Backroads

In a more civilized era, this was an uncommon though not unknown phenomenon. The neighborhood men (either those local, or those who took part in the families' social group, or those related, or some combination of all three) saw to it that the abandoned wife was treated as a widow and helped out with things so that she could continue her important mission of mothering her children while the men collectively and individually picked up the responsibility of surrogate father to the children. Wasn't a perfect system, for sure, but I think it beats our modern system of the government sending a check and everyone else just keeping their distance every which way.

There’s nothing wrong with that lifestyle-until the man leaves his wife and she’s left with no “outside the house” skills and has to raise three kids by herself. 

And from the man's point of view, why have a "kept woman"? She won't be faithful. and you don't want children with her anyway. What's the attraction? She's a money sink with no connection to you other than sex and (your) credit cards.
I don't actually want to understand this. Some things are better just left on their own.

I don't know if this is new, per say, but my internet algorithm keeps throwing stuff at me for some reason about the rise of the stay-at-home girlfriend lifestyle.
Now, while I realize that the housewife/homemaker stereotype was actually a flash in the pan historically, at least the way we want to picture it and usually the female adult of the house was doing SOMETHING besides watching soaps and eating bon-bons, I do support the general notion of a caretaker of home and children. I think there are many benefits to this: house care, direct and full-tie involvement with children's needs, food prep, errands, even the wild card in the back pocket of having someone a household could theoretically always send to work for money, if needed.
But the notions of the stay-at-home girlfriend vs the stay-at-home wife (or, hey, husband, whatever) seem worlds apart and I'd even say a mockery of that traditional type of marriage. On the surface, it seems the same: you have someone caring for the home. Yet is there any commitment or is it just two people playing house? In the current economy, it really is a sacrifice for many to get by on a single income. So what happens when the stay-at-home girlfriend, without the significantly greater commitment (and, let's be honest, legal protection) of marriage, gets dumped? Why would you be in this situation without a real commitment despite the sacrifices?
And I realize the ones making it on social media rather do have a job and are getting an income out of this, but what message does it send?

Sometimes I feel like the last guy out there in a family where I was always the worker and my wife was the SAHM.  I have to be careful telling stories because of the awkward silences that ensue.
However, I'm hearing a new phrase in social media: "Trad wife".  It's used both favorably and critically, but there are an awful lot of GenY folks out there wanting to live the lifestyle.  I'm ok with younger generations finding it appealing to have the dude be the main provider and the chick be the main kiddo nurturer.  Next year is the 30th anniversary of the Proclamation on the Family - it has weathered startlingly well, and new humans in the US are coming up with some of the principles here on their own without ever being LDS.
But yeah, the "I'll find a man and will never have to work" notion should be dispelled.  The SAHGirlfriend thing is troubling.  ~15 years ago, my bishop asked me to give a talk about the importance of women gaining an education and job experience.  Basically, how the women in our church need to prepare for a future where they'll get married and never have to work.  Statistics, even 15 years ago, stated that most of them would have to work for at least part of their lives.  

What I don’t understand are those people who “fear commitment” but have matching tattoos and three kids together, yet are not married  

I don't know if this is new, per say, but my internet algorithm keeps throwing stuff at me for some reason about the rise of the stay-at-home girlfriend lifestyle.
Now, while I realize that the housewife/homemaker stereotype was actually a flash in the pan historically, at least the way we want to picture it and usually the female adult of the house was doing SOMETHING besides watching soaps and eating bon-bons, I do support the general notion of a caretaker of home and children. I think there are many benefits to this: house care, direct and full-tie involvement with children's needs, food prep, errands, even the wild card in the back pocket of having someone a household could theoretically always send to work for money, if needed.
But the notions of the stay-at-home girlfriend vs the stay-at-home wife (or, hey, husband, whatever) seem worlds apart and I'd even say a mockery of that traditional type of marriage. On the surface, it seems the same: you have someone caring for the home. Yet is there any commitment or is it just two people playing house? In the current economy, it really is a sacrifice for many to get by on a single income. So what happens when the stay-at-home girlfriend, without the significantly greater commitment (and, let's be honest, legal protection) of marriage, gets dumped? Why would you be in this situation without a real commitment despite the sacrifices?
And I realize the ones making it on social media rather do have a job and are getting an income out of this, but what message does it send?

May your page load lag just enough that you end up accidentally clicking the ad link.

Part of some science-y show I watched explained that doorways trigger our brains to "leave the old behind" and "prepare for new" (to greatly simplify).  As we get older, it's harder to recall what we left behind - though going back into the previous room can help.  They explained that if one wants to retain something from one room to the next, one should simply repeat it to oneself as one passes through the doorway.  This seems to work for me.

May every jar lid be just slightly too tight.

May every jar lid be just slightly too tight.

I already hear this has been a good career boost for her, and I'm happy for her.

If you haven't seen Cabrini, I recommend going to see it! It is a great movie!
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14351082/
My wife and I loved it. If there is anything praiseworthy, lovely, or of good report we seek after these things. This movie is definitely praiseworthy and of good report.

One concerning incident I was involved with as a teacher was a family trying to get their kid declared disabled in order to get SSI. No one in the family worked (Mom, Dad, and Grandma) and relied on an assortment of programs to survive.
Kid had ADHD, which, if extreme enough, can qualify for a disability, sure.
The parents' strategy was to enroll him in online school to manipulate his school work and use that to try for an IEP (which apparently can help with SSI cases).
Kid didn't qualify for IEP because our only evidence of any learning issue was the parents not sending him to class and then obviously manipulating his school work.
Mom threw a tantrum, then complained in a mutual Facebook group how concerned she now was about finances since they couldn't rely on a 6-year-old's SSI.

I'll get screwed out of about 60% of my SSN because I will have a public safety pension.  There are currently efforts to change the laws that take away my benefits.  Not really holding my breath.

Take my anecdote for what it's worth:
Years ago, wife and I helped put a Utah child molester behind bars.  He was accused of a dozen counts over the span of a year - abusing his niece.   It was an "aggravated" felony because he was in a position of trust.  Basically, extra horrible, carries extra penalties than just plain old child sex abuse.  He pled guilty to one count, the sentence was 5-life.  He was up for a parole hearing 4 years in, but he hadn't availed himself of any of the programs for sex offenders who want parole, so it was not granted.  He made parole the next year, a few months shy of a full 5 years.
I've heard stories of similar sentences for similar crimes in other states.

I think I might try this one. As much as I think Schindler is the man for all he did, I can't watch stuff like his titular movie.

Just finished Season One. Curse you, Backroads!

This is a rewatch for me, but it cycled back around into another viewing: tv series The Booth at the End. Consists entirely, and I mean entirely, of watching people chat in a diner booth. Guy hangs out there, and people that want something come to him, and he tells them to do things, and they report back. Kind of twisted at times, but really a fun watch if you like character-driven stuff.

The fam went and saw One Life last night.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Life_(2023_film)
I can highly, highly recommend it.  Everyone should know the story.  Inspiring and important reminder of how average folks can rise to the occasion.  Anthony Hopkins and all the other actors did an amazing job.  Easier to watch and less traumatizing/extreme/violent/shocking than Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan.   Excellent movie for older teens on up. 
In my life, as the son of a WWII vet, I've felt the pressing need to preserve and pass along the lessons my dad's generation learned.  This movie really really helped me forward that goal with my older daughter.

Greetings @JohnsonJones:
Back in the 80’s an international acclaimed economists (Milton Friedman) did an audit of the Social Security for then President Ragan.  His audit was somewhat unpopular – especially for the Democrats but it did upset Republicans as well.  Two of the biggest problems with the Social Security Department was the expanded use of the funds (for example the funding of Black Military Ops) and the exorbitant overhead costs (10 time the allowable overhead costs – by law – for privately funded retirement funds).
According to Friedman, there has never been a shortage of funds, rather poor management (including unfunded changes).  As near as I can tell - none of Milton's recomendations have been adopted.
 
The Traveler

The easiest solution is the one they will not choose.
The easiest solution is to raise taxes on Social Security, and a simple method is to make it so there is no limit on how much you make that can be taxed.  If you make 2 million in a year, it is taxed for Social Security.  At the same time, do NOT increase the limits on how much one can withdraw.
This action right here would probably extend SS for awhile longer.
Secondary would be to simply raise the retirement age.  Raise it to 70 or higher.  That also would extend it.
Now, I note that I am waaay past the SS age already, so many would probably be saying...okay Boomer.  You got your cake and now you want to keep everyone else from getting theirs...or something like that.
I admit I've been blessed in this regard, but if I live as long as I plan (I plan to go over 100!! no idea if I'll ever make it though), I'll be facing those shortages right along with others who haven't started their SS yet.
I think the most likely thing that will happen is that the politicians will continue to kick the can down the road until we are about a week from it going away.  Then they will all scramble (like they do with the Budget recently) only to discover this problem isn't as easy to fix...and that will be it.
I only hope I have enough money in my retirement accounts that I can get by if that ever happens (though with my luck, all stocks will fail, the banks will go bankrupt, and all the rest of my money will be gone as well, at which point I can only hope the Lord has appeared and we are living in millennial bliss by that point)(.

One concerning incident I was involved with as a teacher was a family trying to get their kid declared disabled in order to get SSI. No one in the family worked (Mom, Dad, and Grandma) and relied on an assortment of programs to survive.
Kid had ADHD, which, if extreme enough, can qualify for a disability, sure.
The parents' strategy was to enroll him in online school to manipulate his school work and use that to try for an IEP (which apparently can help with SSI cases).
Kid didn't qualify for IEP because our only evidence of any learning issue was the parents not sending him to class and then obviously manipulating his school work.
Mom threw a tantrum, then complained in a mutual Facebook group how concerned she now was about finances since they couldn't rely on a 6-year-old's SSI.

I already hear this has been a good career boost for her, and I'm happy for her.

What do people* not understand about “a world of pure imagination”?
 
*apply to as many different parties as you’d like