Posts by linger
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
and the explanation for that is exactly the same as for Australia's 1979 spike:
The sharp rise in the number of divorces in the early 1980s mainly reflects the legislative changes introduced in 1981. The Family Proceedings Act 1980, passed in 1981, meant that an application for marriage dissolution could be made by either the husband or wife on the grounds that the marriage had broken down irreconcilably, provided a two-year separation requirement was satisfied. Many couples who could satisfy the two-year separation requirement for the single ground of irreconcilable marriage breakdown sought the simpler Family Court dissolution. Consequently, divorces recorded a temporary high of 12,395 in 1982.
-
I'm more confused by that than by the original comment. :-/
Ah well, since you brought up Australia, here are the surprising facts:
First up, figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2000) (PDF, Table 15.1, p211) do show a small, and gradual increase in divorce risk for Australian marriages, from
in 1975-76: 6.9% within 5 years, 17.1% within 10 years
to 1989-90: 8.6% within 5 years, 20.4% within 10 years, and
1994-96: 8.8% within 5 years (with data not yet available for a 10-year estimate).But it's hardly an epidemic, is it And this aggregate data doesn't immediately tell us it's the baby boomers who are responsible for any increase.
Another analysis specifically focussing on life experiences of Australian baby boomers gives the following summary:
The crude marriage rate commenced a strong decline in the 1970s.
e.g. the marriage rate for men born in the 1940s aged between 25 and 29 was 19.6%, but only 10.5% for males at the same age born in the 1960s. Equivalent figures for females are 18.4% for the 1940s cohort, and 12.4% for the 1960s cohort.
Compared with the 1940s cohort, a greater number of people in the 1960s cohorts married at later ages. [...T]he median age at marriage for females increased from 21.1 in 1971 to 26.4 in 1999. For males it increased from 23.4 to 28.2.
A very similar increase in median age at marriage is evident in NZ population data -- in 2007 it was over 30 for women, and over 32 for men.
The Australian trend is explained asthe result of a range of social changes including the increase in an incidence of de facto relationships, longer periods in education and increased access to improved contraception.
, and that seems likely to be true for NZ too.
The proportion of men and women who will never marry is also increasing. The ABS estimates that if the 1997-99 first marriage rates were to continue into the future, 29 per cent of men and 23 per cent of women will never marry.
But as for divorce rates, the report admits:
it is not possible to consider each cohort's divorce experience separately using ABS data. Divorce rates rose substantially in 1976 following the introduction of the Family Law Act 1975 and then declined until 1979 as the backlog of applications was cleared. Since then the crude divorce rate has fluctuated between 2.4 and 2.9 divorces per 1000 population.
though of course that's misleading, since the marriage rate declined over the same period.
Even so, and despite the figures suggesting an increased divorce risk, the median duration of Australian marriages to divorce has increased :In 2001 the median duration of marriage to divorce was 11.8 years which is 1.6 years longer that the median duration in 1981.
This apparent anomaly is probably accounted for by the increase in life expectancy over the period, so that there is a larger pool of longer-lasting marriages, raising the median.
-
Who says they are divorcing en masse, Mark? Marriage survival rates have been virtually unchanged for the last 30 years; there's no clear evidence of any recent uptick in divorce rate per marriage. (However, there may be some impact from changes in life expectancy over that period ==> more time to divorce in; and/or an increase in lifestyle & relationship choices other than marriage.)
-
Scarily accurate, David.
!! Parody error: real entity = beyond parody -
With some of my teachers the problem was late-stage alcoholism I think
As one chemistry teacher put it, "'Sssnot a problem. 'Ssss... a sholution ".
-
I couldn't muster vast amounts of sympathy for the people who thought they could get a 9% return by putting all their assets in one finance company and expect it to be as safe as if they'd had it in the bank at 6%.
That's a little unfair.
Remember, two years ago the banks were returning 8% or more on investments; by comparison with that, 9% from an investment company wasn't high enough to set off any warnings.
In quite a few cases, people made investments in seemingly stable companies, only to see those companies drastically change their business model, without warning, in the following year. (Provincial's foray into the Auckland car finance market, for example. Original investors in Bridgecorp would similarly have been justifiably feeling cheated when its directors spun off its best-performing [though that's only a relative term here] assets as a separate company -- a classic bait-and-switch. And as for the sheer stupidity that saw Capital & Merchant void the terms of the insurance contract which was their main guarantee of investor protection...!)
Also, many investors attempted to spread the risk a little ... by investing in several finance companies -- a strategy that unfortunately ignored the fact that they're all in the same market.
But as has now become obvious, the investment company returns did not reflect the real level of risk. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, innit. (And thus I continue to work in Japan...)
-
like a strip club, the dive operation has a 'no touching' policy when it comes to the fishes and stuff. [...] Cue next blog...
...which, from this, we may expect will feature an altogether seedier dive?
-
One out of left field:
"Goodstuff" by Mike Paterson (c1986, Hard Echo Press)
A fun read, for the most part, and some of the included poetry ain't bad either. Still doesn't quite work as a novel though; some plot development is rushed through, and the conclusion is a postmodern mess that doesn't (but possibly, isn't intended to) wrap anything up.
Typos abound, but mostly add to the "homemade" atmosphere of the work. It's also self-referential (to the point of inserting advertisements for the typesetter), but even that works on occasion.And one further out of left field:
"Rock n Roll Babes from Outer Space" by Linda Jaivin.
A lightweight guilty pleasure, this one, but enjoyable as.
Both are books where the writer obviously had fun in the process, and it's infectious. -
4D = next-generation 3D.
(What else would you expect in this context?) -
I intend to return permanently to NZ in a few years.
Mind you, I've been saying that for at least the past 4 years. But it's still true. I do not consider my current residence as "home" in any sense. I'm not part of any local social circles unconnected to my job (not even expat social circles; I've been to the embassy about 5 times in the past decade, that's about it). Which kind of sucks since I no longer have any social contact in NZ either outside immediate family. Indeed I no longer have a "home town" as such; all my family have moved elsewhere in the intervening years. That has muffled the call back somewhat, but has not silenced it.
At the same time, I am fully aware, and more than a little ashamed, that I am not giving Japan as much of a chance as it deserves. The language barrier remains impenetrable for me, partly because of the lack of social contact; partly because I struggle in most social situations anyway and learn languages far more effectively through written media, and Japanese is rather unforgiving on that approach -- but, in the end, mostly because of that underlying feeling of separation, which saps any motivation to learn.
I am weary of this strange half-life; but it is made more bearable by the hope that I can someday hop on a plane and end it. And yet... I say "hope" rather than "knowledge" here because I also fear I may have forgotten how to reconnect.
Uh. That was bleaker than I intended.