[Fwd: CHILD POVERTY RATES REFLECT FAMILY STRUCTURE, NOT RACE, ANALYSIS SHOWS -5/01]
furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Wed May 30 16:58:10 PDT 2001
>Here is the Heritage Foundation's thinking on the family origins of
>the Communitarianoids at Smartmarriages.
>Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema
>> subject: Child Poverty Rates Reflect Family Structure, Not Race - 5/01
> > from: Smart Marriages
> > The press release can be read below, and the entire paper, "Understanding
> > Differences in Black and White Child Poverty Rates," is available online
> > at http://www.heritage.org/library/cda/cda01-04.html .
> > CHILD POVERTY RATES REFLECT FAMILY STRUCTURE, NOT RACE, ANALYSIS SHOWS
> >Black children are more than twice as likely to live in poverty than are
> >white children-but not because they are "born black in America," according
> >to a new study from The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis
> >Examining data from the U.S. Department of Labor's National Longitudinal
> >Survey of Youth, Heritage analysts determined that child poverty rates are
> >driven primarily by single-parent households and dependency on welfare
> >benefits. When these and other, less significant, factors are taken into
> >account, the disparity between black and white child poverty rates
Based upon the above "analysis" (sic), the Heritage Foundation of
course recommend the virtue of "traditional marriage" (restricted to
that of a man & a woman). However, they have no explanation why, if
two-parent families are economically better for kids than
single-parent families, three-, four-, or X-parent families wouldn't
be even better than two-parent families. Moreover, since on the
average men make more than women, it is reasonable to hypothesize
that having two gay fathers is likely to be economically better for
kids than the nuclear family model of male husband & female wife.
Polyandry & gay marriage, anyone?
More information about the lbo-talk