For Richer or Poorer

[Wehrwolfen]

For Richer or Poorer​

by Bethany Stotts
November 24, 2012

Filed Under affirmative action, Economy, Family Values, Jobs, Marriage, Poverty


As the lack of opportunity in America becomes less of an issue of race and more of perpetual class separation, liberal reporters and academics continue to propose the same recycled, progressive policies which have little hope of solving the marriage problem but will undoubtedly bloat federal and state governments.

For example, in a New York Times article printed this summer, Jason DeParle cast the growing trend of lower-class single mothers as one of class conflict. “Estimates vary widely, but scholars have said that changes in marriage patterns — as opposed to changes in individual earnings — may account for as much as 40 percent of the growth in certain measures of inequality,” wrote DeParle. He cited Johns Hopkins sociologist Andrew Cherlin as saying that “It is the privileged Americans who are marrying, and marrying helps them stay privileged.”

Inequalities of opportunity in America recently prompted academic Lane Kenworthy to boldly write for Foreign Affairs that “The United States has lost its historical distinction as the land of opportunity.” He instead compares America’s “intergenerational mobility” to that of France and Italy.

“So how did the United States get here?” asks the University of Arizona professor. “…On the right, a standard proposal is to strengthen families. On the left, a recent favorite is to reduce income inequality. And everyone supports improving education.”

“Long concentrated among minorities, motherhood outside marriage now varies by class about as much as it does by race,” reported DeParle this summer.“Less than 10 percent of the births to college-educated women occur outside marriage, while for women with high school degrees or less the figure is nearly 60 percent,” he writes (emphasis added).

Kenworthy suggests a series of government interventions to enhance “intergenerational mobility” and close the opportunity gap, including,

◦increasing the Child Tax Credit, with Canada as an example;
◦convincing less-educated women to delay childbirth;
◦federal and state interventions to promote parenting by “paying for home visits by nurses or counselors and providing free or low-cost parenting classes;”
◦a “universal system of affordable, educational child care and preschool;”
◦the federal government making college more affordable;
◦the Federal Reserve allowing wages to rise somewhat;
◦increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit for able-bodied adults without children (ABAWDs); and
◦direct affirmative action for those with disadvantaged family background, rather than by race.​

[excerpt]

Read more:
For Richer or Poorer « Bethany Stotts

 

[emptystep]

For Richer or Poorer​

by Bethany Stotts
November 24, 2012

Filed Under affirmative action, Economy, Family Values, Jobs, Marriage, Poverty


As the lack of opportunity in America becomes less of an issue of race and more of perpetual class separation, liberal reporters and academics continue to propose the same recycled, progressive policies which have little hope of solving the marriage problem but will undoubtedly bloat federal and state governments.

For example, in a New York Times article printed this summer, Jason DeParle cast the growing trend of lower-class single mothers as one of class conflict. “Estimates vary widely, but scholars have said that changes in marriage patterns — as opposed to changes in individual earnings — may account for as much as 40 percent of the growth in certain measures of inequality,” wrote DeParle. He cited Johns Hopkins sociologist Andrew Cherlin as saying that “It is the privileged Americans who are marrying, and marrying helps them stay privileged.”

Inequalities of opportunity in America recently prompted academic Lane Kenworthy to boldly write for Foreign Affairs that “The United States has lost its historical distinction as the land of opportunity.” He instead compares America’s “intergenerational mobility” to that of France and Italy.

“So how did the United States get here?” asks the University of Arizona professor. “…On the right, a standard proposal is to strengthen families. On the left, a recent favorite is to reduce income inequality. And everyone supports improving education.”

“Long concentrated among minorities, motherhood outside marriage now varies by class about as much as it does by race,” reported DeParle this summer.“Less than 10 percent of the births to college-educated women occur outside marriage, while for women with high school degrees or less the figure is nearly 60 percent,” he writes (emphasis added).

Kenworthy suggests a series of government interventions to enhance “intergenerational mobility” and close the opportunity gap, including,

◦increasing the Child Tax Credit, with Canada as an example;
◦convincing less-educated women to delay childbirth;
◦federal and state interventions to promote parenting by “paying for home visits by nurses or counselors and providing free or low-cost parenting classes;”
◦a “universal system of affordable, educational child care and preschool;”
◦the federal government making college more affordable;
◦the Federal Reserve allowing wages to rise somewhat;
◦increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit for able-bodied adults without children (ABAWDs); and
◦direct affirmative action for those with disadvantaged family background, rather than by race.​

[excerpt]

Read more:
For Richer or Poorer « Bethany Stotts

Sounds like a very liberal agenda.

 

[Moonglow]

Which agenda keeps companies from hiring those over 50?