• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing Dem Debacle Thread: Commander will kill us all

jhmd2000 said:
You can always tell when your policies have failed. You point to the validation of like-minded posters on a message board, rather than their results.
Click to expand...

Look just to be clear, I am not saying that your model and your preferred policy action is incorrect, I am saying that you are asserting certainty when it is not warranted. Maybe all of these things are connected, but maybe they are not, the data are inconclusive, at least the data you've provided here to support your position. Believing, with unwarranted certainty, that you your model is the true and only model leads to political impasse and gridlock, it's like Muslims and Catholics trying to work together to plan a Hanuka feast. If we can't even agree on the mechanisms that drive the system then how can we predict the consequences of policy solutions. Uncertainty is a fact of life and it ok to implement policy solutions even though we don't have the one true system model all worked out. You'll make far more headway, towards actually useful solutions, if you accept uncertainty and keep an open mind on what might work.
 
4 Ways the US Keeps Single Moms in Poverty – And What We Can Do About It

Quote:
----------
...Why the US Is Unique – And Not in a Good Way

The US has a long and ugly history of keeping certain groups impoverished – and single moms are no exception.

But the last thing single moms need is to be told that they are to blame for their financial hardships. In reality, the situation is just so much more complicated, and so much more structural, than something that can be reduced to any one person’s individual choices.

And that structure is unique to the United States.

A paper in the journal Demography analyzed the poverty of single mothers in relation to the total population both in the United States and abroad. It found that not only does the US have the highest poverty rate for single mothers among the 18 countries they reviewed, but additionally, while in the US, single mothers are 24% more likely to be poor than are other groups, this simply isn’t the case in the comparable countries.

The authors argue that universal anti-poverty programs, rather than those targeted directly at single mothers, are most effective.

But it’s unlikely we will see sweeping reforms here since anti-poverty measures aren’t popular among many Americans who often want to hold individuals – and not complex structural systems – accountable for our financial situations.

As a result of this view, what we get are piecemeal measures that receive limited funding, rather than sweeping reforms that might actually make a difference. Solutions are out there, but in order to put those into action we have to challenge the notion that poverty and single motherhood go hand-in-hand.

However, as long as we make higher education inaccessible, fail to provide a livable minimum wage or affordable childcare, and lack family-friendly workplace policies, poor single moms are going to have an awfully hard time becoming financially stable.
----------
 
One of the ugliest parts of this victim blaming is the idea that it's easy to just get married and/or just get a higher paying job.

The fact that it's propagated by people who probably wouldn't have married a single mom or given her a good paying job is icing on the cake.
 
This Week in Poverty: US Single Mothers—’The Worst Off’

Quote:
----------

[Despite working more hours than their peers in other high-income countries, single mothers in the US have higher poverty rates.]

In my work covering poverty this past year, I’d be hard pressed to come up with anyone who is doing more to shatter the myths about single mothers in the United States than Tim Casey, senior staff attorney at Legal Momentum, the nation’s oldest organization advocating on behalf of the legal rights of women and girls.

Casey himself was raised by a single mother, and he is relentless in his pursuit of the facts about the real lives and living conditions of single-parent families in America—especially critical at a moment when women are demonized for being unmarried and blamed for their circumstances.

Yesterday, Casey and his colleague, Laurie Maldonado, research associate of the Luxembourg Income Study Center at the Graduate Center City University of New York, released an exhaustive new report, “Worst Off—Single-Parent Families in the United States, A Cross-National Comparison of Single Parenthood in the US and Sixteen Other High-Income Countries.”

Using data from government agencies, social scientists and researchers worldwide, the report shows that single mothers in the United States—most of whom are either separated or were previously married—are employed more hours and yet have much higher poverty rates than their peers in other high-income countries. Let me run that by you again—because it’s generally not what you’ve been reading of late in the news: the majority of single mothers in the United States are separated, divorced or widowed; and they work more hours and yet have higher poverty rates than single mothers in other high-income countries...
----------
 
they do teach Math at the Air Force Academy, right? That's something pilots use if I'm not mistaken
 
jhmd2000 said:
Which would make some modicum of sense, if there wasn't ample data on the behavior choices which substantially reduce your risks of long-term poverty in the United States. That data can be found here, quoted in pertinent part as follows:

Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2 percent are in poverty and nearly 75 percent have joined the middle class (defined as earning around $55,000 or more per year). There are surely influences other than these principles at play, but following them guides a young adult away from poverty and toward the middle class.

Consider an example. Today, more than 40 percent of American children, including more than 70 percent of black children and 50 percent of Hispanic children, are born outside marriage. This unprecedented rate of nonmarital births, combined with the nation’s high divorce rate, means that around half of children will spend part of their childhood—and for a considerable number of these all of their childhood — in a single-parent family. As hard as single parents try to give their children a healthy home environment, children in female-headed families are four or more times as likely as children from married-couple families to live in poverty. In turn, poverty is associated with a wide range of negative outcomes in children, including school dropout and out-of-wedlock births.
Click to expand...

Good progress here on finding data to support your model, however: What is the causality? Does single motherhood cause poverty or does poverty cause single motherhood? And how does welfare perpetuate the pattern? Do you have data to support the hypothesis that single mothers are choosing to have babies so they can get more government entitlements? Even if you answer those questions, we still don't have an obvious solution, like cut welfare and implement jobs training programs. Perhaps greater access to birth control and abortion would help poverty more effectively?
 
It’s a favorite conservative tactic. Blame something in place that may not be solving the problem at the level it needs to be solved with zero idea or input on how to solve the problem. It’s pretty much the foundation on which whataboutism has grown from.
 
If the idea is that pregnant women are choosing to have babies instead of getting an abortion due to government entitlements, doesn't that mean government entitlements are pro-life?
 
It's amazing.

In other wealthy countries--where they have policies to better support single parents and their children (better access to education, child care, health care, paid leave, etc.)--the rate of single parent/child poverty is lower and economic mobility is better.

Makes. No. Sense.
 
Have these factory jobs in red states reduced the poverty rate of number of out of wedlock babies?
 
MHBDemon said:
dzzalt.jpg
Click to expand...

No wonder Ronald Reagan is their Jesus. Holy moly
 
birdman said:
Sanders is too old. He shouldn't run.
Click to expand...

Dems have to put up a person under 60. For about the past 100 years, each time they put someone up for the first time who was over 60, he lost. You don't invigorate young people to vote when granmdpa or grandma is running. Young people can turn an election.
 
"Many on the left have speculated that this means Flynn is cooperating with Mueller's investigators or is negotiating to do so, which they argued could be worrisome for President Donald Trump.

On "Fox & Friends" this morning, Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said he doesn't think this is a big deal.

"His lawyers are very smart. What they're doing is they're holding up Michael Flynn and saying, 'He can be bought or at least rented by either side,'" Dershowitz said. "If the president wants him, he can pardon him. If the president won't pardon him, he'll flip and become a prosecutional witness."


LOL.

"The left is saying it's a 6. Alan Dershowitz thinks it could be a half dozen instead."
 
It sure does seem like a travesty to the Constitution that an acting president can pardon known criminals with the expressed intent to hide his/her own crimes. Obviously a huge conflict of interest...example, if you know a person associated with a crime that you are called for jury duty you are excused from jury (my understanding, maybe I am wrong).

Will any Republicans grow a sac and say that any pardon to theses guys is too much? Doubtful, I mean they would rather have a bible thumper who was removed from his job twice as a judge and a pediphile. What the fuck has happened to people?
 
Constitution has always been based on people exercising good faith. Constitution is being exposed for being far more susceptible to malicious intent than ever conceived up to this point
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top