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.
The article was using rates and it was straight from the U.S. census. I guess you refuse to read it. No problem.
You need to read it again. They used a different way to measure poverty, and only in that alternative way of measuring did the rate for Hispanics go up and blacks down.
Quote:
Among the nation’s largest racial and ethnic groups, poverty rates using the alternative measure are higher than official poverty rates for Hispanics, whites2 and Asians, but are lower for blacks.
You need to read it again. They used a different way to measure poverty, and only in that alternative way of measuring did the rate for Hispanics go up and blacks down.
Yes I agree with you. But THEY meaning the U.S. census, not Pew Research who wrote the article. The U.S. Census is the official source. They did both measures but used a broader range in the article I posted.
Yes I agree with you. But THEY meaning the U.S. census, not Pew Research who wrote the article. The U.S. Census is the official source. They did both measures but used a broader range in the article I posted.
I know. But it's only the alternative measure that says what you assert. That is muddying the waters when we don't know why it turns out that way.
I know. But it's only the alternative measure that says what you assert. That is muddying the waters when we don't know why it turns out that way.
Gotcha. I was confused when you said the article used an alternative measure. I was just pointing out that the studies were done by the same entity.
Ultimately, as said earlier, I do not agree with Informed Consent that the focus on the black out of wedlock rate is solely due to the rates of child poverty. Rates of poverty for Hispanic children are very high and depending on the study used, have surpassed Black children at one point. He is trying to get away from that point with statistical arguments. It really doesn’t matter. The numbers are too close to argue that the focus OOW is simply due to rates of poverty. If so, close to the same focus would be put on the Hispanic out of wedlock rate because their rates child poverty have been high. Yet never has there been a major focus on their marriage/out of wedlock rates.
As Jencam pointed out, in the article I posted the U.S. census used a broader range of factors. Without doing so you are correct. If you use that broader range of factors, I am correct. Here is information for childhood poverty with the broader factors.
You are incorrect. Directly quoting from that link:
Quote:
"Non-Hispanic black children historically have had the highest child poverty rate and remain at elevated risk today, with more than 1 in 3 (37.1%) poor. Latino children are also at elevated risk for poverty, with nearly 1 in 3 (31.9%) poor."
You are incorrect. Directly quoting from that link:
Which is a higher percentage? 37.1%? or 31.9%?
That is true but using their supplemental methods, it is not. The very next line says this:
Quote:
Official poverty statistics have been criticized, however, for being based on an outdated measure of poverty.
Meaning they disagree with the statistics.
Regardless, I do not agree with you that the focus on the black out of wedlock rate is solely due to the rates of child poverty. Rates of poverty for Hispanic children are very high and depending on the study used, have surpassed Black children at one point. You are trying to evade my initial point with statistical arguments. It really doesn’t matter. The numbers are too close to argue that the focus on black OOW rates is simply due to rates of poverty. If so, close to the same focus would be put on the Hispanic out of wedlock rate because their rates child poverty have been high. Yet never has there been a major focus on their marriage/out of wedlock rates.
That is true but using their supplemental methods, it is not. The very next line says this:
Quote:
Official poverty statistics have been criticized, however, for being based on an outdated measure of poverty.
Meaning they disagree with the statistics.
They may disagree with the statistics, however, nowhere in that article does it state that Hispanic children's poverty rate is higher than Black children's poverty rate. Nor, has it ever been.
They may disagree with the statistics, however, nowhere in that article does it state that Hispanic children's poverty rate is higher than Black children's poverty rate. Nor, has it ever been.
Quote:
When the alternative measure is used, a greater share of Hispanics in 2010 lived in poverty than any other group. By contrast, when using the official poverty rate, a greater share of blacks in 2010 lived in poverty than Hispanics or any other group.
That is true but using their supplemental methods, it is not. The very next line says this:
Meaning they disagree with the statistics.
Regardless, I do not agree with you that the focus on the black out of wedlock rate is solely due to the rates of child poverty. Rates of poverty for Hispanic children are very high and depending on the study used, have surpassed Black children at one point. You are trying to evade my initial point with statistical arguments. It really doesn’t matter. The numbers are too close to argue that the focus on black OOW rates is simply due to rates of poverty. If so, close to the same focus would be put on the Hispanic out of wedlock rate because their rates child poverty have been high. Yet never has there been a major focus on their marriage/out of wedlock rates.
Maybe because it's been a big problem for a long time and the other is newish.
Quote:
In 2016, 28 percent of all births to non-Hispanic white women (i.e., white) occurred outside of marriage, a figure that is almost twice as high as the 15 percent of births among this demographic that were nonmarital in 1990. In 2016, 52 percent of all births to Hispanic women occurred outside of marriage, up from 34 percent in 1990 (a more than 50 percent increase). The percent of births that occurred outside of marriage also increased for non-Hispanic black women (black) between 1990 and 2016, from 63 to 69 percent (a nine percent increase), though a much lesser extent than for white and Hispanic women.
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.
