Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Other mothers said that if they married, their household income would rise, costing them government benefits like food stamps and child care.
Unbelievable. Well. Not really. Afterall, look who's in charge these days? The "work requirement" is not even in place anymore to receive assistance....thanks to you know who! No wonder we're headed down the tubes as a nation!
You're right, let's get rid of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that way the poor and senior citizens aren't "more dependent" on government. They'll be dead, but at least they won't be "dependent" on government.
we should stop these cons and allow people to keep the money the earn for themselves.
You do realize everyone ends up dead, eventually, and in spite of welfare? lol
The "rate" doesn't necessarily imply that the actual number is siginficant. You understand that, right?
29% vs 70% are not even in the same ballpark.
I am less concerned about the actual percentage, for the validity of my point, then the actual rate of increase from the baseline of the 60's.
The THEORY, from the right, is that OOWLB cause things like high rates of crime and poverty, and hence, this is what causes dysfunction in the black community (see FOX news)...and not some mythical racism because racism has existed without impact or consequence.
That having been said, one would think that if the rate of such births were 8% of whites in 1960 and 29% today, more than triple the rate, then there should have been a discernible rise in the poverty rate, homicide rates, and the like, for whites since then. The white rate relative to blacks is irrelevant in regards to proving or disproving OOWLB role and responsibility as a root cause of socioeconomic dysfunction.
From my analysis, this debunks the theory that high OOWLB is the primary cause of socioeconomic dysfunction in the black community. That having been said, its worth noting that in 1960 blacks had about 3 times the rate of OOWLB as whites. Thus, whatever caused the difference in the rates back then is the real issue, because going forward the difference has simply been preserved. Both groups rate have gone up since the 60's.
I pointed this out numerous times. Since the early 60's, the rate of white OOWL births has risen FASTER than the rate for blacks.
OOWL births are given as the CAUSATION of most of black Americas socioeconomic dysfunction, and is used to discredit the role of the accrued impact of racism. Yet, if OOWL births is the cause of socioeconomic dysfunction in humans, why has not such dysfunction risen in the white community proportionately with the rise of OOWL births since the 60's? Why has not the white murder rate, poverty rates and the like risen to level much higher than in the early 60's when only a small percentage of whites had children out of Wedlock? Why is OOWL birth a causation for black dysfunction but OOWL births do not produce similar rates of dysfunction in whites? Granted, its true that the black rate is much higher, but if OOWL is truly the culprit then the significant rise in this behavior in whites, since the 60's, should be reflected in a significant rise in crime, poverty and the like, since the 60's, for whites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
The "rate" doesn't necessarily imply that the actual number is siginficant. You understand that, right?
29% vs 70% are not even in the same ballpark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant
I am less concerned about the actual percentage, for the validity of my point, then the actual rate of increase from the baseline of the 60's.
The THEORY, from the right, is that OOWLB cause things like high rates of crime and poverty, and hence, this is what causes dysfunction in the black community (see FOX news)...and not some mythical racism because racism has existed without impact or consequence.
That having been said, one would think that if the rate of such births were 8% of whites in 1960 and 29% today, more than triple the rate, then there should have been a discernible rise in the poverty rate, homicide rates, and the like, for whites since then. The white rate relative to blacks is irrelevant in regards to proving or disproving OOWLB role and responsibility as a root cause of socioeconomic dysfunction.
From my analysis, this debunks the theory that high OOWLB is the primary cause of socioeconomic dysfunction in the black community. That having been said, its worth noting that in 1960 blacks had about 3 times the rate of OOWLB as whites. Thus, whatever caused the difference in the rates back then is the real issue, because going forward the difference has simply been preserved. Both groups rate have gone up since the 60's.
Wanted to agree that Indentured Servant is right on in his/her assumption in regards to the OOW birth debate that goes on here in CD quite often.
The OOW birth for black women has not risen as fast since the 60s and the implementation of social programs (i.e. the Great Society and War on Poverty developments) than white women have, yet the socioeconomic ills facing whites is still less than those of black people.
But in taking race out of the equation, I actually do agree that the programs are one of the prime reasons why people do not get married anymore. People want their tax breaks and they want their food stamps and other social welfare program benefits.
I personally do feel that we should heavily reform the criteria for various programs and I feel we should get rid of the EITC for lower income workers because I do know women (a lot) who live with men and don't get married because they will no longer get a tax return. I will be honest and admit that I was with my current husband for a long time (about 7 years) before we got married and we did have a child and I did get a huge tax return, but I naively thought that was the norm for people with kids until I got back into my career after marrying and having another child and I was shocked that I no longer get a tax return like I used to (I used to get nearly $7000 a year for one child, if I wasn't married I would get about $10K now). So I feel that that proponent of the welfare to work act should be removed and if not removed should be maintained for people making less than $20K per year. When I got all that as a tax return, I made about $43K per year individually so now that I think about it, I don't think I should have received it since I was not what one would consider to be poor, plus my husband (boyfriend at the time) made an income similar to mine so it was just vacation money for us since we were well off financially compared to many other American families.
But OOW births I don't see going down any time soon. Reforming the programs would be a start but honestly many women don't feel they need a man anymore to have a family and even though I do value family and a father's role in the family, I can understand their views for the most part because us women are no longer dependent on a man "providing" for us and many won't put up with a bunch of bull from a guy trying to be all macho and needing his ego stroked all the time. Even though I have a good marriage, when we were younger, this was my line of thinking since my husband was young and way too "old fashioned" in my opinion as he frequently would tell me I had to do "women's work" and all other such nonsense lol. We have matured a lot together and were always committed to each other, but most of my lady friends have to deal with a lot of stupid comments from their men and many feel that they would be better off not married and free to live their lives without the burden of a relationship and I think this crosses socioeconomic and racial boundaries.
Wanted to agree that Indentured Servant is right on in his/her assumption in regards to the OOW birth debate that goes on here in CD quite often.
The OOW birth for black women has not risen as fast since the 60s and the implementation of social programs (i.e. the Great Society and War on Poverty developments) than white women have, yet the socioeconomic ills facing whites is still less than those of black people.
But in taking race out of the equation, I actually do agree that the programs are one of the prime reasons why people do not get married anymore. People want their tax breaks and they want their food stamps and other social welfare program benefits.
I personally do feel that we should heavily reform the criteria for various programs and I feel we should get rid of the EITC for lower income workers because I do know women (a lot) who live with men and don't get married because they will no longer get a tax return. I will be honest and admit that I was with my current husband for a long time (about 7 years) before we got married and we did have a child and I did get a huge tax return, but I naively thought that was the norm for people with kids until I got back into my career after marrying and having another child and I was shocked that I no longer get a tax return like I used to (I used to get nearly $7000 a year for one child, if I wasn't married I would get about $10K now). So I feel that that proponent of the welfare to work act should be removed and if not removed should be maintained for people making less than $20K per year. When I got all that as a tax return, I made about $43K per year individually so now that I think about it, I don't think I should have received it since I was not what one would consider to be poor, plus my husband (boyfriend at the time) made an income similar to mine so it was just vacation money for us since we were well off financially compared to many other American families.
But OOW births I don't see going down any time soon. Reforming the programs would be a start but honestly many women don't feel they need a man anymore to have a family and even though I do value family and a father's role in the family, I can understand their views for the most part because us women are no longer dependent on a man "providing" for us and many won't put up with a bunch of bull from a guy trying to be all macho and needing his ego stroked all the time. Even though I have a good marriage, when we were younger, this was my line of thinking since my husband was young and way too "old fashioned" in my opinion as he frequently would tell me I had to do "women's work" and all other such nonsense lol. We have matured a lot together and were always committed to each other, but most of my lady friends have to deal with a lot of stupid comments from their men and many feel that they would be better off not married and free to live their lives without the burden of a relationship and I think this crosses socioeconomic and racial boundaries.
I think one of the reasons that marriage has gone down in American SOCIETY, in general, is due to the changed role of women. The traditional role of the man was as provider and protector and society generally facilitated these roles by discrimination against women. Women were traditionally not to have jobs, but when they did, only certain type of jobs. This created a dependency on men and forced women to carry themselves and behave in a manner that would best secure a man who would provide for her.
Today most women do not need a man to provide for her, because they are more educated than in the past and most jobs are open to women more so than in the past. That is not to suggest that women are now free from employment discrimination, because that is not true. However, women today make enough money to take care of themselves, as well as their kids, if need be and those at the bottom of the economic ladder can get government assistance.
As a result of not NEEDING a man to be the provider.....many women do not carry themselves like they used to and men don't see them as "wife" material. Who wants to marry a women who slept with the football team? I know I am going to get jumped on for such a statement....but there is simply to much promiscuity, bedding on the first date, freaky stuff and the like going on with many women. No Thanks! I would not want to marry a women like that. All I would do with a women like that is hit it...and quit it.
And how many of those mothers have stopped to ask themselves how they're going to feed those unfortunate kids?
Many couples have children, without marrying. And that doesn't mean the children are going hungry, or the mother and child are on welfare. Did you ever meet your father?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
