What do you think?
Rate this book
Men without Work: Post-Pandemic Edition
Nicholas Eberstadt’s landmark 2016 study, Men Without Work, cast a spotlight on the collapse of work for men in modern America. Rosy reports of low unemployment rates and “full or near full employment” conditions, he contends, were overlooking a quiet, continuing crisis: Depression-era work rates for American men of “prime working age” (25–54).
The grim truth: over six million prime-age men were neither working nor looking for work. Conventional unemployment measures ignored these labor force dropouts, but their ranks had been rising relentlessly for half a century. Eberstadt’s unflinching analysis was, in the words of The New York Times, “an unsettling portrait not just of male unemployment, but also of lives deeply alienated from civil society.”
The famed American work ethic was once near universal: men of sound mind and body took pride in contributing to their communities and families. No longer, warned Eberstadt. And now—six years and one catastrophic pandemic later—the problem has not only worsened: it has seemingly been spreading among prime-age women and workers over fifty-five.
In a brand new introduction, Eberstadt explains how the government’s response to Covid-19 inadvertently exacerbated the flight from work in America. From indiscriminate pandemic shutdowns to almost unconditional “unemployment” benefits, Americans were essentially paid not to work.
Thus today, despite the vaccine rollouts, inexplicable numbers of working age men and women are sitting on the sidelines while over 11 million jobs go unfilled. Current low rates of unemployment, touted by pundits and politicians, are grievously misleading. The truth is that fewer prime-age American men are looking for readily available work than at any previous juncture in our history. And others may be catching the “Men Without Work” virus too.
Given the devastating economic impact of the Covid calamity and the unforeseen aftershocks yet to come, this reissue of Eberstadt’s groundbreaking work is timelier than ever.
The grim truth: over six million prime-age men were neither working nor looking for work. Conventional unemployment measures ignored these labor force dropouts, but their ranks had been rising relentlessly for half a century. Eberstadt’s unflinching analysis was, in the words of The New York Times, “an unsettling portrait not just of male unemployment, but also of lives deeply alienated from civil society.”
The famed American work ethic was once near universal: men of sound mind and body took pride in contributing to their communities and families. No longer, warned Eberstadt. And now—six years and one catastrophic pandemic later—the problem has not only worsened: it has seemingly been spreading among prime-age women and workers over fifty-five.
In a brand new introduction, Eberstadt explains how the government’s response to Covid-19 inadvertently exacerbated the flight from work in America. From indiscriminate pandemic shutdowns to almost unconditional “unemployment” benefits, Americans were essentially paid not to work.
Thus today, despite the vaccine rollouts, inexplicable numbers of working age men and women are sitting on the sidelines while over 11 million jobs go unfilled. Current low rates of unemployment, touted by pundits and politicians, are grievously misleading. The truth is that fewer prime-age American men are looking for readily available work than at any previous juncture in our history. And others may be catching the “Men Without Work” virus too.
Given the devastating economic impact of the Covid calamity and the unforeseen aftershocks yet to come, this reissue of Eberstadt’s groundbreaking work is timelier than ever.
215 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 19, 2022
163 people are currently reading
955 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
October 14, 2022
Men Without Work, Post-Pandemic Edition was first published this in 2016, and then again in 2022, a post-pandemic edition. Nicholas Eberstadt, one of my favorite think tank fellows, writes that American men are suffering Depression-era employment rates. The number of Not In the Labor Force (NILFs), prime-age males 24-55), from 1965-2022 grew three times as fast as the male population. Today there are more than 7 million of these men, 11% of that population. From 1948-2015, the work rate (20+) of these men declined from 85.8% to 68.2%. The book answers the first question you’ll have: How do they support themselves?
It also deals with the argument: So what? America’s rich. Working isn’t the point of life, etc. Leisure is a luxury good, we can afford more of it But there’s a difference between Leisure vs. idleness! Leisure is regenerative, idleness put to bad use can ruin you. Hence the Deaths of Despair that we witness in the past decade or so. Plus, if wealth explained this, then why is the USA Labor Force Participation Rate lower than all OECD countries, save Italy. It’s not a skills shortage:
2/5 of these guys have had some college, and 1/5 are college graduates. Since there are so many job openings, all you have do is show up every day, drug free. Perhaps that’s asking too much? Nick discusses the “disability archipelago,” which influences male behavior and how “mass incarceration” impact this trend. He also discusses what are these NILFS are doing on a daily basis. Such as, 2,400 self-reported screen hours in 2020, not volunteering, not in education, not taking care of family, etc. According to self-reported time surveys they seem to be gambling, using tobacco and drugs. This is sloth, not “Earned success.” In the spirit of Charles Murray’s witticism: “I don’t do solutions,” Nick does offer three areas to pay closer attention to:
1. Supply-side: American business, job-creating capacity
2. Reduce incentives to non-work, especially disability
3. Bringing convicts and felons back into economy/society
This is a thought-provoking book of a problem that no one is talking much about. It even contains two chapters by dissenters who challenge the author, and his rebuttal to them.
We had the great good fortune of interviewing Nicholas Eberstadt on this book, along with his 1995 book, The Tyranny of Numbers on our radio show, The Soul of Enterprise. You can listen to that show here:
https://www.thesoulofenterprise.com/t...
It also deals with the argument: So what? America’s rich. Working isn’t the point of life, etc. Leisure is a luxury good, we can afford more of it But there’s a difference between Leisure vs. idleness! Leisure is regenerative, idleness put to bad use can ruin you. Hence the Deaths of Despair that we witness in the past decade or so. Plus, if wealth explained this, then why is the USA Labor Force Participation Rate lower than all OECD countries, save Italy. It’s not a skills shortage:
2/5 of these guys have had some college, and 1/5 are college graduates. Since there are so many job openings, all you have do is show up every day, drug free. Perhaps that’s asking too much? Nick discusses the “disability archipelago,” which influences male behavior and how “mass incarceration” impact this trend. He also discusses what are these NILFS are doing on a daily basis. Such as, 2,400 self-reported screen hours in 2020, not volunteering, not in education, not taking care of family, etc. According to self-reported time surveys they seem to be gambling, using tobacco and drugs. This is sloth, not “Earned success.” In the spirit of Charles Murray’s witticism: “I don’t do solutions,” Nick does offer three areas to pay closer attention to:
1. Supply-side: American business, job-creating capacity
2. Reduce incentives to non-work, especially disability
3. Bringing convicts and felons back into economy/society
This is a thought-provoking book of a problem that no one is talking much about. It even contains two chapters by dissenters who challenge the author, and his rebuttal to them.
We had the great good fortune of interviewing Nicholas Eberstadt on this book, along with his 1995 book, The Tyranny of Numbers on our radio show, The Soul of Enterprise. You can listen to that show here:
https://www.thesoulofenterprise.com/t...
January 26, 2023
Nicholas provides an in-depth look oar the labor maker over much of the last century with a focus on the last half century since the 1960s. The focus is on men leaving the labor force in droves. While there are many claimed reasons, key points include the lack of new businesses, generous safety nets, and many connects with the criminal justice system.
These are important insights which should be considered but people are no doubt better off today than every before. There does appear to be too much government influence in the labor market which distorts people’s incentive to work so the place to start, in my view, is to reduce the size and scope of government that infiltrates these decisions to work and instead let people prosper by making choices which are best for them that could be fewer men ultimately in labor force.
But we must know that comes at a cost to families, governments, and economy. Work brings dignity, respect, and purpose, and ultimately I believe it God’s command for us to be fruitful and multiply, so work should be out back at the front of our society in many ways.
These are important insights which should be considered but people are no doubt better off today than every before. There does appear to be too much government influence in the labor market which distorts people’s incentive to work so the place to start, in my view, is to reduce the size and scope of government that infiltrates these decisions to work and instead let people prosper by making choices which are best for them that could be fewer men ultimately in labor force.
But we must know that comes at a cost to families, governments, and economy. Work brings dignity, respect, and purpose, and ultimately I believe it God’s command for us to be fruitful and multiply, so work should be out back at the front of our society in many ways.
January 6, 2023
An in-depth exploration of one of the major issues in labor economics: the large and growing percentage of prime-age men opting out of work. Eberstadt describes this growing phenomenon with lots and lots of graphs and data. He first gives the evidence for growing numbers of "un-working" men. He then describes the demographics of this group. He looks at what these men do and how they are able to do it without working. He also looks at some of the possible causes. Lastly, he briefly suggests some prescriptions to help reduce this problem.
One of the more interesting aspects of the book is that after the last chapter, there are two additional chapters by critics of book, and then a response by Eberstadt to the critics. The critics dispute aspects of Eberstadt's description of the problem, his explanation of the possible causes, and his prescriptions. This added a lot to my understanding of the ideas of the book.
It's a bit wonky and data-heavy for most readers; Eberstadt has appeared on any number of podcasts discussing the ideas in the book (that's how I heard about it). And unless you really want to dig into the data, those are probably sufficient to get the idea and the book is not necessary.
One of the more interesting aspects of the book is that after the last chapter, there are two additional chapters by critics of book, and then a response by Eberstadt to the critics. The critics dispute aspects of Eberstadt's description of the problem, his explanation of the possible causes, and his prescriptions. This added a lot to my understanding of the ideas of the book.
It's a bit wonky and data-heavy for most readers; Eberstadt has appeared on any number of podcasts discussing the ideas in the book (that's how I heard about it). And unless you really want to dig into the data, those are probably sufficient to get the idea and the book is not necessary.
October 17, 2025
I would consider this an important read about men absenting themselves from the workforce.
January 20, 2023
Dry but important
January 21, 2023
I question the author’s decision to use the acronyms NILF and CEX so many times in quick succession. Some wild facts in here (US is behind every Western European country other than Italy in terms of prime male labor force participation!!). Honestly, this is a huge societal problem and we need to crank on both labor demand and supply side solutions—especially, imo, criminal justice reform / return-to-work; build critical things in America like EVs and batteries; unions; teach boys/men better social skills for service sector jobs and to improve stability of family life.
January 14, 2023
Lots of charts and graphs
While the author did a great job of identifying the problem, not enough energy was devoted to laying out a viable solution. Once I got about half way through the book I started skimming pages hoping the author would eventually get passed citing charts, studies and surveys and get into a discussion on a solution. The book never really got there. Its my hope that someone else picks up where this book falls short and offers some viable solutions. The author of this book sold me on the problem early in the book. Unfortunately we never get around to fixing it.
While the author did a great job of identifying the problem, not enough energy was devoted to laying out a viable solution. Once I got about half way through the book I started skimming pages hoping the author would eventually get passed citing charts, studies and surveys and get into a discussion on a solution. The book never really got there. Its my hope that someone else picks up where this book falls short and offers some viable solutions. The author of this book sold me on the problem early in the book. Unfortunately we never get around to fixing it.
November 16, 2025
TLDR: This book reads as a narrow-minded criticism of social programs that support our most marginalized Americans while conveniently ignoring how corporate America exploits its workers. It's an uncomfortable read that I found little to agree on as a fellow economist more interested in supporting our working populace than our ever-growing capitalist greed-driven economy.
Nicholas Eberstadt is an American Economist who obtained his training at Harvard and the London School of Economics; his current work includes advising on the National Bureau of Asian Research, the visiting committee at the Harvard School of Public Health, and membership on the World Economic Forum. Most notably, he is the Chair for Political Economy in the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right think tank that advocates in favor of private enterprise, limited government, and democratic capitalism.
In the first three pages of his introduction alone, Eberstadt declares a number of claims that may not entirely be statistically inaccurate, but are abundantly charged with conservative ideology.
First, he compares inter- and post-COVID-19 pandemic unemployment levels to the Great Depression. In 2021, male adult unemployment hovered at 5.1% whereas between 1933 and 1938, unemployment rates fluctuated between 19 and 25%. Moreover, despite being a book all about statistics and analysis, he doesn’t cite this claim, and only reinforces it by citing the number of job openings that grew over the pandemic, seemingly comparing those numbers to the depression nearly a century prior. 3.9M jobs, as he puts it, is comparable to the Depression-era 1930s. However, back then, women were working in drastically fewer numbers, racial minorities had fewer rights governing their participation in the economy, and the country’s population was less than 130M, nearly a third of what it is today. Eberstadt is either deliberately misleading the reader by ignoring all of these realities in his claims, or is authentically and drastically misunderstanding the nation’s economic realities of both then and now, despite being a world-class economist.
Second, he cites raising unemployment as a fault of deteriorating American work ethic, before laying any consideration to the worker’s natural opposition to working in unsafe, unjust, or unappealing work conditions in an otherwise highly pro-business, anti-union, anti-worker nation state. Even as he notes that by the 1960s, male unemployment steadily decreases over each passing decade. Incidentally, women have been entering the workforce in greater numbers over the same period of time, but this fact is overshadowed by the criticism that somehow men and their work ethic are instead suffering. To his credit, Eberstadt is able to concede that technological innovations and disruptions, outsourcing, lower demand in unskilled labor, and a general decline all contribute to increased levels of unemployment. Nevertheless, he continues to double down by noting if there are jobs available (11M he cites) and men to work them (7M he cites), then the concepts of job supply and job demand must be overstated. I find it baffling that an economist cannot comprehend any other reason why a worker would not be able to or willing to access a job; what of poor wages, inaccessibility to education and training, poor working conditions, the list goes on. Yet none of these possibilities are mentioned, with only a crisis of enthusiasm cited. Eberstadt even devolves his argument into a thorough criticism of the “U.S. Welfare State” that provides an overabundance of social safety nets that actively disincentivize motivations to work – another capitalist, conservative talking point made by wealthy and scholarly elites who have never had to live off of disability and/or unemployment insurance payments. J.D. Vance’s tone-deaf Hillbilly Elegy is even quoted in these claims, further attempting to reinforce the idea that a majority of individuals receiving assistance are “gaming” the system. Yet, naturally, nobody bats an eye when the ultra-wealthy “game” the system; it only appears to be the poor, marginalized groups that are worthy of criticism.
Third, he cites that if the total economic output of the United States were actually divided evenly, every family of four in the country would have earned $1.7M in the year 2021; however, instead of criticizing wealth inequality, Eberstadt uses this measure to instead complain that somehow, even with private wealth growing at a rate of 3% per year (his own statistic), the American economy is actually fairing poorly compared to the postwar era of the late 1940s and 1950s. This claim reveals an otherwise toxic longing for exponential, unceasing growth that is pernicious among zealous capitalists.
Eberstadt proceeds with the rest of his book to argue the following:
- The compact majority of people who are unemployed or not in the labor force (NILF) simply don’t want to work because they are dependent on the robust American welfare-state.
- Unemployment insurance, disability payments, and social security all actively contribute to poisoning our labor supply by making people dependent on social benefits and making them lazy.
- Unemployed people are idle, and not working hard enough to find work.
- There are productive and unproductive uses of free time, and it is only acceptable for people to be productive. Resting, socializing, and turning to hobbies is to be frowned upon.
- People with criminal records are less likely to re-enter the labor force, and it’s their own fault.
Never at any point does the author even come to acknowledge any of the following:
- Wage stagnation and raising costs of living
- Skyrocketing corporate profits in spite of unemployment rates
- Barriers to job entry, education, and training
- Societal discrimination
- Conditions of work environments and work cultures that are harmful to workers
- Treatment and status of labor unions
- Wealth inequality and disparities
- Mental Health epidemics across lower and middle class Americans
The text is extremely close-minded and dismissive of the plight of both American and Foreign workers that disguises itself with pretty numbers to avoid the revelation that it's just more capitalistic death cult propaganda.
Nicholas Eberstadt is an American Economist who obtained his training at Harvard and the London School of Economics; his current work includes advising on the National Bureau of Asian Research, the visiting committee at the Harvard School of Public Health, and membership on the World Economic Forum. Most notably, he is the Chair for Political Economy in the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right think tank that advocates in favor of private enterprise, limited government, and democratic capitalism.
In the first three pages of his introduction alone, Eberstadt declares a number of claims that may not entirely be statistically inaccurate, but are abundantly charged with conservative ideology.
First, he compares inter- and post-COVID-19 pandemic unemployment levels to the Great Depression. In 2021, male adult unemployment hovered at 5.1% whereas between 1933 and 1938, unemployment rates fluctuated between 19 and 25%. Moreover, despite being a book all about statistics and analysis, he doesn’t cite this claim, and only reinforces it by citing the number of job openings that grew over the pandemic, seemingly comparing those numbers to the depression nearly a century prior. 3.9M jobs, as he puts it, is comparable to the Depression-era 1930s. However, back then, women were working in drastically fewer numbers, racial minorities had fewer rights governing their participation in the economy, and the country’s population was less than 130M, nearly a third of what it is today. Eberstadt is either deliberately misleading the reader by ignoring all of these realities in his claims, or is authentically and drastically misunderstanding the nation’s economic realities of both then and now, despite being a world-class economist.
Second, he cites raising unemployment as a fault of deteriorating American work ethic, before laying any consideration to the worker’s natural opposition to working in unsafe, unjust, or unappealing work conditions in an otherwise highly pro-business, anti-union, anti-worker nation state. Even as he notes that by the 1960s, male unemployment steadily decreases over each passing decade. Incidentally, women have been entering the workforce in greater numbers over the same period of time, but this fact is overshadowed by the criticism that somehow men and their work ethic are instead suffering. To his credit, Eberstadt is able to concede that technological innovations and disruptions, outsourcing, lower demand in unskilled labor, and a general decline all contribute to increased levels of unemployment. Nevertheless, he continues to double down by noting if there are jobs available (11M he cites) and men to work them (7M he cites), then the concepts of job supply and job demand must be overstated. I find it baffling that an economist cannot comprehend any other reason why a worker would not be able to or willing to access a job; what of poor wages, inaccessibility to education and training, poor working conditions, the list goes on. Yet none of these possibilities are mentioned, with only a crisis of enthusiasm cited. Eberstadt even devolves his argument into a thorough criticism of the “U.S. Welfare State” that provides an overabundance of social safety nets that actively disincentivize motivations to work – another capitalist, conservative talking point made by wealthy and scholarly elites who have never had to live off of disability and/or unemployment insurance payments. J.D. Vance’s tone-deaf Hillbilly Elegy is even quoted in these claims, further attempting to reinforce the idea that a majority of individuals receiving assistance are “gaming” the system. Yet, naturally, nobody bats an eye when the ultra-wealthy “game” the system; it only appears to be the poor, marginalized groups that are worthy of criticism.
Third, he cites that if the total economic output of the United States were actually divided evenly, every family of four in the country would have earned $1.7M in the year 2021; however, instead of criticizing wealth inequality, Eberstadt uses this measure to instead complain that somehow, even with private wealth growing at a rate of 3% per year (his own statistic), the American economy is actually fairing poorly compared to the postwar era of the late 1940s and 1950s. This claim reveals an otherwise toxic longing for exponential, unceasing growth that is pernicious among zealous capitalists.
Eberstadt proceeds with the rest of his book to argue the following:
- The compact majority of people who are unemployed or not in the labor force (NILF) simply don’t want to work because they are dependent on the robust American welfare-state.
- Unemployment insurance, disability payments, and social security all actively contribute to poisoning our labor supply by making people dependent on social benefits and making them lazy.
- Unemployed people are idle, and not working hard enough to find work.
- There are productive and unproductive uses of free time, and it is only acceptable for people to be productive. Resting, socializing, and turning to hobbies is to be frowned upon.
- People with criminal records are less likely to re-enter the labor force, and it’s their own fault.
Never at any point does the author even come to acknowledge any of the following:
- Wage stagnation and raising costs of living
- Skyrocketing corporate profits in spite of unemployment rates
- Barriers to job entry, education, and training
- Societal discrimination
- Conditions of work environments and work cultures that are harmful to workers
- Treatment and status of labor unions
- Wealth inequality and disparities
- Mental Health epidemics across lower and middle class Americans
The text is extremely close-minded and dismissive of the plight of both American and Foreign workers that disguises itself with pretty numbers to avoid the revelation that it's just more capitalistic death cult propaganda.
October 3, 2022
illuminating a largely hidden problem of millions of men missing in the workforce
Shining light on a topic not often discussed and mostly hidden from view. With room for debate the ‘shining of the light’ offers sight on the issue of men falling outside the of the life path of work, gives insights into its size, thought on its causes and a starting point for thinking on a direction for changing the curve.
The harsh link of the crime and punishment culture contribution to this issue is a painful reminder of the lives and futures lost of whole groups of our often young men, impacting not just these men but also families and communities. Risking an negative inheritance for the future.
Shining light on a topic not often discussed and mostly hidden from view. With room for debate the ‘shining of the light’ offers sight on the issue of men falling outside the of the life path of work, gives insights into its size, thought on its causes and a starting point for thinking on a direction for changing the curve.
The harsh link of the crime and punishment culture contribution to this issue is a painful reminder of the lives and futures lost of whole groups of our often young men, impacting not just these men but also families and communities. Risking an negative inheritance for the future.
October 5, 2022
Love the data collection and thoroughness. Not sure on the conclusions and qualitative recommendations on how to get this group of men into the workforce.
October 14, 2022
There's just something refreshing about reading an economist's take on the "why are things the way that they are" question.
May 1, 2023
Documents the low (by post-WW II standards and by international standards) rate of participation in the labor force by "prime-age" (defined as 25-54, corroborating my subjective sense that I'm well past my prime) men in the US.
Some interesting time use diary data to bolster his contention that those who have opted out are not using the freed up time to care for children or elders, nor to volunteer in the community, nor to participate in organized religion, but instead........to watch TV and play video games.
Borders on distasteful (to me) scorn for these men when tallying up how many are on disability -- if the kind of job for which your limited education qualifies you is less available than it used to be (manufacturing), and/or you don't live in a "ban the box" community and have a hard time getting hired b/c you have a prison record from our days of incarcerating everybody (esp. men of color), and Clinton-era welfare reform mostly dried up other sources of assistance, it's not amazing that you'd turn to SSDI.
Liked the feature of letting two economists who disagree with him as to the causes and cures take a shot at rebuttal, though predictably author gets last word. interesting point emerging in that debate about how for all its other downsides the military draft used to solve the employment problem for lots of young men.
More generally, a good reminder that what data we collect and publicize shapes perceptions. The unemployment rate is probably 20x as well-known as the labor force participation rate, but there are by this account triple the number of not-in-labor-force men as officially unemployed men.
Some interesting time use diary data to bolster his contention that those who have opted out are not using the freed up time to care for children or elders, nor to volunteer in the community, nor to participate in organized religion, but instead........to watch TV and play video games.
Borders on distasteful (to me) scorn for these men when tallying up how many are on disability -- if the kind of job for which your limited education qualifies you is less available than it used to be (manufacturing), and/or you don't live in a "ban the box" community and have a hard time getting hired b/c you have a prison record from our days of incarcerating everybody (esp. men of color), and Clinton-era welfare reform mostly dried up other sources of assistance, it's not amazing that you'd turn to SSDI.
Liked the feature of letting two economists who disagree with him as to the causes and cures take a shot at rebuttal, though predictably author gets last word. interesting point emerging in that debate about how for all its other downsides the military draft used to solve the employment problem for lots of young men.
More generally, a good reminder that what data we collect and publicize shapes perceptions. The unemployment rate is probably 20x as well-known as the labor force participation rate, but there are by this account triple the number of not-in-labor-force men as officially unemployed men.
February 13, 2023
I think Men Without Work is one of the most depressing, but eye-opening books I have read in a long time. It highlights the alarming problem of Americans deciding not to work. The book focuses on men, but it is also an issue for women as well.
It is a great read because the book is more of an analysis of what is happening, but unsure as to exactly why and how to solve the problem. It made me think about what could skew the data for 10 million men to choose not to have jobs...perhaps college students not working, early retirement, more stay-at-home fathers, Twitch streamers, etc., but the book acknowledges all of those possibilities. It also focused on what are the men doing in their free time. Are they being productive members of society or focusing on families and chores, that does not seem to be the case.
I left wanting answers and learning what could be the root cause...and what are these men doing with their time each day? Which is exactly what I think the book's mission was.
I give it 4 stars because the sheer amount of data and numbers can be difficult for readers to comprehend sometimes. I think the book was a lot better in the later chapters and a bit easier to follow. I would definitely recommend.
It is a great read because the book is more of an analysis of what is happening, but unsure as to exactly why and how to solve the problem. It made me think about what could skew the data for 10 million men to choose not to have jobs...perhaps college students not working, early retirement, more stay-at-home fathers, Twitch streamers, etc., but the book acknowledges all of those possibilities. It also focused on what are the men doing in their free time. Are they being productive members of society or focusing on families and chores, that does not seem to be the case.
I left wanting answers and learning what could be the root cause...and what are these men doing with their time each day? Which is exactly what I think the book's mission was.
I give it 4 stars because the sheer amount of data and numbers can be difficult for readers to comprehend sometimes. I think the book was a lot better in the later chapters and a bit easier to follow. I would definitely recommend.
December 10, 2024
What a frustrating book! On the one hand, I appreciated all the data on just how many people are "Not In the Labor Force" (Roughly $7+ million, depending on how and who you count.) It helps explain how the low unemployment rates and rosy job reports I read about do not map to what I see on the streets of NYC.
But the moralizing! The author makes it clear that it's a problem of work ethic.
“An earlier era had terms for sturdy me who chose to sit on the economic sidelines, living off the toil or bounty of others. None were kind or forgiving.”
The phrase "flight from work" is used over and over. And "their worklessness is largely voluntary.” It's a moral disease, it seems, more than a systemic or economic one: "This “Men without work affliction” may be spreading to groups previously resistant to it."
But...! I applaud the author for including two opposing opinions as a Part Two in the 2nd edition. These opinions agree with his data but not with the causes. I was amazed to find this here as well as a civil, fact-based response from the author to the two critiques. Bravo.
But the moralizing! The author makes it clear that it's a problem of work ethic.
“An earlier era had terms for sturdy me who chose to sit on the economic sidelines, living off the toil or bounty of others. None were kind or forgiving.”
The phrase "flight from work" is used over and over. And "their worklessness is largely voluntary.” It's a moral disease, it seems, more than a systemic or economic one: "This “Men without work affliction” may be spreading to groups previously resistant to it."
But...! I applaud the author for including two opposing opinions as a Part Two in the 2nd edition. These opinions agree with his data but not with the causes. I was amazed to find this here as well as a civil, fact-based response from the author to the two critiques. Bravo.
November 7, 2024
This study speaks to an eye-opening reality: men in the prime of life are steadily leaving the workforce and seemingly not coming back. Eberstadt provides solid research for this phenomenon but is short on solutions. He does call attention to the problem and offers several potential causes. In his final chapter, he asserts, "It is high time for American citizens and policymakers to recognize the American male's postwar flight from work for what it is: a grave social ill (p. 180)." Disappointingly, despite the new edition, Eberstadt does not spend much time discussing the effects of Covid-19 on men's flight from work. The study is primarily based on data from 2016.
February 27, 2025
Book reminds me why I didn’t go further in my economics studies! Lots of stats - too many. Doesn’t easily flow. Reads like someone shoved 200 references into ChatGPT and asked it to spit out a book.
I expected a sociological analysis, not someone recounting all the studies they had read. Thanks, I could have also read those analysis!
I do not recommend
I expected a sociological analysis, not someone recounting all the studies they had read. Thanks, I could have also read those analysis!
I do not recommend
abandoned
October 8, 2024Stopped at 27% (Pg. 60)
Wish I could like this book. It speaks of an overlooked matter of importance which should be more talked about. Unfortunately, it continuously bombards you with statistics and graphs, making it hard and tedious to remain committed to.
Wish I could like this book. It speaks of an overlooked matter of importance which should be more talked about. Unfortunately, it continuously bombards you with statistics and graphs, making it hard and tedious to remain committed to.
August 29, 2024
Chock full of data, this book seeks to illustrate the astonishing high number of able bodied men in the US who are not working nor seeking employment.
Very interesting and deeply saddening.
Very interesting and deeply saddening.
June 11, 2025
Must read. Well written. This is a very big problem in America.
December 7, 2024
What do people do when not working? Why is it less community oriented?
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews