Sunday, February 22, 2009

Can anyone explain (part II)...



I came across a very interesting statistic on poverty:

There's one segment of the black population that suffers only a 9.9 percent poverty rate, and only 13.7 percent of their under-5-year-olds are poor.

There's another segment of the black population that suffers a 39.5 percent poverty rate, and 58.1 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

Among whites, one population segment suffers a 6 percent poverty rate, and only 9.9 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

Another segment of the white population suffers a 26.4 percent poverty rate, and 52 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

What do you think distinguishes the high and low poverty populations?

The only statistical distinction between both the black and white populations is marriage.

William Galston, once an assistant to President Clinton, put the matter simply. To avoid poverty, do three things: finish high school, marry before having a child, and produce the child after you are 20 years old. Only 8% of people who do all three will be poor; of those who fail to do them, 79% will be poor.

Can anyone explain to me why "progressives" are so conerned about poverty in the African-American community, yet so few acknowledge the clear and indisputable connection between family structure and poverty?

An intellectually honest "progressive" should do whatever was in their power to combat single parenthood in the African-American community, yet so few have raised this issue.

Are they unable to accept any facts that contradict the "progressive" narrative of "activists" protecting "victims" against "oppressors"?

Are they too afraid of "blaming the victim"?

2 comments:

  1. You say 'An intellectually honest "progressive" should do whatever was in their power to combat single parenthood in the African-American community, yet so few have raised this issue.'

    Isn't $400,000,000 of family planning money a pretty good indication of commitment to combatting single parenthood? I know lectures and moralizing are cheaper (isn't this what abstinence-only sex ed is, really?) but thus far has not been proven to be effective.

    You want proof that the million dollars are effective? I want proof that bloviated sermonizing does anything more than reinforce an 'us-vs.-them' mentality that turns the target population off to the more practical points of the message.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jazz Pants,

    I agree with you 100% that abstinence only education is flawed. But there is a major flaw in your argument - it implies that the very large rate of single-parenthood in the African-American community stems from a lack of knowledge about birth control.

    I do NOT believe that more than a very small minority of African-Americans are that ignorant of reproduction and birth control.

    Single-parenthood in the African-American community is largely stems from choices that reflect:

    1. Cultural factors - namely that
    single-parenthood is considered acceptable by the majority of African-Americans.

    2. Government subsidies - our welfare system, in its current form, is structured in a way that subsidies single-parenthood.

    ReplyDelete