman-lear-to-parks-and-recreation-by-l-benjamin-rolsky/">examined</a> how the religious and spiritual backgrounds of cultural and political icons shaped their contributions to American television programming, especially in tumultuous times.</p>
<p>Rogers, who was an ordained minister, taught everyone, in particular children, to follow a greater calling – that of serving their fellow humans.</p>
<h2>Programming for social change</h2>
<p>In the late 1960s, American <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520074187/prime-time-families">prime time television</a> was going through a change. Producers were trying to use the medium to address social problems.</p>
<p>In the 1970s, Norman Lear, often referred to as the father of modern-day sitcoms, brought to television the comedy series “<a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-religious-left/9780231193634">All in the Family</a>,” which explored issues of racism, homosexuality, women’s liberation and the Vietnam War, among other concerns of the time. The protagonist Archie Bunker was modeled after Lear’s own father: He was a working-class, seemingly uneducated and outspoken but “lovable” bigot. </p>
<p>The writers used his character to address problems in American society and their <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/25/opinions/all-in-the-family-archie-bunker-returns-in-trump-era-rolsky/index.html">insidious effects</a>. Another sitcom that foregrounded social issues was “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2017/01/26/five-ways-the-mary-tyler-moore-show-revolutionized-women-on-television/">The Mary Tyler Moore Show</a>.”</p>
<p>The show’s writers brought awareness to women’s rights through the program’s plotlines. Each week, millions looked on as Mary attempted to negotiate the various challenges of her time, including admitting to using “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/arts/television/mary-tyler-moore-show-moments.html">the pill</a>” in front of a live studio audience.</p>
<h2>Children as ministry</h2>
<p>Rogers would bring a similar approach to children’s programming through his iconic show, “<a href="https://www.misterrogers.org/">Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood</a>.” Much like his <a href="https://www.henson.com/our-founders.php">contemporaries</a>, Rogers viewed television not as a passive instrument of entertainment but as an interactive medium that <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-columbia-guide-to-america-in-the-1960s/9780231113731">could shape individuals</a> in real time. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297574/original/file-20191017-98661-3lqa60.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rogers attuned children to the important attributes of what it meant to be a human.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Mister-Rogers-Stamp/c937c4190b3a4688a67969954ffff431/23/0">AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In many respects, I would argue that Rogers’ iconic invitation, “Won’t you be my neighbor?” reflected the religious <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/britain-s-other-new-leader-impeach-o-meter-mister-rogers-radical-theology-lgbt-free-zones-in-poland-more-1.5224060/how-mister-rogers-religious-beliefs-shaped-his-radical-teachings-on-race-and-sexuality-1.5224068">sensibilities</a> of <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5-7&version=ESV">Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount</a>, which encouraged individuals to turn the other cheek, to assist the less fortunate and to love their neighbors as they would love themselves.</p>
<p>Rogers attuned children and their developmental journeys to the most significant attributes of what it means to be a human: love, compassion and kindness for others. In many ways, this is also what he meant by being a good neighbor.</p>
<p>“I want to be a vehicle for God, to spread his message of love and peace,” Rogers said in an interview with the “<a href="http://neighborhoodarchive.com/misc/veg_times/index.html">Vegetarian Times</a>,” a Southern California periodical first published in 1974. Rogers was a vegetarian too.</p>
<p>As for the children, as he said in another interview, they were his “congregation.”</p>
<h2>What shaped Mr. Rogers?</h2>
<p>Raised in the Presbyterian tradition of Protestant Christianity, Rogers valued hard work, commitment to one’s family and service to one’s fellow human beings. </p>
<p>Rogers’ biographer, <a href="https://littlevillagemag.com/a-more-deliberate-pace-qa-with-fred-rogers-biographer-maxwell-king/">Maxwell King,</a> <a href="https://www.abramsbooks.com/product/good-neighbor_9781419727726/">attributes these qualities</a> to his mother, Nancy Rogers’ deep influence. Nancy engaged Fred throughout his childhood in meaningful conversations and treated him as an adult, according to King’s 2008 book, <a href="https://www.abramsbooks.com/product/good-neighbor_9781419727726/">“The Good Neighbor: The Life and Work of Fred Rogers.”</a> </p>
<p>“She loved to talk. And she loved to talk with Fred,” writes King. But “never to Fred; always with Fred.”</p>
<p>For his graduate education, Rogers enrolled in Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. At the same time, he continued to be interested in children’s television programming. While splitting time with his coursework, Rogers started working as a program manager at the local Pittsburgh public broadcasting station WQED in 1953. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, Rogers was excelling at his ministerial work. He even won a prize for his preaching ability and would often give a sermon or two at Pittsburgh’s <a href="http://sixthchurch.org/">Sixth Presbyterian Church</a>, a congregation known for its sexual and racial inclusivity. </p>
<h2>Ministering in prime time</h2>
<p>Rogers’ desire to take on challenging subjects would later reveal itself on <a href="https://www.misterrogers.org/">Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood</a>, which debuted on Feb. 19, 1968. </p>
<p>In episode after episode, over the TV show’s extensive run, Rogers attempted to explain challenging societal issues such as <a href="http://www.neighborhoodarchive.com/mrn/episodes/1476/index.html">divorce</a> and instances of political or social violence for children.</p>
<p>One <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6O_Ep9bY0U">episode</a> of Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood in May of 1969 demonstrated to children how issues of race could be dealt with. </p>
<p>Demonstrating the power of empathy and human compassion, Rogers invited an African American police officer played by actor <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/06/mister-rogers-neighborhood-wont-you-be-my-neighbor-francois-clemmons-officer-clemmons-fred-rogers">François Clemmons</a> onto the set as “Officer Clemmons.” At a time when black people could not swim alongside whites in <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-history-of-segregated-swimming-pools-and-amusement-parks-119586">many public places</a>, the American audiences witnessed Rogers and Officer Clemmons wash their feet in a small plastic swimming pool. It was also a reminder of the Christian tradition of <a href="https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/articles/the-real-meaning-of-foot-washing-for-christians.aspx">foot washing</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/K6O_Ep9bY0U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">An episode from ‘Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood’ that shows Rogers inviting a black man to join him in the pool.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In another such example, Rogers did a series of five episodes, first aired on Nov. 7, 1983, in which he addressed the difficult subject of conflict between two neighboring lands. The series <a href="https://qz.com/942781/lost-episodes-of-mr-rogers-about-the-cold-war-have-emerged-on-youtube/">warned</a> its audiences of the dangers of war in general and the stockpiling of bombs in particular. </p>
<p>Rogers added his own theological touch to the episode’s conclusion by flashing the text of the Old Testament verse Isiah 2:4 on the television screen, which said,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“And they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning forks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war any more.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In these moments, Rogers’ work not only challenged <a href="http://xroads.virginia.edu/%7Ema01/white/anthology/wright.html">many societal assumptions</a> but exemplified his understanding of religion as a tool for service.</p>
<p>In the end, Rogers’ mission was as simple as it was timeless: Love thy neighbor.</p>
<p>[ <em>Like what you’ve read? Want more?</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=likethis">Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/123313/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>L. Benjamin Rolsky does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new film on beloved children’s television icon Fred Rogers hits theaters next month. Rogers’ moral values contributed to the power and appeal of his neighborhood.L. Benjamin Rolsky, Adjunct Professor of History, Religion, and Anthropology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1111522019-02-08T19:17:39Z2019-02-08T19:17:39ZYour relationship may be better than you think – find the knot<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258016/original/file-20190208-174864-1l1rftf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It's worth focusing on the dealmakers not just dealbreakers.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/rope-heart-shape-knot-1013309116">Billion Photos/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>There’s an old saying, “When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hang on.” In other words, before you give up, take matters into your own hands and try a little harder.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=v2ai_5wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra">As a psychology researcher</a>, I believe this adage applies to relationships, too. Before you let go, look for the “knots” that might save you from accidentally letting a great relationship slip from your grasp. Relationship science suggests that the problem is that people tend to overemphasize the negative and underappreciate the positive when looking at their romantic partners.</p>
<p>If you could build the perfect relationship, what would it look like? Perhaps more importantly, how does your current relationship stack up? Expectations for today’s relationships are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415569274">higher than ever</a>. Now that relationships are a choice, mediocrity isn’t acceptable. It’s all or nothing, and no one <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034628">wants to settle</a>.</p>
<p>The secret to avoiding settling seems simple: have high standards and demand only the very best. Researchers refer to people who are pickier than others and always want the absolute best possible option as <a href="http://www.sjdm.org/%7Ebaron/journal/jdm7830.pdf">maximizers</a>. Their counterparts are satisficers – those satisfied once quality surpasses a minimum threshold of acceptability. For them, “good enough” is perfectly fine. As long as their relationship exceeds their predetermined benchmarks for “high quality,” satisficers are content. </p>
<p>Maximizer personalities will tend to exhaust all options and explore many possibilities to secure the flawless partner. You might think that sounds ideal, even noble, almost like common sense. But there are hidden downsides. Call it the myth of maximization, because the research reveals that maximizers <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1178">report more regret and depression and feel threatened</a> by others whom they perceive as doing better. Maximizers also experience lower self-esteem and less optimism, happiness and life satisfaction. And they <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615595271">prefer reversible decisions or outcomes</a> that are not absolute or final.</p>
<p>See the problem? In long-term relationships, people tend to prefer more of a “‘til death do us part” approach rather than a “'til I find something better” tactic. Overall, the implication for your relationship is clear: The continuous pursuit of perfection could be fine for a car, but in your relationship it may result in failing to recognize the truly great relationship that’s right in front of you for what it is. Impossibly high standards can make an excellent relationship seem average.</p>
<p>You may also undervalue your relationship by being too quick to identify imperfections, notice the negatives and find problems. Blame what psychologists call the negativity bias, which is a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2">tendency to pay attention to the bad or negative</a> aspects of an experience.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257795/original/file-20190207-174887-14ssq08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Don’t forget all the good stuff that’s just running smoothly.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/rvdlDB1D68c">Anthony Tran/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In other words, when your relationship is going well, it doesn’t register. You take it for granted. But problems? They capture your attention. The bickering, insensitive comments, forgotten chores, the messes and the inconveniences – all stand out because they deviate from the easily overlooked happy status quo.</p>
<p>This tendency is so pronounced that when a relationship doesn’t have any major issues, research suggests that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8731">people inflate small problems into bigger ones</a>. Rather than be thankful for the relative calm, people manufacture problems where none previously existed. You could be your own worst enemy without even realizing it.</p>
<p>Time to recalibrate. The key is separating the critical from the inconsequential in order to distinguish minor issues from real problems. Identifying the true dealbreakers will allow you to save your energy for real problems, and allow the minor stuff to simply fade away.</p>
<p>Data from a representative sample of over 5,000 Americans, ranging in age from 21 to over 76, identified the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215609064">top 10 relationship dealbreakers</a>: </p>
<ol>
<li> Disheveled or unclean appearance</li>
<li> Lazy</li>
<li> Too needy</li>
<li> Lacks a sense of humor</li>
<li> Lives more than three hours away</li>
<li> Bad sex</li>
<li> Lacks self-confidence</li>
<li> Too much TV/video games</li>
<li> Low sex drive</li>
<li>Stubborn</li>
</ol>
<p>Beyond that list, there are certainly annoyances that can become dealbreakers in otherwise generally healthy relationships. And if your partner disrespects, hurts or abuses you, those are behaviors that shouldn’t be ignored and should rightly end your relationship.</p>
<p>In a follow-up study, researchers asked participants to consider both dealbreakers and dealmakers – that is, qualities that are especially appealing. When determining whether a relationship was viable, it turned out the dealbreakers carried more weight. The negativity bias strikes again. The fact that people tend to focus more on the breakers than the makers is further evidence that we’re not giving some aspects of our relationship enough credit. </p>
<p>To help you better appreciate your partner’s good qualities, consider the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00531.x">qualities individuals find most desirable</a> in a marriage partner.</p>
<p><iframe id="0D15d" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0D15d/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>What have you been missing in your relationship? Surely there are boxes that your partner checks that you’ve neglected to notice. Start giving credit where credit is due. </p>
<p>In fact, some studies suggest you should give your partner even more credit than she or he might deserve. Instead of being realistic, give your partner the benefit of the doubt, with an overly generous appraisal. Would you be lying to yourself? Sure, a little bit. But research shows that these types of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297236003">positive illusions help the relationship</a> by decreasing conflict while increasing satisfaction, love and trust.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/257796/original/file-20190207-174857-1radsgd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A positive attitude toward your partner can be a partly self-fulfilling prophecy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/0lLoXbAZ31o">Alex Holyoake/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Holding overly optimistic views of your partner convinces you of their value, which reflects well on you – you’re the one who has such a great partner, after all. Your rose-colored opinions also make your partner feel good and give them a good reputation to live up to. They won’t want to let you down so they’ll try to fulfill your positive prophecy. All of which benefits your relationship. </p>
<p>It’s time to stop being overly critical of your relationship. Instead find the knots, the parts of your relationship you’ve been taking for granted that will help you hold on. If you know where to look and what to appreciate, you may just realize there are a lot more reasons to happily hold onto your relationship than you thought.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111152/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It might be human nature to undervalue what’s chugging along doing fine while imagining there’s a mythical ‘best’ partner out there somewhere. A psychology researcher has advice.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1079472018-11-30T11:43:45Z2018-11-30T11:43:45ZG-20 leaders descend on Buenos Aires as host Argentina battles worst economic crisis in a decade<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/248061/original/file-20181129-170250-10k7evk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Protesters carry a banner that reads in Spanish, 'Property of the G20? Who chose?'</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-G20-Summit/fa2c39a17e914862985aebf2338e6f6a/6/0">AP Photo/Sebastian Pani</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Leaders of the world’s biggest economies have gathered in Buenos Aires for the annual Group of 20 Summit to discuss some of the most important issues facing the global economy, from the <a href="https://www.cfr.org/blog/g20-tango-what-expect-buenos-aires-summit">future of work and food security</a> to <a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2018/11/29/18114600/trump-xi-jinping-china-g20-trade-war">U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war</a> and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/world/americas/g20-audi-prince-khashoggi.html">Khashoggi killing</a>. </p>
<p>And although their host, Argentine President Mauricio Macri, probably won’t want to talk about the dire state of his country’s economy, heads of state need only use a cash machine to see evidence of it. A U.S. dollar worth just 20 pesos in April <a href="https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=ARS&to=USD&view=1Y">today converts into almost double that</a>, making the Argentine currency the world’s <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-26/argentine-peso-slides-as-more-data-shows-economy-is-slowing">worst performer</a> this year. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robert-h-scott-iii-380235">We’ve</a> been <a href="https://www.monmouth.edu/directory/profiles/ken-e-mitchell/">following</a> the ebbs and flows of the Argentine economy for two decades and are currently wrapping up a book on economic and fiscal policy in Argentina, Brazil and Chile. Here’s a quick look at what went wrong and how it could get better.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A man serves food at a soup kitchen in Buenos Aires.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-Economy/fd9fe6e06f2b4eb596951adf69498747/22/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Scary times</h2>
<p>Pesos have been <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/04/investing/emerging-markets-argentina-turkey/index.html">fleeing the country</a>. The economy has been sinking deeper into <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-04/argentina-to-go-deeper-into-recession-central-bank-survey-says">recession</a>. And the country is suffering the <a href="https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay">worst drought in decades</a>. </p>
<p>Sound scary? </p>
<p>For Argentina, it’s more of the same. The country has suffered through many <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-debt-chronology/chronology-argentinas-turbulent-history-of-economic-crises-idUSKBN0FZ23N20140730">economic crises in recent decades</a>. And pretty much every time, the catastrophic meltdowns ended with some combination of unsustainable national debt, high unemployment, rising poverty rates, looting, bank runs, capital flight and hyperinflation. That in turn set the stage for the next economic crisis. </p>
<p>But it didn’t have to happen this time. Only two years ago, Argentina’s leadership <a href="https://doi.org/10.2753/0577-5132570605">had appeared to learn lessons</a> from the past and were governing the economy pretty effectively. Capital controls helped stabilize the peso and strengthen the financial sector, while prudent government spending <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/379/LAP_090716_Lustig_Bulletin_ENG_1.pdf?1543521716">helped reduce poverty</a>. Consumer spending grew and unemployment and income inequality fell. </p>
<h2>The wrong policies</h2>
<p>So when Macri became president at the end of 2015, there was a foundation of beneficial policies in place that supported the government’s coffers – as well as <a href="https://www.worldfinance.com/special-reports/a-history-of-economic-trouble-in-argentina">some challenges</a>. </p>
<p>But, instead of pursuing a path of fiscal responsibility to rein in spending and inflation, the center-right Macri decided to cut taxes for businesses and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-economy-idUSKBN0U71AV20151224">borrowed record amounts</a> in dollars to do so. At the same time, he eliminated the capital controls put in place in 2002. </p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, all of this made the country more vulnerable to a crisis, which began in May when a particularly bad drought – the <a href="https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay">most expensive in Argentina’s history</a> – dried up important export crops, such as soybeans and corn. Argentina is the world’s <a href="https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/world-leaders-in-soya-soybean-production-by-country.html">third-largest exporter of both</a>.</p>
<p>Foreign investors, concerned about the government’s ability to meet its obligations, <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/world/americas/2018-10-09-argentinas-peso-extends-rally-as-central-bank-frets/">began dumping short-term central bank debt</a>. Meanwhile Argentines, acutely aware of any whiff of economic trouble, began to get rid of their pesos too. </p>
<p>By June, Argentina was seeking help from the International Monetary Fund in the form of a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/08/argentina-loan-imf-protests-peso">US$50 billion line of credit</a>, which is the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/argentina-bailout-50-billion-loan-biggest-in-imf-history-2018-6">most a country has ever received</a> from the institution.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Macri’s end of capital controls may have been a mistake.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-Economy/4b525f00ec0a493fb53ba85c03610e5f/5/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Whither Argentina?</h2>
<p>Argentina immediately drained $15 billion of the IMF’s money trying to stabilize the peso. </p>
<p>It succeeded, but, to keep the peso from falling further, the central bank <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/argentina-economy/update-2-argentina-peso-strengthens-ahead-of-central-bank-debt-sale-idUSL2N1WI0GW">has been selling</a> tens of billions of pesos worth of bonds at yields as high as 70 percent – the highest in the world. </p>
<p>Although that has staunched the bleeding, the wound remains deep. The peso is hovering near a record low, and economists <a href="https://www.nasdaq.com/article/argentina-2018-inflation-forecast-revised-up-to-475-pct-20181102-00958/amp">recently revised</a> their forecast for 2018 inflation to 47.5 percent, double their estimate in April. To make matters worse, the <a href="https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDP_RPCH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD/ARG">IMF expects</a> the Argentine economy to shrink 1.9 percent in 2019 after contracting an estimated 2.6 percent this year.</p>
<p>Fortunately, there’s some room for optimism. Finding its way out of this mess, however, depends on whether Argentina follows through on the IMF’s condition to eliminate the budget deficit by 2019. </p>
<p>And whether it adopts other prudent policies such as increasing public revenue by re-instituting export taxes and putting in place currency controls to ensure a stable peso. </p>
<p><em>This is a modified version of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/argentina-bets-60-percent-interest-rates-and-50b-international-bailout-will-revive-its-economy-104529">article originally published</a> on Oct. 12, 2018.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107947/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Argentina has been grappling with currency flight and an economy sinking deeper into recession, not to mention the worst drought in decades.Robert H. Scott III, Professor of Economics & Finance, Monmouth UniversityKenneth Mitchell, Associate Professor of Latin American Politics, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1050082018-10-16T19:50:06Z2018-10-16T19:50:06Z¿Reactivará la economía argentina un rescate internacional de 50.000 millones de dólares?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240634/original/file-20181015-165897-ox2im1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Los argentinos protestan las condiciones de austeridad que forman parte del rescate del FMI. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/APTOPIX-Argentina-Economy/42ae5e1435f74296a09b6b3a713a6749/70/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Una economía en <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-04/argentina-to-go-deeper-into-recession-central-bank-survey-says">recesión</a>. <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/04/investing/emerging-markets-argentina-turkey/index.html">Fuga</a> de pesos. La <a href="https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay">peor sequía en décadas</a>. Los <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/argentina-central-bank-interest-rates-1.4805032">tipos de interés más altos</a> del mundo. El <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/argentina-bailout-50-billion-loan-biggest-in-imf-history-2018-6">mayor rescate</a> de la historia del Fondo Monetario Internacional. </p>
<p>¿Suena alarmante? </p>
<p>Para Argentina es más de lo mismo, ya que ha sufrido muchas <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-debt-chronology/chronology-argentinas-turbulent-history-of-economic-crises-idUSKBN0FZ23N20140730">crisis económicas en las últimas décadas</a>. Y casi todas las veces, los colapsos catastróficos acabaron con una combinación de deuda nacional insostenible, desempleo elevado, aumento de las tasas de pobreza, saqueos, pánico financiero, fugas de capital e hiperinflación. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/argentina-bets-60-percent-interest-rates-and-50b-international-bailout-will-revive-its-economy-104529">Argentina bets 60 percent interest rates – and $50B international bailout – will revive its economy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robert-h-scott-iii-380235">Hemos</a> estado <a href="https://www.monmouth.edu/directory/profiles/ken-e-mitchell/">siguiendo</a> las fluctuaciones de la economía argentina durante dos décadas y en este momento estamos rematando un libro sobre política económica y fiscal en Argentina, Brasil y Chile. Nos hemos estado preguntando: ¿esta última crisis de Argentina podría terminar de forma diferente a las otras?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Un hombre sirve comida a las puertas de un comedor social de la avenida principal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-Economy/fd9fe6e06f2b4eb596951adf69498747/22/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>No tenía por qué suceder de esta manera</h2>
<p>Para nosotros no es excesivamente complicado identificar en qué se falló, dado que ya lo <a href="https://monthlyreview.org/2017/06/01/old-malbec-in-new-bottles/">pronosticamos</a> el verano pasado. </p>
<p>Pero no tenía por qué suceder de esta manera. Hace solo dos años, los líderes de Argentina parecían haber aprendido las lecciones del pasado y estaban gobernando con bastante eficacia en materia económica. </p>
<p>Después de que la última crisis acabara en 2002 con el <a href="https://www.economist.com/special-report/2002/02/28/a-decline-without-parallel">incumplimiento del pago</a> y con una pobreza considerable, el Gobierno estuvo trabajando bajo restricciones financieras estrictas. Los líderes de Argentina tuvieron que encontrar formas de respaldar su moneda, aumentar la recaudación fiscal, reducir la pobreza y aumentar el empleo. </p>
<p>Y <a href="https://doi.org/10.2753/0577-5132570605">en buena medida lo lograron</a>, lo que generó un sector financiero y a un peso (la moneda de Argentina) más fuertes, debido a tres razones principales. </p>
<p>En primer lugar, mientras que los anteriores Gobiernos respondieron a las crisis adoptando políticas de austeridad, en 2003, el presidente recién elegido, Néstor Kirchner, aumentó el gasto público utilizando pesos (en lugar de dólares prestados) para ayudar a los pobres, lo que a su vez ayudó a estimular el gasto de consumo. Esto <a href="https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/LAP_090716_Lustig%20Bulletin%20ENG_1.pdf">generó menos pobreza</a>, menos desempleo y menos desigualdad de ingresos.</p>
<p>En segundo lugar, se aplicaron controles de capital para mantener los pesos en Argentina. Esto aseguró que no se diera otra huida de la moneda. </p>
<p>Por último, y lo más importante, el Gobierno comenzó a utilizar los ingresos en cuenta para pagar salarios y reportar beneficios, lo que <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01603477.2018.1431797">incrementó significativamente</a> el porcentaje de población en el sistema bancario oficial. Antes, más de la mitad de la ciudadanía no tenía una cuenta bancaria o una tarjeta de crédito, lo que dificultaba que el Gobierno conociera sus ingresos reales y le cobrara los impuestos correspondientes. </p>
<p>Gracias a los cambios, la participación en el sistema bancario se disparó hasta un 90%, lo que generó un récord en la recaudación del impuesto sobre el valor añadido, la <a href="https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/revenue-statistics-in-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-2015/the-oecd-classification-of-taxes-and-interpretative-guide_rev_lat-2015-7-en-fr#page3">fuente de ingresos más importante</a> del Gobierno argentino. </p>
<p>Como consecuencia, la ratio entre impuestos y PIB del país —una forma de medir el nivel de recaudación del gobierno— se elevó desde una media de aproximadamente un 19 % en los años ochenta y noventa a un 32% en 2015, la <a href="https://www.iadb.org/en/news/news-releases/2017-03-23/tax-revenues-continue-to-rise-in-latin-america-in-2015%2C11749.html">más alta de la zona</a> —algo impensable tan solo una década antes. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">El fin de los controles de capital aplicado por Macri puede haber sido un error.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-Economy/4b525f00ec0a493fb53ba85c03610e5f/5/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Avivar una crisis</h2>
<p>Por tanto, cuando Mauricio Macri pasó a ser presidente a finales de 2015, existía una base de políticas beneficiosas que financiaban las arcas del gobierno.</p>
<p>Macri también tuvo que lidiar con <a href="https://www.worldfinance.com/special-reports/a-history-of-economic-trouble-in-argentina">algunos desafíos</a>. El gasto público subía con demasiada rapidez, mientras que la inflación alcanzaba el 30% anual. </p>
<p>Pero en lugar de ajustar las riendas del gasto y seguir la vía de la responsabilidad fiscal, Macri —de ideología de centroderecha— decidió reducir los impuestos de las empresas y <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-economy-idUSKBN0U71AV20151224">pidió un préstamo de una cantidad récord</a> de dólares para poder hacerlo, todo esto sin reducir el gasto público. Al mismo tiempo, eliminó los controles de capital establecidos en 2002. </p>
<p>Como era de esperar, todo esto hizo que el país fuese más vulnerable a una crisis, que comenzó en mayo, cuando una sequía especialmente grave —la <a href="https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay">más costosa de la historia de Argentina</a>— secó cultivos de exportación muy importantes, como la soja y el maíz (Argentina es el <a href="https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/world-leaders-in-soya-soybean-production-by-country.html">tercer exportador mundial de ambos</a>.</p>
<p>Los inversores extranjeros, preocupados por la capacidad del gobierno para cumplir con sus obligaciones, <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/world/americas/2018-10-09-argentinas-peso-extends-rally-as-central-bank-frets/">empezaron a deshacerse de la deuda a corto plazo del banco central</a>. Mientras tanto, los argentinos, expertos en identificar cualquier indicio de dificultad económica, también comenzaron a deshacerse de sus pesos.</p>
<p>En junio, Argentina pidió ayuda del Fondo Monetario Internacional en forma de una <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/08/argentina-loan-imf-protests-peso">línea de crédito de cincuenta mil millones de dólares estadounidenses</a>, la <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/argentina-bailout-50-billion-loan-biggest-in-imf-history-2018-6">mayor que un país ha recibido nunca</a> de esta institución.</p>
<p>Pero la inyección de crédito, así como la decisión del banco central de <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-11/argentina-holds-rate-at-world-high-60-percent-to-fight-inflation">aumentar los tipos de interés</a> a un máximo mundial del 60%, sirvieron de poco para contener la caída del peso. Desde abril, el peso <a href="https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=ARS&to=USD&view=1Y">perdió</a> casi un 50% de valor frente al dólar. </p>
<h2>A dónde conducirá esta situación</h2>
<p>Avancemos hasta el momento actual.</p>
<p>La crisis <a href="https://frontera.net/news/latam/argentinas-new-currency-crisis-what-happened-this-time/">se ha reducido un poco</a> a medida que el peso se estabiliza en poco menos de 40 pesos por dólar —casi peor que nunca—, algo que ha costado quince mil millones de dólares del FMI. El banco central está vendiendo muchos bonos con tipos de interés de más del 60% para poder mantenerlo.</p>
<p>En otras palabras, tres meses de tipos de interés al 60% y miles de millones de efectivo del FMI han demostrado que es costoso forzar el valor del peso. Y lo que es aún peor, todo el dinero prestado deberá devolverse, lo que pone más cargas sobre la economía.</p>
<p>Mientras tanto, el FMI, que acordó transferir siete mil millones de dólares adicionales, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-09/imf-sees-deeper-recession-in-argentina-slower-growth-in-brazil">estima</a> una recesión más profunda de lo esperado.</p>
<p>Si bien esto parece alarmante, afortunadamente hay motivos para ser optimistas. Y para responder a nuestra pregunta anterior: sí, creemos que Argentina no está condenada a seguir los errores de las crisis anteriores y que puede volver a una senda sostenible de crecimiento. </p>
<p>Sin embargo, esto dependerá de si Argentina cumple la condición del FMI de acabar con el déficit presupuestario en 2019 y de si adopta otras políticas prudentes, como el incremento de los ingresos públicos mediante la reinstauración del gravamen por exportación y el establecimiento de controles de divisas para garantizar la estabilidad del peso. </p>
<p>Esta es la estrategia que Macri debería haber seguido en diciembre de 2015. Aun así, más vale tarde que nunca.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105008/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert H. Scott III no trabaja para ninguna compañía u organización que se beneficie de este artículo; tampoco consulta ni posee acciones ni recibe fondos por ese concepto; y no ha divulgado afiliaciones relevantes más allá de su posición académica.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kenneth Mitchell no trabaja para ninguna compañía u organización que se beneficie de este artículo; tampoco consulta ni posee acciones ni recibe fondos por ese concepto; y no ha divulgado afiliaciones relevantes más allá de su posición académica.</span></em></p>Una profunda recesión, una grave sequía y la caída de la moneda han provocado el mayor rescate de la historia del FMI. El Gobierno espera poder evitar el colapso generado en las anteriores crisis.Robert H. Scott III, Professor of Economics & Finance, Monmouth UniversityKenneth Mitchell, Associate Professor of Latin American Politics, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1045292018-10-12T13:26:22Z2018-10-12T13:26:22ZArgentina bets 60 percent interest rates – and $50B international bailout – will revive its economy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240363/original/file-20181012-154573-1mxharx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Argentines protest the austerity measures of the IMF bailout. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/APTOPIX-Argentina-Economy/42ae5e1435f74296a09b6b3a713a6749/70/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/reactivara-la-economia-argentina-un-rescate-internacional-de-50-000-millones-de-dolares-105008">Leer en español</a></em>.</p>
<p>An economy in <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-04/argentina-to-go-deeper-into-recession-central-bank-survey-says">recession</a>. Pesos <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/04/investing/emerging-markets-argentina-turkey/index.html">fleeing the country</a>. The <a href="https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay">worst drought in decades</a>. The world’s <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/argentina-central-bank-interest-rates-1.4805032">highest interest rates</a>. The <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/argentina-bailout-50-billion-loan-biggest-in-imf-history-2018-6">biggest bailout</a> in the history of the International Monetary Fund. </p>
<p>Sound scary? </p>
<p>For Argentina, it’s more of the same, as it has suffered through many <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-debt-chronology/chronology-argentinas-turbulent-history-of-economic-crises-idUSKBN0FZ23N20140730">economic crises in recent decades</a>. And pretty much every time, the catastrophic meltdowns ended with some combination of unsustainable national debt, high unemployment, rising poverty rates, looting, bank runs, capital flight and hyperinflation. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robert-h-scott-iii-380235">We’ve</a> been <a href="https://www.monmouth.edu/directory/profiles/ken-e-mitchell/">following</a> the ebbs and flows of the Argentine economy for two decades and are currently wrapping up a book on economic and fiscal policy in Argentina, Brazil and Chile. We’ve been wondering, could Argentina’s latest crisis turn out differently than the others? </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240341/original/file-20181011-154583-19pyvz4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A man serves food at a soup kitchen along a main avenue.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-Economy/fd9fe6e06f2b4eb596951adf69498747/22/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>It didn’t have to be this way</h2>
<p>It’s not terribly hard for us to pinpoint what went wrong, since <a href="https://monthlyreview.org/2017/06/01/old-malbec-in-new-bottles/">we predicted</a> it last summer. </p>
<p>But it didn’t have to happen this way. Only two years ago, Argentina’s leadership had appeared to learn lessons from the past and were governing the economy pretty effectively. </p>
<p>After the country’s last crisis ended in <a href="https://www.economist.com/special-report/2002/02/28/a-decline-without-parallel">default</a> and massive poverty in 2002, the government was operating under strict financial constraints. Argentina’s leaders had to find ways to support its currency, increase tax revenue, lower poverty and increase employment. And they <a href="https://doi.org/10.2753/0577-5132570605">largely succeeded</a>, which led to a stronger financial sector and peso, Argentina’s currency, for three main reasons. </p>
<p>First, while past governments responded to crises by adopting austerity policies, in 2003 the newly elected President Nestor Kirchner instead increased government spending using pesos (instead of borrowed dollars) to assist the poor, which in turn helped spur consumer spending. This <a href="https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/LAP_090716_Lustig%20Bulletin%20ENG_1.pdf">led to less poverty</a>, unemployment and income inequality.</p>
<p>Second, capital controls were implemented to keep pesos in Argentina. This ensured there wouldn’t be another run on the currency. </p>
<p>Finally, and most importantly, the government began using direct deposits to pay salaries and provide benefits, which <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01603477.2018.1431797">significantly increased</a> the percentage of the population in the formal banking system. Before then, more than half of citizens didn’t have a bank account or credit card, making it harder for the government to know their true earnings and tax them. </p>
<p>Thanks to the changes, the share in the banking system jumped to 90 percent, leading to record value-added tax collections, the Argentine government’s <a href="https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/revenue-statistics-in-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-2015/the-oecd-classification-of-taxes-and-interpretative-guide_rev_lat-2015-7-en-fr#page3">most important revenue stream</a>. As a result, the country’s tax-to-GDP ratio – which is a measure of how well the government is collecting revenue – soared from an average of around 19 percent in the 1980s and 1990s to 32 percent in 2015, the <a href="https://www.iadb.org/en/news/news-releases/2017-03-23/tax-revenues-continue-to-rise-in-latin-america-in-2015%2C11749.html">highest in the region</a> – something unthinkable only a decade prior. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240340/original/file-20181011-154577-1987fya.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Macri’s end of capital controls may have been a mistake.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Argentina-Economy/4b525f00ec0a493fb53ba85c03610e5f/5/0">AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Stoking a crisis</h2>
<p>So when Mauricio Macri became president at the end of 2015, there was a foundation of beneficial policies in place that supported the government’s coffers.</p>
<p>He also had <a href="https://www.worldfinance.com/special-reports/a-history-of-economic-trouble-in-argentina">some challenges</a> to contend with. Government spending was rising too quickly, while inflation was hitting 30 percent a year. But instead of tightening the reins on spending and pursuing a path of fiscal responsibility, the center-right Macri decided to cut taxes for businesses and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-economy-idUSKBN0U71AV20151224">borrowed record amounts</a> in dollars to do so – all without reducing government spending. At the same time, he eliminated the capital controls put in place in 2002. </p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, all of this made the country more vulnerable to a crisis, which began in May when a particularly bad drought – the <a href="https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay">most expensive in Argentina’s history</a> – dried up important export crops, such as soybeans and corn. Argentina is the world’s <a href="https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/world-leaders-in-soya-soybean-production-by-country.html">third-largest exporter of both</a>.</p>
<p>Foreign investors, concerned about the government’s ability to meet its obligations, <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/world/americas/2018-10-09-argentinas-peso-extends-rally-as-central-bank-frets/">began dumping short-term central bank debt</a>. Meanwhile Argentines, well-versed in any whiff of economic trouble, began to get rid of their pesos too. </p>
<p>By June, Argentina was seeking help from the International Monetary Fund in the form of a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/08/argentina-loan-imf-protests-peso">US$50 billion line of credit</a>, which is the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/argentina-bailout-50-billion-loan-biggest-in-imf-history-2018-6">most a country has ever received</a> from the institution.</p>
<p>But the injection of credit, as well as the central bank’s decision to <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-11/argentina-holds-rate-at-world-high-60-percent-to-fight-inflation">hike interest rates</a> to a world-high 60 percent, did little to stem the peso’s slump. The peso <a href="https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=ARS&to=USD&view=1Y">is down</a> almost 50 percent in value since April versus the dollar. </p>
<h2>Where will it lead</h2>
<p>Fast forward to today.</p>
<p>The crisis <a href="https://frontera.net/news/latam/argentinas-new-currency-crisis-what-happened-this-time/">has eased a bit</a> as the peso stabilizes at just under 40 pesos per dollar – near its worst ever – which cost $15 billion of the IMF’s money to achieve. And the central bank is selling lots of bonds with interest rates over 60 percent to hold it there. </p>
<p>In other words, three months of 60 percent interest rates and billions of IMF cash have proved it’s expensive to wrestle the peso into submission. Even worse, all that borrowed money will need to be paid back, which puts further stress on the economy.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the IMF, which agreed to send over an additional $7 billion, is <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-09/imf-sees-deeper-recession-in-argentina-slower-growth-in-brazil">forecasting</a> a deeper-than-expected recession. </p>
<p>While this does in fact look rather scary, fortunately, there’s room for optimism. And to answer our earlier question, yes, we do believe Argentina is not doomed to follow past crisis missteps and can return to a sustainable path of growth. </p>
<p>It’ll depend, however, on whether Argentina follows through on the IMF’s condition to eliminate the budget deficit by 2019. And whether it adopts other prudent policies such as increasing public revenue by re-instituting export taxes and putting in place currency controls to ensure a stable peso. </p>
<p>This is the approach Macri should have taken in December 2015. Still, it’s better late than never.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104529/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A deep recession, a severe drought and a plunging currency have led to the biggest bailout in IMF history. The government hopes it can avoid the meltdowns that followed past crises.Robert H. Scott III, Professor of Economics & Finance, Monmouth UniversityKenneth Mitchell, Associate Professor of Latin American Politics, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/924712018-03-19T10:38:10Z2018-03-19T10:38:10ZRecent stock market sell-off foreshadows a new Great Recession<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210667/original/file-20180315-104676-j2vnia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">An ice sculpture titled 'Main Street Meltdown' melts near Wall Street.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Frank Franklin II</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In early February, concerns about inflation and rising interest rates sent global financial markets into a frenzy, <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/05/583325123/stocks-extend-losses-with-dow-dropping-more-than-300-points-at-the-open">prompting the biggest single-day drop</a> ever in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Stocks have since recovered some of their losses.</p>
<p>A similar episode occurred exactly 10 years earlier, <a href="https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2017/01/31/the-ars-debacle-the-forgotten-crisis-of-2008/">though few may remember</a>. In February 2008, the failure of an obscure market precipitated a <a href="https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2017/01/31/the-ars-debacle-the-forgotten-crisis-of-2008/">similar selling frenzy</a>. At the time, this sell-off went mostly unrecognized as a harbinger of something worse because the stock market quickly recovered. </p>
<p>Just as the world shouldn’t have been complacent in 2008, we shouldn’t rest easy today. Both events are proverbial dead canaries in a coal mine. </p>
<p>That’s because they have something else in common. Both stemmed from worries that rising borrowing costs would hurt debt-burdened consumers, the housing market and ultimately the U.S. economy.</p>
<p>Our soon-to-be-published research shows that the same problems that led to the biggest financial market meltdown since the Great Depression are alive and well today. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OHmY_7GrT8A?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>2008’s canary in a coal mine</h2>
<p>In the mid-2000s, the U.S. economy <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100422.html?referrer=email">seemed to be riding high</a>, but two key problems lurked below the surface: excessive household debt and a housing bubble.</p>
<p>Part of the first problem was that real, <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N">inflation-adjusted household incomes were actually lower</a> than they had been in the late 1990s. To maintain living standards, Americans took on more debt thanks to <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS">relatively low borrowing costs</a> and weak underwriting standards among lenders. <a href="https://www.newyorkfed.org/microeconomics/hhdc.html">Total household debt soared</a> more than 50 percent, from a little over US$8 trillion in 2004 to $12.69 trillion by 2008. </p>
<p>That brings us to the second problem. Most of that was mortgage debt. The housing bubble pushed it to the point <a href="http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/son2008.pdf">that it was unsustainable</a> as housing prices outstripped incomes, leading banks to come up with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2007/sep/30/5">ever creative ways</a> to lend people money they ultimately couldn’t pay back. </p>
<p><iframe id="CChwb" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/CChwb/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>At around the same time, the Federal Reserve began to lift interest rates, from 2004 to 2006, making credit more expensive. This reduced consumer spending as more of households’ falling real incomes went to repay debt, thus <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDP">slowing economic growth</a> and the housing market. </p>
<p><iframe id="oggP3" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/oggP3/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>To <a href="http://keenomics.s3.amazonaws.com/debtdeflation_media/2007/03/SteveKeenDebtReportNovember2006.pdf">some observers</a>, it was only a matter of time before an economic recession or worse. </p>
<p>Among the first significant signs that things were seriously amiss came from the <a href="http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/60418/securitization+structured+finance/AuctionRate+Securities+Bidders+Remorse+A+Primer">auction rate securities</a> market, which was worth about $330 billion at its peak in 2008. Auction rate securities are essentially packages of mortgages, student loans and other medium- to long-term debt. Back in 2008, broker dealers held weekly <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dutchauction.asp">Dutch auctions</a> at which these short-term securities changed hands and interest rates were set after a bidding process. <a href="https://www.barrons.com/articles/SB121159302439419325">Credit-rating agencies gave them</a> their <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/aaa.asp">super-safe ranking of AAA</a>. </p>
<p>Investors <a href="https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2017/01/31/the-ars-debacle-the-forgotten-crisis-of-2008/">liked them</a> because they were paid a much higher rate than other short-term securities with AAA ratings. Because they could be sold quickly to investors, borrowers could get loans more easily. </p>
<p>But on Feb. 7, 2008, the <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34672.pdf">market began to seize up</a>. It started when the big investment banks, responsible for ensuring the market had plenty of “liquidity” by purchasing the securities if demand was weak, backed away because a growing number of households couldn’t repay their debts and this was beginning to squeeze their bottom lines. </p>
<p>This spooked investors, who sensed something was wrong. By the end of the month, there were no auctions, and billions of dollars in securities were frozen. The auction rate securities market remains closed to this day. </p>
<p>Within months of its February seizure, the broader market had moved on, as the Dow Jones Index reached the year’s peak by May. Yet the event sent ripples throughout the economy as investors continued to avoid mortgage-related assets. </p>
<p>By September 2008, when investment bank Lehman Brothers collapsed because of problems with these securities, the Great Recession was in full swing. </p>
<h2>Deja vu?</h2>
<p>Fast forward to today. </p>
<p>The economy has mostly recovered from the financial crisis, the <a href="https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000">unemployment rate has dropped</a> from 10 percent in 2009 to 4.1 percent in January and <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N">real median household income surged</a> to a record at the end of 2016. </p>
<p>Good news, right? </p>
<p>Our new research shows that these rosy-looking stats conceal the same two related problems as 10 years ago: excessive consumer debt (relative to income) and unaffordable housing.</p>
<p>First, debt and income. After falling in the aftermath of the Great Recession, debt is once again reaching new highs. Especially worrisome, nonmortgage household debt (student loans and credit cards) has soared at a rapid pace and <a href="https://www.newyorkfed.org/microeconomics/hhdc.html">is now 41 percent above</a> its previous peak in 2008. We estimate that the resulting interest payments on nonmortage household debt have reduced living standards of the typical household by 3.1 percent since 2008. That either lowers consumption or prolongs the vicious cycle of more and more household debt. </p>
<p><iframe id="licSC" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/licSC/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><iframe id="ww841" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ww841/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>But things are even worse than this. Income data ignore <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/05/its-becoming-more-common-for-young-adults-to-live-at-home-and-for-longer-stretches/">recent demographic shifts</a>, such as more multi-generation households and college students living with their parents longer. We adjusted household income by family size because more people living together requires more money to attain the same living standards. Our data show this has lowered average living standards by 3.3 percent. This is on top of the 3.1 drop due to greater interest payments on nonmortgage debt.</p>
<p>Second, although there is no great housing bubble today, the fundamental problem is the same as 10 years ago – people with average incomes cannot afford to buy and live in an average priced home. Low interest rates helped the housing market recover, but <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/07/25/u-s-home-prices-reach-record-high-6th-straight-month/507808001">also helped drive prices to record highs</a>. </p>
<p>Just like before the 2008 crisis, incomes <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/13/economist-home-prices-are-increasing-twice-as-fast-as-income-growth.html">have not kept pace</a> with home prices. Too many people cannot afford to buy a home. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210997/original/file-20180319-31602-1tgo5lb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Dark days ahead?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sunny Boy/Shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Storm clouds brewing</h2>
<p>So what does this all mean? </p>
<p>Home prices and consumer debt are again at record highs, and the Fed has been steadily raising benchmark borrowing costs for over a year now. The central bank <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/30/fed-will-be-forced-to-raise-rates-more-rapidly-than-expected-cnbc-fed-survey.html">is expected</a> to accelerate the process because the recent tax cut is likely to cause inflation to rise, requiring the Fed to lift interest rates to cool things down. This will hurt the housing market, pushing more homeowners underwater and making it harder for them to pay their mortgages and repay other debt.</p>
<p>At the same time, incomes have only grown modestly and, as our research shows, average American households have 6 percent to 7 percent less spending power than they did a decade ago, before the global financial system collapsed. Something will have to give. Households can take on more debt to maintain their living standards for a short while, or they can significantly reduce their spending. </p>
<p>In either case, the U.S. economy is primed for another recession. We believe it’s not a question of if. It’s a question of when.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92471/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The collapse of an obscure corner of the financial market a decade ago foreshadowed the Great Recession. The stock-market swoon in February should offer a similar warning.Steven Pressman, Professor of Economics, Colorado State UniversityRobert H. Scott III, Professor of Economics & Finance, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/897332018-02-09T14:13:01Z2018-02-09T14:13:01Z15 questions to determine if your relationship is Hall of Fame material or a strikeout<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205703/original/file-20180209-51700-1v9wr7l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=535%2C147%2C4276%2C3135&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Relationship science can weigh in on whether you're with a winner.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/check-sheet-gifts-favorite-female-hand-785823808">Evgeniia Trushkova/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Decisions are a part of life. At various times you may need to choose the best vacation spot, job candidate, babysitter, or place to live. Your most important decision may be figuring out your best romantic partner. Relationships matter – a lot. They have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510383501">implications for your health</a>, your <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006X.71.1.176">reactions to stress</a> and even <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12201">how you look at the world</a>.</p>
<p>But how can you determine if your current romantic partner is the best of the best for you? It’s hard to know what factors truly matter, what you should not overvalue, or what is best to ignore entirely.</p>
<p>This kind of assessment comes up in a variety of contexts. Consider, for example, something that may seem entirely unrelated to relationships: determining whether a baseball player qualifies for the Hall of Fame. The task requires wading through dozens and dozens of highly qualified candidates, each with various outstanding characteristics, to determine who warrants permanent enshrinement. Still, no candidate is absolutely perfect – just like finding a quality relationship partner. </p>
<p>So as a relationship scientist, I’ve gathered inspiration from the Hall of Fame selection process and infused some science to draw up a checklist of intangibles you can use to think about your own relationship. </p>
<h2>Instinct adds nuance to hard numbers</h2>
<p>There are two general ways to make assessments: data and your gut feeling. In a sport like baseball, with a plethora of statistics, a data-based approach makes sense. But for a player to be truly Hall of Fame worthy, numbers may not tell the whole story. It should be visceral, a player should feel like a Hall of Famer. As Malcom Gladwell famously observed in his book “<a href="https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/malcolm-gladwell/blink/9780316005043/">Blink</a>,” snap judgments can have astounding accuracy. As a psychology professor myself, one example that always amazes me is that student assessments of a professor <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.3.431">based on a 30-second silent video clip</a> matches students’ evaluations based on the entire semester. </p>
<p>Relying on gut feelings isn’t perfect. But <a href="http://www.sydneysymposium.unsw.edu.au/2011/chapters/DijksterhuisSSSP2011.pdf">intuition is an important component of decisions</a>, especially social ones. Clearly, people rely on instincts in a variety of situations such as deciding which job to take, which daycare is best, and who you should date. Trusting your own feelings is sometimes necessary because expert information is hard to access – published research articles are often locked behind paywalls – or written in a way that defies comprehension. And of course, the very nature of science and statistics is to focus on what is most typical in a population, instead of what is best for any individual.</p>
<p>Experts also aren’t perfect and new research shows that people have a sense of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1378721">when to value nonexpert opinions over experts</a>. In fact, some experts admit to using intuition themselves. A study revealed that marriage therapists acknowledge using their intuition and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-011-9161-7">consider it a valuable tool</a> in clinical settings.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=586&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=586&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205708/original/file-20180209-51710-72q8y3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=586&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Hall of Fame is forever – you have to be sure before you celebrate.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Hall-of-Fame-Baseball/8005577fa1574e4b8e73199ab63da417/1/0">AP Photo/Mike Groll</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Deserving of Hall of Fame enshrinement?</h2>
<p>Perhaps with the value of instinctive evaluation in mind, famous baseball statistician Bill James created the “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keltner_list">Keltner List</a>.” Named for a seven-time All-Star with borderline qualifications, the list was devised as a way to help assess a player’s Baseball Hall of Fame viability. </p>
<p>Even though James is a statistician, the Keltner List is intentionally nonscientific. Rather, it’s a <a href="https://www.billjamesonline.com/article1238/">collection of 15 questions</a> that anyone can quickly answer to help guide an overall assessment of a player’s worthiness for the Hall of Fame. (Think: “Was he the best player on his team?”) The answers are not meant to provide a definitive conclusion, but rather to force a careful consideration of the most important information.</p>
<p>Back to relationships. A similar process can help you determine whether your current romantic partner belongs in your relationship Hall of Fame. Inspired by the Keltner List concept, I’ve put together a list of 15 questions to highlight what matters most. Like the Keltner List, my approach to relationship assessment is intentionally not scientific and has not been tested empirically (though that isn’t a bad idea for future research).</p>
<p>That said, as a relationship scientist, I couldn’t help but use science as a guide. In crafting each question, I consulted the existing research to ground it in the science of what contributes to a healthy relationship. Note that this list isn’t about helping you pick the best Tinder date, hookup or short-term fling. The questions focus on what matters for serious, long-term, committed, sustainable love. To benefit from this exercise, you need to be honest. If you’re lying to yourself, you won’t gain any insight. As computer programmers say, “garbage in, garbage out.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205704/original/file-20180209-51723-760tbk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Remove your romance blinders and prepare to be honest with yourself.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/picture-romantic-couple-having-fun-hearts-434746606">Kamil Macniak/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A Keltner List for relationships</h2>
<p>Consider each question and answer truthfully with a simple yes or no response:</p>
<ol>
<li> Does your partner <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398694.013.0005">make you a better person</a>, and do you <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/weekinreview/02parkerpope.html">do the same for them</a>?</li>
<li> Are you and your partner both comfortable with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.52.3.511">sharing feelings, relying on each other, being close,</a> and able to avoid worrying about the other person leaving?</li>
<li> Do you and your partner <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.18.3.289">accept each other for who you are</a>, without <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00627.x">trying to change each other</a>? </li>
<li> When disagreements arise, do you and your partner <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/353438">communicate respectfully and without contempt or negativity</a>?</li>
<li> Do you and your partner share <a href="http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2011/6/16/power-in-relationships-predictors-and-outcomes.html">decision-making, power and influence</a> in the relationship?</li>
<li> Is your partner <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-you-should-date-your-best-friend-72784">your best friend</a>, and are you theirs?</li>
<li> Do you and your partner think more in <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596">terms of “we” and “us,”</a> rather than “you” and “I”?</li>
<li> Would <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.77.5.942">you and your partner</a> <a href="http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2013/10/30/what-matters-for-intrusive-behavior-trust-self-control-or-bo.html">trust each other</a> with the passwords to social media and bank accounts?</li>
<li> Do you and your partner have <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.79">good opinions of each other</a> – without having <a href="http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2012/11/15/and-for-my-next-trick-the-magical-effects-of-positive-illusi.html">an overinflated positive view</a>?</li>
<li><a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1042">Do your close friends</a>, as well as your partner’s, think you have a great relationship that will stand the test of time?</li>
<li>Is your relationship <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412958479.n123">free of red flags</a> like cheating, jealousy and controlling behavior?</li>
<li>Do <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1992.00369.x">you and your partner</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.024">share the same values</a> when it comes to politics, religion, the importance of marriage, the desire to have kids (or not) and how to parent?</li>
<li>Are you and your partner willing to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1373">sacrifice your own needs</a>, desires and goals for each other (without being a doormat)?</li>
<li>Do you and your partner both have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1948">agreeable and emotionally stable personalities</a>?</li>
<li>Are you and your partner <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2013.807336">sexually compatible</a>?</li>
</ol>
<p>At this point you may be tempted to tally your responses. Remember, this isn’t about generating a score, but rather engaging in a self-guided tour through what’s important in relationships. That said, the best answer for every question is a quick, certain and unqualified “yes.”</p>
<p>Looking at the list, you may take issue with a question or two and think, “that’s not important.” First, I’d say that the scientific evidence begs to differ. But that’s also why there are 15 questions. More questions provide greater accuracy. While any one question may not perfectly capture your relationship, 15 different perspectives gives a fairly complete picture.</p>
<p>Are there different questions you could ask? Sure. More questions? No doubt, but Bill James stuck to 15 questions for his Keltner List, so I did as well. </p>
<p>With relationships, like selections to a Hall of Fame, there aren’t easy answers and no guarantees for what the future holds. As much as you may like a definitive scoring system where a partner with at least a 12 out of 15 is a “keeper,” that isn’t possible. Relationships are complex. Any attempt at an easy answer is inevitably an oversimplification.</p>
<p>Instead, consider your responses to this list as additional data points that provide new insights. Don’t stop here. When you make important decisions – like who you’re going to spend the rest of your life with! – collect as much data as possible. Consult the experts, yourself and, as Question 10 suggests, your friends. By using both your head and your heart you can make the best decision about whether your romantic partner is Hall of Fame material.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89733/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If there were a Keltner List for relationships – as for induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame – what would be on it? A relationship scientist draws on psychology research to help you assess your love.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/797512017-06-29T23:50:24Z2017-06-29T23:50:24ZWant a satisfying relationship? Don’t present yourself as a sex object<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176274/original/file-20170629-7291-1s3q7sa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C453%2C600%2C445&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is objectification bad – if you welcome sexualized attention?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.pinterest.com/pin/146578162841552029">Lionsgate AMC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When Joan Holloway – the bombshell office worker on the show “Mad Men” – enters a room, she knows she looks good and is going to turn heads. Every morning, Joan meticulously does her makeup and hair and puts on a skintight dress. The men in her office take notice and are quick with the catcalls and sexual comments. </p>
<p>Rather than becoming embarrassed or angry, for the most part Joan finds the attention invigorating. Her hourglass figure is a source of power that she wields intentionally. Male attention is welcome and men’s reactions seem largely innocuous. But her male co-workers’ reactions are objectifying and ultimately may not produce the empowerment Joan desires.</p>
<p>Objectification occurs when one person <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407516631157">treats another like a thing or commodity</a>, ignoring his or her humanity and dignity. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010378402">Objectifying a woman</a> reduces her worth down to her physical appearance. It reflects the view that women’s bodies are objects of sexual pleasure without regard for the living, feeling, thinking people inhabiting them. </p>
<p>Research has shown that objectification of women opens the door to a whole host of other issues, including not taking women’s work and accomplishments seriously, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x">sexual violence</a>, increased <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00118.x">concerns about appearance</a> and lower <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00452.x">self-esteem</a>.</p>
<p>Experiencing objectification from strangers may be particularly demeaning because unknown others never have the opportunity to dig deeper and truly know the woman as a person. But what happens when it happens within a close, romantic relationship?</p>
<h2>A pervasive way of perceiving women</h2>
<p>Unfortunately, objectification from many quarters is a common occurrence in women’s lives. To determine exactly <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12152">how frequently American women perceive it happening</a>, researchers contacted participants throughout the day via a smartphone app.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175255/original/file-20170622-12008-uu8y90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Joan Holloway experiencing the male gaze.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://wallpaperscraft.com/image/christina_hendricks_lady_dress_grace_charm_24817_3840x2400.jpg">AMC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Young women reported experiencing objectification themselves an average of once every two days, most typically in the form of a sexual gaze – someone checking them out or staring at their bodies. The women reported seeing other women being objectified even more frequently, a little over once a day.</p>
<p>Perhaps due to its frequency, sexual objectification of women <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000010378402">may seem normal</a>. As a result, it’s seeped into many aspects of our world including advertisements, movies and television, and even the <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x">workforce</a>, where women’s looks can dictate how they are treated.</p>
<p><a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x">According to objectification theory</a>, women often take objectifying comments to heart and use them to evaluate themselves. As damaging as these comments and views can be, what does it mean for women when their romantic partners objectify them too?</p>
<h2>Object of a partner’s affection</h2>
<p>To address this question, <a href="http://webhost.bridgew.edu/lramsey/">psychologist Laura Ramsey</a> and colleagues from Bridgewater State University conducted three studies to determine how being <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407516631157">objectified by a male romantic partner affects women</a>. If a woman enjoys being sexualized – like Joan from “Mad Men” – would objectification promote relationship satisfaction?</p>
<p>In the first study, the researchers recruited 114 women in heterosexual relationships: 9.6 percent dating, 28.9 percent steady partner, 8.8 percent engaged, 16.7 percent cohabitating and 36 percent married. They all responded to multiple prompts that fell into three categories. Examples include, “I want men to look at me” (enjoyment of sexualization), “My partner often worries about whether the clothes I am wearing make me look good” (partner objectification) and “How well does your partner meet your needs” (relationship satisfaction). </p>
<p>Women whose responses indicated more partner objectification were less satisfied with their relationship – even when the women reported that they enjoyed being sexualized. This suggests that despite liking sexualized attention, it may encourage objectification from a male partner, which may ultimately undermine the relationship.</p>
<p>Clearly those results sound bad for objectification. But it’s also possible that a male partner’s objectification is more innocent, merely his way of showing affection toward his adored female partner. If that’s the case, maybe objectification isn’t so bad, especially since other research shows that sexual desire in healthy relationships <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1152455">increases people’s happiness about them</a>.</p>
<p>To explore the role of sexual desire in objectification, Ramsey and her colleagues asked 196 women to respond to the same three measures from the first study. Additionally, they asked the women about how much sexual desire they felt from their partner.</p>
<p>These results confirmed that feeling sexually desired by their partners did relate to greater relationship satisfaction. But feeling more desired didn’t relate to women enjoying sexualization more. Rather, feeling sexually desired went along with greater perceived objectification by the partner. </p>
<p>These findings suggest that feeling desired is not synonymous with objectification and each has different implications for satisfaction. Feeling wanted by your partner is good for relationships; feeling like your body is the only thing that matters isn’t.</p>
<p>But what about the Joan Holloways of the world who knowingly emphasize their appearance and sexuality? Given the voluntary nature of their self-objectification, would any negative effects it had on the relationship be attenuated?</p>
<p>The researchers found that while women who self-objectify also enjoy sexualized attention from others, it doesn’t help their relationships. As before, enjoyment of sexualized attention coincides with objectification from the partner, which is associated with less relationship satisfaction.</p>
<p>In short, wanting sexualized attention seems to create an environment that fosters objectification. Unfortunately, greater objectification also means the relationship suffers.</p>
<h2>Who’s to blame?</h2>
<p>These surveys make clear that women who experience objectification from their male partners are less satisfied in their relationships.</p>
<p>On the surface, the solution seems simple: Men should avoid objectifying their female partners. But the research also indicates that men engage in objectification more when their partner likes being sexualized and when women objectify themselves. Intentionally or not, women who enjoy sexualized attention may seek out males who objectify them to fulfill that need.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/176280/original/file-20170629-2996-183rnn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Women grow to expect a sexualized male gaze coming at them from any angle.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/helloturkeytoe/7773728912">Michael</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Objectification is so pervasive in society – for instance, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9359-1">half of advertisements sexualize women</a> – that it’s tempting to think women should just embrace it and use it to their advantage. But the problem is that objectification ends up undermining women, not providing the empowerment they seek. This research shows that holds true in the intimate confines of their romantic relationships, as well as at work and on the street.</p>
<p>As Joan from “Mad Men” knows, women should feel free to dress and act as they wish. But the research suggests it’s also important to be aware of how your partner reacts to your choices. If your boyfriend’s or husband’s reaction involves objectifying remarks, don’t dismiss them merely as indicators of his sexual desire. Recognize objectification for the disrespectful thought process it is. Then identify more positive ways you both can express sexual desire. Ultimately that should lead to a happier and more satisfying relationship.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79751/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Women experience negative effects from the objectification that’s common in our society. What happens if they try to seize the reins and elicit sexualized attention in their romantic relationships?Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityErin Hughes, Master's Student in Psychology, Villanova UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/788202017-06-05T01:43:29Z2017-06-05T01:43:29ZWhy Trump’s withdrawal from Paris doesn’t matter as much as you think<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172164/original/file-20170604-20569-13pntvs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Fortunately, it's not quite so gloomy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Susan Walsh</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-decision-to-leave-paris-accord-hurts-the-us-and-the-world-78707#comment_1304030">Many reacted</a> to President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord with understandable dismay, fearful that the U.S. <a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-decision-to-withdraw-from-the-paris-accord-cedes-global-leadership-to-china-76279">is shirking its global leadership role</a>, will fall behind in green technology and is helping usher in the worst effects of global warming.</p>
<p>Let’s take a collective breath and think about what withdrawal really means. After weighing many pros and cons, I believe it’s sensible to conclude it doesn’t really matter. </p>
<p>That’s because efforts by cities, states and companies are already underway to keep up the spirit of Paris, even if the feds won’t. We’re at a point where ecological forces such as climate change are increasingly driving economic behavior, as <a href="http://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=19445083&AN=47365043&h=WkIUBVO0E30u8ptyMGpJJdmq8YoHAwBVSq27lTIKpPFivcMk6T%2bdnJTRuU%2bZp52QJBK1CFSG00yNO9fUG1rjEA%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3dsite%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d19445083%26AN%3d47365043">I explored in a 2009 paper</a>, which is making these efforts to combat it more inevitable, regardless of Trump. </p>
<p>While the Paris withdrawal is unfortunate, there’s a bigger threat. </p>
<h2>Reasons to worry?</h2>
<p>From a political perspective, the United States <a href="http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/in-climate-talks-its-always-been-america-first/articleshow/58955848.cms">has often been</a> a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/mar/29/globalwarming.usnews">noncontributor</a> in the global carbon emissions reduction game. </p>
<p>The United States signed <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/26/world/kyoto-protocol-fast-facts/index.html">but never ratified the Kyoto Protocol</a> – citing many of the same reasons as President Trump (large, developing countries are held to lower standards, and this will put the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage). </p>
<p>Yet there was far less outrage with Kyoto – probably because people knew less about climate change. We know more now and <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-need-to-get-rid-of-carbon-in-the-atmosphere-not-just-reduce-emissions-72573">realize that climate change is real</a> and poses serious threats – anyone who actually reads the <a href="http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/acp-16-3761-2016.html">evidence</a> comes to this conclusion.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2012/nov/26/kyoto-protocol-carbon-emissions">actual performance</a> of the Kyoto Protocol, however, does give us reason to worry today. While some countries did limit their emissions, many did not. The largest polluters (e.g., China and the United States) did not participate, so the <a href="https://350.org/science/#causes">carbon emissions problem continued to get worse</a>, which is a serious problem. </p>
<h2>‘Creative destruction’</h2>
<p>Fortunately there are trends in force that will likely limit the practical effect of Trump’s decision and, in fact, may make it almost meaningless over time, for three reasons. </p>
<p>Before I get to those, a brief economics lesson. Economist Joseph Schumpeter in his 1942 book <a href="http://cnqzu.com/library/Economics/marxian%20economics/Schumpeter,%20Joeseph-Capitalism,%20Socialism%20and%20Democracy.pdf">“Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy”</a> popularized the term “creative destruction.” Schumpeter used this term to describe the process whereby old, inefficient capitalist systems, industries and ideas are destroyed by newer, more industrious and more highly valued capital. </p>
<p>For example, been to a video rental store lately? Me neither. While video stores were useful in their time, technology changed the game (seemingly overnight) and they became obsolete. This same creative destruction is beginning to occur now for oil, gas and other nonrenewable energies. <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurapennington/2013/06/19/embrace-the-life-building-power-of-creative-destruction/#28574d0c6454">Companies such as Tesla</a> point to the future, and Schumpeter would state this is not only a good thing, but inevitable.</p>
<p>Global warming isn’t going to disappear, and engineers, scientists and companies in the United States know this and will push development – regardless of any accords. That leads me to my three reasons. </p>
<p>First, states, cities and corporations in the U.S. can set carbon targets on their own that meet (or ideally beat) global goals. For example, <a href="https://onenyc.cityofnewyork.us/">OneNYC’s 80x50 commitment</a> to reduce emission in New York City by 80 percent by 2050. If more cities, states and corporations commit to ambitious environmental goals, than President Trump not signing the accord looks less important – and may, ironically, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/american-cities-climate-standards.html">kickstart more innovation</a>. </p>
<p>Second, those cities and states that accomplish ambitious environmental improvements will benefit from new technology and cleaner environments and <a href="https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-sustainable-cities-can-drive-business-growth">will probably attract highly educated citizens</a> who appreciate progressive development. And that in turn could pressure other communities to follow suit as they witness the benefits.</p>
<p>Third, the rest of the world will act likewise, so the countries that <a href="https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/green-development/50559116.pdf">lead with green technology will have a significant competitive advantage</a> in the future (<a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2009/06/18/6192/the-economic-benefits-of-investing-in-clean-energy/">both domestically and internationally</a>). </p>
<h2>The bigger threat</h2>
<p>So while I’m not pleased Trump withdrew from Paris, I’m comforted that the impact will be limited. </p>
<p>Americans should be less concerned about Paris and far more so with <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/epa-11106">what is happening</a> at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The administration’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-planned-epa-cuts-us-to-lose-vital-connection-to-at-risk-communities-74489">changes</a> and <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/16/white-house-seeks-to-cut-epa-budget-31-as-trump-targets-regulation.html">proposed cuts</a> will have a <a href="https://www.environmentalintegrity.org/trump-watch-epa/trumps-proposed-cuts-to-epa-budget/">much more meaningful impact</a> on the environment, from the air we breathe to the water we drink, which will also harm the economy. </p>
<p>In fact, the EPA – <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/12/gallery-why-nixon-created-the-epa/67351/">notably established</a> by President Richard Nixon in 1970 – has been underfunded for many years. Its <a href="https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/budget">workforce has declined 15 percent since 1999</a>. </p>
<p>The recent water crisis in Flint, Michigan, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-behind-the-flint-water-crisis-corrosion-of-pipes-erosion-of-trust-53776">offers a vivid illustration</a> of what happens when funding for environmental protection is cut: It becomes harder to spot, study, analyze and solve problems like Flint’s. And many other areas in the country <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/24/americas-water-crisis-goes-beyond-flint-michigan.html">face similar threats</a> from polluted drinking water. </p>
<p>The threat of climate change is real, and our withdrawal is disappointing, but creative destruction will continue and local governments and individual companies will pick up the slack. The effects of a weakened EPA, however, can’t be made up for elsewhere. </p>
<p>The consequences are far more important and immediate than Paris.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78820/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert H. Scott III does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Economic forces – alongside a moral imperative – are driving cities, states and companies to make changes to forestall climate change, regardless of the whims of the White House.Robert H. Scott III, Associate Professor of Economics, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/784362017-05-26T23:34:05Z2017-05-26T23:34:05ZPoor and middle-income families need a better way than 529s to save for college<p>A college education is increasingly necessary for success in today’s economy. It’s also <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-us-student-loan-problem-and-how-we-got-here-32676">increasingly expensive</a>. </p>
<p>Americans with a college degree earn, on average, <a href="https://collegepuzzle.stanford.edu/?p=4551">US$1 million more over the course of their lives</a> than those without one. At the same time, the <a href="https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/average-rates-growth-published-charges-decade">cost to attend a four-year school</a> has been climbing 2 percent to 3 percent a year above the rate of inflation. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, American families are not saving enough to cover these rising costs. More than half <a href="http://nypost.com/2015/04/29/most-parents-arent-saving-money-for-kids-college-education">have no college savings at all</a>. Those that do typically don’t set aside nearly enough to pay for even one child to attend college for one year.</p>
<p>A few decades ago <a href="http://www.savingforcollege.com/articles/infographic-history-of-529-plan">Michigan tried to change this</a> by helping state residents save for college. This eventually morphed into the 529 plan. Yet after more than 20 years, <a href="http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-64">only 2.5 percent of households have one</a>.</p>
<p>Part of the failure is a lack of communication, which is why most states celebrate “529 Day” on May 29 to try to raise awareness about this college savings option. The real reason so few families use them, however, is that 529s don’t actually make college more affordable. </p>
<h2>The college affordability crisis</h2>
<p>The rising cost of a college education – coupled with the lack of adequate savings – means that students are graduating with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-student-loan-debt-really-a-crisis-44069">great deal of debt</a>. </p>
<p>Total student debt <a href="https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/current/">rose to a record $1.44 trillion</a> in March, about $33,000 per borrower, more than double the level in 2008. </p>
<p>This has both <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/08/the-long-term-consequences-of-student-loans.html">personal and economy-wide consequences</a>, from credit-ruining defaults and significant financial stress to impairing the ability to save enough to buy a home or retire. Money spent repaying these loans means less consumer spending, thus slowing economic growth. </p>
<p><iframe id="F3Ram" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/F3Ram/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>529s to the rescue?</h2>
<p>Enter the 529. The plan’s name comes from section 529 of the U.S. tax code, which created it. </p>
<p>In 1986, before 529s existed, <a href="http://colofma.com/web_documents/2014_fall_529_2.pdf">Michigan</a> sought to help state residents deal with the rising cost of college by letting them prepay. A tussle over whether Michigan’s plans qualified for a tax exemption led Congress to pass section 529 in 1996, which exempted earnings in these plans from federal taxes. </p>
<p>Today all 50 states offer a 529 plan. Families can put after-tax income in a college savings plan that then grows tax-free. Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, Montana and Pennsylvania also offer state income tax deductions for money put into a 529 savings plan. </p>
<h2>Why 529s haven’t worked</h2>
<p>While their intention was good, in practice they’ve done little for those who need the most help paying for college. </p>
<p>For starters, half of families saving for college <a href="http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-64">don’t even know 529s exist</a>, and those that do say they don’t understand them because the investment options are too complex. </p>
<p>More importantly, 529 plans are poorly designed to help low- and middle-income families. Their main selling point is their tax savings, but this doesn’t help families that don’t make a lot of money and thus don’t have a large tax liability. Savings in a 529 also <a href="http://www.savingforcollege.com/articles/five-things-to-know-about-529s-and-financial-aid">count against families</a> when they apply for financial aid, and there are tax penalties if the money is not used to pay for college expenses.</p>
<p>That’s why only <a href="https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/notes/feds-notes/2016/saving-for-college-and-section-529-plans-20160203.html">0.3 percent of households</a> in the bottom half of the income distribution (under $56,516 in 2015) have 529 accounts, while 16 percent of the top 5 percent do. </p>
<p>In addition to all this, 529 plans <a href="https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/tax-analysis/Documents/WP-113.pdf">cost the federal government</a> close to $2 billion per year in lost tax revenue for a benefit that mostly helps upper-income families. </p>
<h2>Ending the 529</h2>
<p>That’s why President Obama <a href="http://time.com/money/3676300/529-taxes-obama-state-of-the-union">proposed eliminating</a> the 529 tax break in 2015. He quickly dropped the idea, however, after encountering strong bipartisan opposition. </p>
<p>While it may have been bad politics to propose killing 529s without replacing them with something else, in our view ending the plans is the right thing to do. There are better ways for the federal government to invest $2 billion and make college more affordable.</p>
<p>One excellent way would be to increase the Pell Grant – currently $5,920 – which has been shown to <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/PovertyAnniversary.pdf">increase college enrollment rates</a> for students who do not come from wealthy households. </p>
<p>Another option is to follow the example of New York, which <a href="https://www.ny.gov/programs/tuition-free-degree-program-excelsior-scholarship">recently made tuition free</a> at state public colleges for residents with household incomes below $125,000. A program in Tennessee provides free community college to all state high school students, which <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/18/pf/college/free-community-college-tennessee/">has significantly increased enrollment rates</a>. </p>
<p>In sum, 529 plans have failed to help low- and middle-income households pay for college. Instead, these plans benefit the financial industry (via the high management fees) and wealthy families that do not need the help.</p>
<p>It is time to replace them with something that will actually help make college more affordable.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78436/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>More than half of American families aren’t able to save a dime to cover the cost of college, and the 529 college savings plan has done almost nothing to change that.Robert H. Scott III, Associate Professor of Economics, Monmouth UniversitySteven Pressman, Professor of Economics, Colorado State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.