Data analysis: more money == less sex, for the young

This has a simple explanation that the article doesn't account for, namely that the busier you are with work at a young age (and hence better income), the less time you have for sexual activity within or without an associated relationship.

That could be the most I've ever seen someone confuse correlation and causation in one article. He doesn't even understand the difference between the amount of money you have, and the amount of satisfaction you have with your financial situation. I know poor people who rarely think of money and rich people who worry about it all the time.<p>I have to stop clicking these links, they're always among the dumbest here.

To what confidence interval? The article is interesting, but light on the statistics. Since everything is nicely binned up into "satisfied with money" and "not satisfied," you could easily do a hypothesis test to reject that the two categories have the same mean sex rate.<p>Of course, an obvious extension of this research is to take financial and age distributions into account with one's statistical voyeurism (<a href="http://xkcd.com/563/" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/563/</a>).

Talk about a perfect example of correlation not equaling causation.<p>It could be a matter of priorities.<p>Or it could be a matter of risk taking.<p>Or it could be a matter of location (higher salaries and less intimacy in bigger cities).<p>A shocking study would be more money == less sex, for older men.

As much as the article claims that it's not conflating correlation with causation, this sort of sentence really throws some red flags for me:<p>"The moral is clear though - If you want to keep the fires burning into your golden years, get your financial affairs together early. (Not too early, though. Right around age 35 would be perfect.)"<p>Overall, the author seems to be forcing trends that simply aren't there. Looking at this data set, it seems just as likely that all of these trends can be explained with the idea that young people don't have as much money and have more sex than old people. The sex-per-year differential within any age and gender group is less than 5 times per year.

What's with all the sex stories lately? Spring is here, so hormones are flowing?

I call bullshit. I'm broke and still not getting any.

why do they assume satisfaction with financial situation equals financial situation? there are plenty of people making 6 figures that want more, and there are plenty of people making 40k that are happy with their lives.

All I know is if I were bartending, or working at starbucks, Id be getting laid far more often. As a hacker/entrepreneur, women don't play a significant role in my life.

To paraphrase Eldridge Cleaver, sex and power are one in the same. Poor folk comparatively get down more often because they cannot exert influence. The rich have less sex because they're too busy controlling others.