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.
Except it was 75% when they stopped providing data, which was what I said. I did not talk about what it is today.
What are you providing is not state data. It is a survey done by the US government.
And nowhere is this compared to the marriage rate, which is lower in California. How can you make a conclusion before you even have done the calculations.
Information on the total numbers and rates of marriages and divorces at the national and State levels are published in the NCHS National Vital Statistics Reports. The collection of detailed data was suspended beginning in January 1996. Limitations in the information collected by the States as well as budgetary considerations necessitated this action. The most recent comprehensive analyses of detailed marriage and divorce data are published in Advance Report of Final Marriage Statistics, 1989-90 and Advance Report of Final Divorce Statistics, 1989-90.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
3.6 / 6.8 = 52%.
And?
That is not supporting your argument which claims it has been declining.
except that is 6.8 per 1000. Your math skills are lacking. The other logical fallacy you display is that the number of people who marry vs those who divorce in a year are not the same sets of data. Meaning, if you cannot accuratly assume that marriage/divorce for a year is an accurate comparrison. Causation does not equal correlation.
There was a thread a while back talking about divorces in liberal families being lower then those in evangelical churches.
The difference is that you use nominal divorce rates which does not take into account the massive differences in marriage rate. What if marriage rate was 1.0, an divorce rate was 0.9. That is not a low divorce rate even though 3.6 is much higher than 0.9. That means over time 90% of marriages end in divorce.
Quote:
While there may be few marriages, it seems that those who do marry are in it for the long haul and seem to be more stable.
Your data only talk about divorce rate without relation to the number of marriages, hence you just made a conclusion that you are unable to support.
Quote:
There are other studies that indicate that marrying later in life and higher degree of education are other factors that lead to longer marriages or those less likely to divorce.
Yep, there are many studies that indicates it is good to marry after 25, not 35.
except that is 6.8 per 1000. Your math skills are lacking.
Your posts are pathetically bad. First off the nominal divorce rate is 3.6, not 6.8.
Secondly, what is more interesting is how many marriages end in divorce. Not just how many divorces are there. That says nothing about how likely a marriage is to succeed.
Your posts are pathetically bad. First off the nominal divorce rate is 3.6, not 6.8.
Secondly, what is more interesting is how many marriages end in divorce. Not just how many divorces are there. That says nothing about how likely a marriage is to succeed.
So all you can do is attack my posts? That is patetic. That is another logical fallacy that you've displayed. . Sorry attacking me or my posts makes your point all the weaker.
whether it is 3.6 or 6.8 you cannot divide your numbers to come up with a rate. That does not paint an accurate picture.
But that's the point - you can't compare the number of marriages and divorces in a given year and think that this is what gives you the divorce rate.
It is the best comparison we have without looking at marriages and correlating them for age, which requires a lot of work.
It is a million times better than just looking at crude divorce rate without even looking at marriage rates. I can ask you, what would you prefer if you are concerned with keeping divorce rates low?
So all you can do is attack my posts? That is patetic. That is another logical fallacy that you've displayed. . Sorry attacking me or my posts makes your point all the weaker.
You have repeatedly posted personal attacks, and when I give you a little bit of your own medicine then you start crying.
Your post was pathetic. Next time think before you write.
It is the best comparison we have without looking at marriages and correlating them for age, which requires a lot of work.
It is a million times better than just looking at crude divorce rate without even looking at marriage rates. I can ask you, what would you prefer if you are concerned with keeping divorce rates low?
The only way that you even be accurate is an assumtion of a year long marriage. Which is rarely the case. The percent you assert can't be accuraly computed.
The only way that you even be accurate is an assumtion of a year long marriage. Which is rarely the case. The percent you assert can't be accuraly computed.
Except I gave a graph of the last 60 years. In the long term a 50% divorce rate leads to 50% failed marriages.
But answer this question. Which place have more failed marriages?
Place A: 8.0 marriages, 2.0 divorces
Place B: 2.0 marriages, 1.5 divorces
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.
. Sorry attacking me or my posts makes your point all the weaker.