1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Children in single-mother households

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Little-Acorn, Feb 1, 2009.

  1. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Time to dust off the old statistical database and bring it up to date.

    First result out of the gate is:

    [​IMG]

    Comment?
     
  2. Lagboltz

    Lagboltz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,847
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hurricane alley
    The reference you cited,
    www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hh-fam.html
    is a government site for the raw data in the graph, but not the graph itself and text. You should cite where that comes from too. The text implies that there is a cause and effect relation between government policy and black single-mother households. If so, why doesn't the white family graph not follow the same sort of drop from 1990 to 2005. There can be many other factors. This is a fine example of statistical manipulation by some biased person or group with a personal motive.

    It seems that the conclusion of the author is to stop welfare for minority families. Is that what you are trying to say?
     
  3. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    In the book, Black Red Necks and White Liberals, Thomas Sowell describes in detail where the current "black culture" came from, and how policies have helped to continue their propagation.

    Welfare is not a cause of this, as the above post seems to indicate. However, it has caused it to be continued. What welfare has done, is make it more fiscally possible to break up the family unit, which leads to crime, drugs, and the chaos common to the culture today.
     
  4. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.....

    BUSTED, Little-Acorn!!!!!

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    (Maybe your magical White-Hood would have better-protected, you!)​
     
  5. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I guess that helps explain the meth-issue, in Wasilla.

    :rolleyes:
     
  6. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Does anyone know what "Mr. Shaman" is raving about?

    Back to the subject:
    Single motherhood is often a VOLUNTARY choice of the mothers involved... to the serious detriment of the childen who find themselves without a father.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It's possible that the images might have come from hardcopy that isn't/wasn't published on the Internet.
     
  8. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    "Mr." Shaman can sometimes be difficult to read for a variety of reasons. In this particular post:

    ...the incorrect usage of the hyphen between the words "White" and "Hood", and again between the "better" and "protected" are a bit confusing. The comma between the "protected" and "you" is incorrectly inserted as well. Given other context clues, the likely reference regarding the "White-Hood" is to the white hood worn by members of the Ku Klux Klan. The "better-protected" is simple misuse of a hyphen but suggests that your agenda might have remained more hidden under such garb, which is patently a bit extreme. In any case, one possible translation is that "Mr." Shaman is intimating that you're a filthy, white supremist, racist b@stard.

    All of which, of course, doesn't negate the validity of the statistics. The text below gives some interpretation and is therefore subject to debate.
     
  9. bododie

    bododie New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,639
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think he's saying that if a graph is at all faulty then the reality doesn't exist. If you say it does, then you are a klan member, suffering from that illness called racism that can only affect whites. In minorities it's called "racial pride".
     
  10. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Not really sure what you're typically cryptic and un-related post is meant.

    I assume you are claiming that my general explanation for drugs and cultural chaos, doesn't fit with a meth lab in Alaska or something...

    Well... you are right, the explanation only applied to the topic at hand, not some unrelated matter. In other words, you are correct about something that's generally obvious to most of the population. Congrats on being correct about something unimportant for the first time since I have started reading your posts.
     
  11. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Shaman typically never follows the topic. Whenever presented with evidence that contradicts his presuppositions, he generally does a quick topic change to avoid admitting he's wrong. Otherwise, he'd have more posts about himself being wrong, than on any other topic.
     
  12. Lagboltz

    Lagboltz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,847
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hurricane alley
    You still didn't answer the questions. What is the source of the images? They are not from the government and too perfect to be a scan from a book.

    I have no problem with the data itself. This has been widely publicized. But the authors of the text seem to be drawing conclusions about the causes. Such as tax cuts and welfare. Are you saying that welfare should be denied to single-mother households?
     
  13. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Paradox!

    To reduce an activity that's not illegal: Tax it, or do not divert taxes to it

    To increase an activity that's not illegal: Do not tax it, or divert taxes to it

    Naturally, there's going to be an equilibrium somewhere in between those two. I've seen cases over the past many years where the DHS almost hunted the fathers down, mandatory paternity testing and all. If legislation and practice get to where there's absolutely no escape (short of suicide) for the father from financially supporting the kids then single motherhood might go the way of the dodo.
     
  14. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    First promote family values. Second, remove no fault divorce. Third, keep a limit on how much welfare can be collected.

    When you do these things, the need for welfare will automatically reduce.
     
  15. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    I generally skip the unimportant ones.

    Do you have an issue with the data? Or with its presentation in the graph, or the opinions below?

    Nope. I'm saying that when welfare paid women to have babies out of wedlock, things got rapidly worse for their kids. When limits were put on it, things began to slowly get better for the kids.

    Limit welfare, and cut off the welfare queens. Do it for the children.

    (You also achieve Constitutional compliance after 30 years of violation, if anyone cares.)
     
Loading...

Share This Page