THE CORRECT ANSWER
This is a deceptively simple question to answer, despite being an insurmountable problem:
“By wanting others to act against their self-interest in order to satisfy your self-interest, instead of you working at constructing an exchange, that is more valuable to both parties than the competing alternatives to that exchange.”
The problems arise because of the power and Pareto laws, meaning that opportunities tend to concentrate into those people who are able to make the best use of them because of knowledge, ability, relationships, and assets.
This means that many people can produce nothing worth exchanging – even just their time, attention, and labor. As such men rapidly run out of things worth exchanging and may resort to despair, drugs, crime, or war, while women can always assist in food production, caretaking, and childbearing and rearing (or prostitution for that matter).
So this means that men must climb an evolutionary status hierarchy in order to obtain exchanges (income) and status (mating privileges) necessary to capture a wife (reproduction).
In other words, this problem cannot be altered ever because it is an expression of evolutoin – even if by evolution we just mean resistance to dysgenic devolution.
The only solution to this problem of course is the impossible one: constraining reproduction to those who are employable – meaning that they have something to trade.
In this era of industrialization, this means many that were able to move from farm to factory will now have nothing to do. And they won’t like it very much. And so we begin the tragic process of post-growth decline.