Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 21,113
- 6,493
- 335
That is opinion not fact hence the word article
Byron Donalds Lies | LBJ's War On Poverty Defeated Jim Crow And Still Helps Black Families
- Thread starter IM2
- Start date
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 21,113
- 6,493
- 335
WrongWho has an abortion is based on INCOME. Those with the lowest income, have the highest rates of abortion, because they have the highest rates of unintended pregnancies.
The same holds true of crime rates - both are driven by lack of income and/or opportunity. With no mandated maternity leave for pregnant women and no employment protections for pregnant women, low income women are routinely fired when their bosses learn they're pregnant. So at a time when they need health care the most, they'll lose their jobs and their health insurance.
Contary to the Republican belief that women who get abortions are amoral party girls getting rid of the "consequences" of a promisculous lifestyle, the majority of women seeking abortions are low income wives and mothers whose birth control failed, and who can ill afford to lose their jobs. 75% are living below or just above the poverty line. 60% are married or in a committed relationship. Most are in their late 20's.
One in Four US Women Expected to Have an Abortion in Their Lifetime
www.guttmacher.org
These are the same people you would call "irresponsible" if they have were to have more children than they can afford to raise. And when these people do the "responsible" thing, you call them names for being in that position in the first place.
Crime is noit driven by poverty but the other way around.
This is fact.
Crime dropped during the great depression for example
IM2
Diamond Member
- Mar 11, 2015
- 113,734
- 144,176
- 3,645
- Thread starter
- #68
So let's see, Donalds and the Republicans here have decided to tell everybody how the black family was so string during Jim Crow. However this report says dfferent:
"Although before the 1960s age at first marriage and the proportion of women ever married were similar among whites and blacks, blacks had higher rates of marital dissolution during this period."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Dissolution definition - the act or process of dissolving:
termination or destruction by breaking down, disrupting, or dispersing
www.merriam-webster.com
So basically what Donalds said and what rght wingers believe is fiction.
The Growing Racial and Ethnic Divide in U.S. Marriage Patterns
R. Kelly Raley, Megan M. Sweeney, and Danielle Wondra"Although before the 1960s age at first marriage and the proportion of women ever married were similar among whites and blacks, blacks had higher rates of marital dissolution during this period."
The Growing Racial and Ethnic Divide in U.S. Marriage Patterns - PMC
The United States shows striking racial and ethnic differences in marriage patterns. Compared to both white and Hispanic women, black women marry later in life, are less likely to marry at all, and have higher rates of marital instability. Kelly ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Dissolution definition - the act or process of dissolving:
termination or destruction by breaking down, disrupting, or dispersing
Definition of DISSOLUTION
the act or process of dissolving: such as; separation into component parts; decay, disintegration… See the full definition
So basically what Donalds said and what rght wingers believe is fiction.
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 21,113
- 6,493
- 335
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 21,113
- 6,493
- 335
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 21,113
- 6,493
- 335
tyroneweaver
Diamond Member
- Moderator
- #73
The "poverty" level today is roughly the same as it was in the 1960s when these programs started. Furthermore, at the beginning of the Great Society programs the rate of illegitimacy among black children was only around 25%. Today it's around 75%.
Sounds like an abject failure, but keep pushing the far left propaganda.
Dragonlady
Designing Woman
That’s a fact based news article based on statistical analysis and charts, not an editorial opinion piece.
If you bothered to read the link, you would’ve seen that.
IM2
Diamond Member
- Mar 11, 2015
- 113,734
- 144,176
- 3,645
- Thread starter
- #75
Again the argument you make was debunked nearly 60 years ago. Illegitimacy has nothing to do with this. You conservatives need to learn that just because you believe something and repeat it over and over and over doesn't make it so. Numerous studies denbunk your beliefs. I have shown several.
The problem with people talking about how LBJ's Great Society Program damaged the black famility is that it is a lie. The no man in the house rule which was blamed on Johnson was created by conservatives. That rule lasted from 1964 until 1968. So the Great Society has nothing to do with anything. I have posted before that welfare started long before LBJ.
Mothers' pensions
Mothers' pensions, also referred to as mothers' aid or widows' aid, were cash payments distributed to impoverished single mothers in the United States during the first three decades of the 20th century. Introduced during the Progressive Era, they were among the earliest components of the modern American welfare state and were the first public cash assistance programs targeted to single mothers.
Mother's pensions were aimed at family preservation, intending to provide the means for poor single mothers to care for their children in their own homes. While primarily targeted at widows, they were also sometimes authorized for women whose husbands had deserted them, were confined to mental hospitals or prisons, or were physically or mentally incapacitated. They were financed and administered by state and local governments, and served as a precursor to the federal Aid to Dependent Children program created by the Social Security Act of 1935
Mothers' pensions - Wikipedia
Title 4 or IV provided grants to states as Aid To Dependent Children. Eventually the name of the program was changed to Aid to Families with Dependent Children. This is what happened during Johnson. Assistance for single moms with children and no daddy at home. In 1935. Blacks were excluded. Aid to Dependent Children provide federal grants to help the states with mothers’ aid or mothers pension laws. So from 1910 until the 1960's the givernment was doling out checks to white women who had illegitiamte chidren. The program was not denigrated as something creating dependence on government; it was seen as essential assistance needed to help women without husbands who had children. But when others besides whites started gettiing the benefits, we see the whning and hypocrisy.
Aid to Families with Dependent Children - Wikipedia
The Man in the House Rule which denied benefits to single mothers if a man was iving with them was a conservative creation. In every law that was passed as part of The New Deal, Roosevelt had to compromise with southern representatives to get the votes he needed. Southern Democrats pressured Northern Republicans to create policies allowing state control. Southern Democrats knew doing that would let southern states exclude blacks from participation in these programs. And when you Republicans try blaming Democrats for all this, Republican were complicit in Jim Crow because no matter what, Northern Republicans gave Southern Democrats what they wanted.
Man-in-the-House Rule
In 1968 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the regulation as being contrary to the legislative goals of the Aid to Families of Dependent Children (AFDC) program.
In King v. Smith, 392 U.S. 309, 88 S. Ct. 2128, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1118 (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court entertained a challenge to the man-in-the-house rule brought by the four children of Mrs. Sylvester Smith, a widow. These children were denied benefits by Dallas County, Alabama, welfare authorities, based on their knowledge that a man named Williams was visiting Smith on weekends and had sexual relations with her.
The children of Smith filed a CLASS ACTION suit in federal court on behalf of other children in Alabama who were denied benefits under Alabama's "substitute father" regulation. This regulation considered a man a substitute father if (1) he lived in the home with the mother; (2) he visited the home frequently for the purpose of living with the mother; or (3) he cohabited with the mother elsewhere (King, citing Alabama Manual for Administration of Public Assistance, pt. I, ch. II, § VI). Testimony in the case revealed that there was some confusion among the authorities over how to interpret the regulation. One official testified that the regulation applied only if the parties had sex at least once a week, another official testified that sex every three months was sufficient, and still another placed the frequency at once every six months.
According to the High Court, Congress did not intend that the AFDC program require children "to look for their food to a man who is not in the least obliged to support them." The Court maintained that when Congress used the term parent in the SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, it was referring to "an individual who owed to the child a state-imposed legal duty of support." Ultimately, the Court struck down the man-in-the-house rule by holding that under the AFDC provisions in the Social Security Act, "destitute children who are legally fatherless cannot be flatly denied federally funded assistance on the transparent fiction that they have a substitute father."
The Man in the house rule was struck down because a black single mother took it to the supreme court, and it was a black sngle mother that ended the incentive for black women to get welfare money for having children.
In low-wage paying occupations, Black men are paid @87 cents for every dollar a white man makes and black women @63 cents. In high-paying occupations, black men earn @97 cents for every dollar a white man makes, and black women @64 cents. A black married couple will earn less than a white couple even when all other factors are the same. Throughout a 40 year work career, a black married couple in low-paying occupations will lose well over 1 million dollars of income compared to white married couples in the same jobs. A black married couple in a high-paying profession will earn approximately 2 million dollars less than a white couple at the same level during the same 40 year period.
"In 1965, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, attributed racial inequality as well as poverty and crime in the black community to family structure, particularly the prevalence of families headed by single mothers. Not only did research at the time cast doubt on this causality, but evidence over the last the 50 years demonstrates that rates of child poverty, educational attainment, and crime do not track rates of single parenthood. Thus, even though the share of children living with a single mother rose for all racial and ethnic groups through the mid-1990s and has remained high since then, school completion and youth arrests for violent crimes have declined significantly, while poverty rates have fluctuated according to economic conditions. Family structure does not drive racial inequity, and racial inequity persists regardless of family structure."
"The median white single parent has 2.2 times more wealth than the median black two-parent household and 1.9 times more wealth than the median Latino two-parent household."
-Amy Traub, Laura Sullivan, Tatjana Meschede and Thomas Shapiro, DEMOS, “The Asset Value of Whiteness: Understanding the Racial Wealth Gap.”
The Great society created the black middle class. All your post amounts to is dumb ass drivel about illegitiate births as if that was the critera for success. But that's rght wing propaganda for you.
whitehall
Diamond Member
If black abortion is based on income how did LBJ's "Great Society" ever benefit black families? It was just the opposite. Black families learned to depend on government handouts not unlike democrat administrations in the plantation South.Who has an abortion is based on INCOME. Those with the lowest income, have the highest rates of abortion, because they have the highest rates of unintended pregnancies.
The same holds true of crime rates - both are driven by lack of income and/or opportunity. With no mandated maternity leave for pregnant women and no employment protections for pregnant women, low income women are routinely fired when their bosses learn they're pregnant. So at a time when they need health care the most, they'll lose their jobs and their health insurance.
Contary to the Republican belief that women who get abortions are amoral party girls getting rid of the "consequences" of a promisculous lifestyle, the majority of women seeking abortions are low income wives and mothers whose birth control failed, and who can ill afford to lose their jobs. 75% are living below or just above the poverty line. 60% are married or in a committed relationship. Most are in their late 20's.
One in Four US Women Expected to Have an Abortion in Their Lifetime
These are the same people you would call "irresponsible" if they have were to have more children than they can afford to raise. And when these people do the "responsible" thing, you call them names for being in that position in the first place.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
beagle9
Diamond Member
- Nov 28, 2011
- 51,499
- 20,864
- 2,290
Racism, and "keeping minorities from TAKING OVER" is holding the nation back ????? Since when does a minority take over a majority without some sort of struggle to then ensue during the "take over" ?
Did you actually think before you wrote the above post with such a ridiculous point attempted to be made?
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 21,113
- 6,493
- 335
I DID read it and it is not fact based or evidence based
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
So the 9/11 False Flag Worked, and the Greater Israel Project is Right on Track- Started by munkle
- Replies: 1
-
I swam in my pool yesterday, March 20th earliest day of the year ever.- Started by MarathonMike
- Replies: 13
-
