Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

by **Werthless** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 14:32:05

TenuredVulture wrote:One of the main things a father is supposed to do is provide for his family.

Misogynist.

by **pacino** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 14:35:31

Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:
Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:i don't view single mothers as a problem in need of a solution

Are you concerned at all with the worse life outcomes, on average, of children raised by a single parent?

Well, if you're not, then I guess we're done. I took that as a given I guess.

i don't think stigmatizing a section of our society as the problem in our society is very helpful. i also proposed several things that would help them achieve more money. i'd rather deal with realities and improve people's lives as they are (and give them opportunity to improve them in the future) than with some idea of how we want our society to be. it's really not my, or anyone's, place to judge the construction of a family unit. it's our job, as a society, to help them be the best they could be.

i've proposed many things in these threads over the years, minimum wage increases, single payer healthcare system, birth control, paid sick leave, more money for education, universal pre-K, cheaper access to affordable adult education, etc. you disagree that most of these would help. so there we are. i'm not sure why you think i don't 'care' because i don't agree on focusing directly on single mothers and their lack of a man in their household and asking them basically 'what's your problem?'.

by **swishnicholson** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 14:38:06

Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:
Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:i don't view single mothers as a problem in need of a solution

Are you concerned at all with the worse life outcomes, on average, of children raised by a single parent?

Well, if you're not, then I guess we're done. I took that as a given I guess.

Hate it when I do this, but I would guess that pacino is concerned, but would like to attack the factors that make these worse outcomes more likely.

Which seems worth considering in any case since with more and women no longer needing the economic support of marriage, but still wanting children, the incidence of single parent households will almost inevitably rise, and policy will only affect the rate of this.

by **Werthless** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 14:46:52

This whole sequence of posts started with Pacino posting an embarrassingly misleading chart and comment (as the description of the hyperlink). We wouldn't be having this discussion about the costs of an absent parent if Pacino hadn't started talking nonsense. All of my posts were about that, and how to improve life outcomes for children in these difficult situations through no fault of their own. Somehow, shockingly, it came back around to sluts and personal insults (thanks SK and doc!).

Not sure if I posted this recently:

by **pacino** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 14:49:15

it was only 'misleading' because of the multiple children thing...black men were found to be 'better' fathers when both in and out of the households when compared to white and latino peers with similar situations

also,just so i'm clear, what is your solution for this absent parent difficult situation, which you call it?

by **Werthless** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 14:59:27

pacino wrote:it was only 'misleading' because of the multiple children thing...black men were found to be 'better' fathers when both in and out of the households when compared to white and latino peers with similar situations

No it is misleading, because no one has the hypothesis that "this race of people are bad parents, even when they're sticking around to raise their kids." That's preposterous. You're citing statistics to disprove a theory that doesn't exist. The mainstream argument, supported by statistics, is that the preponderance of low-income children being raised in single parent families is hitting certain races harder... there are a high percentage of poor black children being raised by a single parent. And these kids have an uphill battle to future success.

pacino wrote:also,just so i'm clear, what is your solution for this absent parent difficult situation, which you call it?

Werthless wrote:I favor education. More choice so poor kids aren't forced to go to bad schools, longer school days (8-5) so parents have the ability to work a normal day, and expansion of early learning programs funding (pre-K) for the poor. The Atlantic article mentioned that there are programs that actually teach parents how to be better parents, but I imagine that will be derided here.

by **dajafi** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:04:16

Longer school days, expanded pre-K and after school programs all mean higher taxes.

I think there's a pretty good case to be made that this is a societal investment with high likelihood of strong return... eventually. But then, I would think that...

by **td11** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:05:58

Werthless wrote:This whole sequence of posts started with Pacino posting an embarrassingly misleading chart and comment (as the description of the hyperlink). We wouldn't be having this discussion about the costs of an absent parent if Pacino hadn't started talking nonsense. All of my posts were about that, and how to improve life outcomes for children in these difficult situations through no fault of their own. Somehow, shockingly, it came back around to sluts and personal insults (thanks SK and doc!).

Not sure if I posted this recently:

oh man so original and cutting. never seen this before. very cool. keep em coming

by **Bucky** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:06:37

if we just reduced the top tax rates, then the salaries of all the employees would go up, resulting in a higher tax base to fund those things

by **The Dude** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:07:25

just pair up all the single parents together

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:09:42

so you guys really don't think it would be easier for two people to raise a kid than one?

just shoot from the hip on this one

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:11:47

kinda happy to learn if I ever knock a girl up, I can just dip, no harm no foul

by **The Dude** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:12:24

i have no idea how single parents do it alone

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:13:06

so why is everyone killing Werthless for the relatively tame idea that two parent families may be preferable

by **td11** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:13:08

Houshphandzadeh wrote:so you guys really don't think it would be easier for two people to raise a kid than one?

who said this?

by **td11** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:13:38

i'm confused i guess

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:14:00

pacino wrote:
Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:i don't view single mothers as a problem in need of a solution

Are you concerned at all with the worse life outcomes, on average, of children raised by a single parent?

by **td11** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:15:54

swishnicholson wrote:
Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:
Werthless wrote:
pacino wrote:i don't view single mothers as a problem in need of a solution

Are you concerned at all with the worse life outcomes, on average, of children raised by a single parent?

Well, if you're not, then I guess we're done. I took that as a given I guess.

Hate it when I do this, but I would guess that pacino is concerned, but would like to attack the factors that make these worse outcomes more likely.

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:17:06

pacino is pretty flatly denying that the increase of single parent homes is one of those factors

by **Werthless** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 16:36:31

The Dude wrote:just pair up all the single parents together

Archived

Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)

Re: Crimea and Putinishment (politics)