80% unemployed people are males, what do you think?

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, since last November, more than 80% of America's jobless figures are male. In Europe, too.　　By the end of 2009, a major global recession could cause 28 million of men to lose their jobs. The US stimulus package did not invest in big public projects like the new Deal. While some are investing in traditional male jobs such as infrastructure and high-speed rail, more money is flowing to education, health and other social services.　　In the United States, nearly half of biologists and doctors, 3/4 of health practitioners are women.　　Can you read something from the data? True, the legacy of the financial crisis will not be the collapse of Wall Street, nor the death of finance, which will continue to exist.　　No longer exist will be the rule of the big man. When US policymakers were asked why they did not stop the housing bubble in time, they often responded that the industry was the engine of job creation.　　Yes, there are many benefits to subsidizing the male sector, while the bursting of the housing bubble is a political suicide. Men are suffering from the agony of dying. The end of the age is near.　　It's true. For years, the world has quietly watched power tilt from male to female. Today, the Great Recession is transforming this evolutionary process into a revolution.　　The consequence would be a fatal blow to the "Men's Club" ——— the "Men's Club" of financial capitalism brought the world into the current economic catastrophe and would be a collective crisis for millions of male workers around the world. Men are suffering from life as dead. The impact of the economic crisis has been almost as men as the incredibly unbalanced ratio, so that economists and bloggers have called recessions bad. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, since last November, more than 80% of America's jobless figures are male. In Europe, too. Because the traditional male field of work (construction, heavy industry, etc.) has declined faster than the traditional female jobs (public affairs, health, education, etc.), the Great Recession has brought about 7 million unemployed men in Europe and America.　　By the end of 2009, a major global recession could cause 28 million of men to lose their jobs. The plight of men will only get worse, and the Great Recession has exacerbated the pain of globalisation. Allen Brind, an economist at Princeton, predicts that 28 million to 42 million of jobs in the United States are at risk of losing out on outsourced services. Worse, men's backwardness in education will make them more difficult to succeed in the era of knowledge-based economy.　　Soon, the proportion of male and female students in the United States will become 2:3, and the prospect of this imbalance exists in other developed countries as well. Not only have men been hit harder by the "yang", but they are still unprepared for the long-term psychological impact of unemployment, according to the American Journal of Public Health, where "financial strains due to unemployment" have a much greater mental impact on men than women.　　In other words, there will be a lot of depressed men on the street who are suffering from unemployment. The deepening of the financial crisis will be in the rightGrowing in the field of political power. The vote has been seen from the election. After the collapse of Iceland's economy, voters in Iceland have done the unprecedented thing: they have not only abandoned the male elites who watched the crisis, but even opted for an openly lesbian prime minister. "This is a reasonable response to the male-dominated investment banking ' positive war '," said Thomos Dorty, a woman head of only a handful of bank-funded Icelandic banks. 99% of them go to the same school, drive the same car, wear the same suit, and have the same attitude. It was they who brought us into this situation ——— and they thought it was fun. "Not long ago, Lithuania also elected a woman President ——— Dalia Grie Bag Grybauskaite, she is an experienced economist, karate black Belt." "Lithuania has made a choice: we will be saved by a woman," a prominent newspaper in the capital Vilnius on the day of his election. "Of course not all countries are reacting in the same line and sweeping the male villains." But the rise in women's status is indeed happening around the world. The speed at which power is tilted from men to women is being accelerated by the economic crisis.　　More and more people are aware that attacking, adventurous male behavior ——— This is a magic weapon for men to gain power ——— in an increasingly globalized world has been proven to be destructive and sustainable. We can indeed say that the legacy of the Great Recession is not the collapse of Wall Street, nor the death of finance, nor the death of capitalism. They will all continue to exist. And no longer exist will be the big Man (rule). In the face of this fact, men are bound to make choices in acceptance or rebellion.　　And their choices will have a seismic effect on all humans.　　Support for male policies leading to a US housing bubble? For years it has been proved that, as behavioural economists Blade Bade and Trens Ouden explicitly pointed out in 2001: In financial markets, all the factors that could lead to overconfidence investments: age, marriage, and so on, the most obvious culprit is the Y chromosome.　　It is now clear that men have not only created the conditions for the financial crisis, but have also been fuelled by another group of male partners in the political circle. The real estate bubble that is ravaging the West is an obvious example. The real estate bubble actually represents an economic policy that glosses over the bleak prospects of blue-collar jobs. In the United States, the boom in the land industry has created well-paid jobs for low-skilled men ——— 814 dollars a week, and men's share in this area is as high as 97.5%. Instead, women earn only 510 dollars a week, compared to major jobs such as nursing workers, who earn about 690 dollars a week. The housing bubble created about 3 million jobs for the construction industry, according to the U.S. Labor Department. Other male-dominated industries, such as real estate, cement production, truck transportation and construction, are also very well paid. These well-paid jobs guarantee that men are better off than women in the economy. When policymakers were asked why they did not stop the housing bubble in time, they often responded that the industry was the engine of job creation.Yes, there are many benefits to subsidizing the male sector, while the bursting of the housing bubble is a political suicide. The real estate bubble is just one of a series of policies that support men, and Roosevelt's New deal is the most powerful. As historian Gwendorin Mink points out, during the peak of the Great Depression of the 1933, 75% of the 15 million unemployed people in the United States were men. Men's role in making bread for their families has been subverted, and the pressure for a return to male status is also high. The new deal caters to this and strives to create jobs for men. Keeping women at home seems to be a symbol of male status.　　Historian Stephanie Cornes that the Great Depression and the new deal reinforce the traditional role of men and women, that is, women are promised economic security in exchange for the State to consolidate and support only male economic strength. Today, this exchange is no longer possible. No government intervention in the economy can bring about such a deal again. The US stimulus package did not invest in big public projects like the new Deal. While some are investing in traditional male jobs such as infrastructure and high-speed rail, more money is flowing to education, health and other social services. In the United States, nearly half of biologists and doctors, 3/4 of health practitioners are women.　　President Obama's speech to the New York Times most clearly confirms the fact that power is transitioning from men to women: although construction and handicrafts do not disappear together, they account for only a small part of the overall economy, so women will likely be the main source of the family economy, like men, or more likely. This means that the government's problem of excessive compensation for men is becoming a problem of male unemployment and lack of government guidance. Last year, the Journal of Sociology and Medicine found that long-term unemployment was a harbinger of alcoholism for men aged 27-35 years. These young male losers don't have to think about marriage anymore, "workers see their jobs going overseas, or disappearing into computer chips," said sociologist Andrew Cherlin, "and we're going to see very few young people with a wife."　　"So the constraints that marriage can bring to men will disappear," he said.　　It is expected that there will be a painful period of power transfer after the opening of the male era, and also on the men's decision: they have two choices. The first is to choose adaptation, to accept women as equal partners, to absorb this new culture, to create new institutions and to make equal arrangements.　　This is not to say that men will become urban beauty men, football rankings and beer sales will plummet, but the old men will be nirvana regeneration. Economist Bezy Stevenson describes the decline of a marriage that favours "consumption" in men and Women: "Men and women are equally engaged in producing and sharing ideas about how to consume and live."　　"Such marriages will be more permanent and more evenly distributed in household chores," he said. Educated men have greater adaptability, not only in family life but also in economic life. In 2004, economist Eric Goulde found that marriages tend to make men (especially low-incomeMen) take their careers more seriously and are more willing to learn and work hard to become white-collar workers.　　This may just be an optimistic idea, but it's not all far-fetched. The second option is confrontation. Some men are fighting the tide of history at the expense of their own future.　　In fact, men who do not know how to resolve anger are likely to be at the root of extremism: Think of the Russians who still miss the KGB, not just for the glory they lost in the past? In the past 10 years, although the female population of Russia is 10.04 million higher than that of men, they have not turned into political or economic power. After the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, women were considered housewives. Russian men, affected by the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the 10 recession, are less able to adapt to the new world. "There are a lot of frustrated men who smoke and drink all the day," Martha Lippman, a Moscow writer.　　Given the high rate of mortality, incarceration, alcoholism and low education, only a small number of Russian men are able and willing to work. The proportion of women working in Russia is almost higher than in any other country.　　However, Elena of the Moscow Centre for Gender Studies points out that, as of 2000, Russian women earn only half as much as men in equal jobs. A tempting idea is that the end of the male era is only a cyclical adjustment, and that the male financial world will soon return to normal. Temptation, but not true.　　The far-reaching effects of "positive competition", mystical financial instruments, and pure capitalism will be tamed forever. While men are blamed for the current economic crisis, much of the discussion remains focused on the impact of the recession on women. Globally, women are higher than men before and after the economic crisis. Many will agree with a report by the United Nations earlier this year: "The economic crisis has brought more burdens to women, more concentrated in the more vulnerable sectors of employment, and often with lower social security and unemployment guarantees, and unequal access to and control over economic and financial resources than men." "This concern is right, and it is not inconsistent with the male ——— not just the fallen bankers ——— the idea of losing to women after the new world emerges from the economic crisis."　　As women begin to gain more social, economic and political power, this will be a revolution that human civilization has never experienced. This is not to say that women and men will be fighting across armed roadblocks. The conflict will be in a delicate form, and the heart and will are the main battlefield. But make no mistake: the axis of global conflict will no longer be an ideological confrontation, or competing geopolitical or civilized conflict, nor will it be a race or a nation, but a gender. We do not have a precedent for the male era. However, this may be expected to be a painful, uneven, and very intense transition period.