> If the purpose of society is not for propagation into the future, I’m not sure what is. that doesn't involve living together in a million dollar house and i

> If the purpose of society is not for propagation into the future, I’m not sure what is. that doesn't involve living together in a million dollar house and it hasn't happened for 99% of the time humans have been on this planet. mating and living under the same roof are two different concepts. you're conflating two concepts that are completely orthogonal. Anyway: society is the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community. In no way society means "propagation into the future" and "propagation into the future" in no way means "housing should be affordable only if you are married and live together with children". It would also otherwise mean that society in the past focused on the "mating thing" while it is clear they did not, priests, priestess, warriors, chastity rules embedded into religious or social norms, it looks to me that the most important trait of the society was to make it prosper, protect it from outside and share the labour that needed to be done in the most productive or the most "please the gods" way on the inside. Moreover since people living alone or not in a commitment are nowadays the relative majority, it's nearly 30% in the US and in my country is an overwhelming 33.2%, there are more singles than couples here, maybe it's time society adapts to the new paradigm, society wasn't invented by some superior entity that set the rules on how we should live, comply or die style, society reflects the way people already live, unless you live in Afghanistan under the rules of the Talibans. It means we are living in societies whose mechanics don't align with how people live, that's why it is not working for the people living in it and people cannot afford or are unhappy living in it.