Posted on 06/03/2012 6:46:35 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The single-mother revolution shouldn't need much introduction. It started in the 1960s when the nation began to sever the historical connection between marriage and childbearing and to turn single motherhood and the fatherless family into a viable, even welcome, arrangement for children and for society. The reasons for the shift were many, including the sexual revolution, a powerful strain of anti-marriage feminism and a "super bug" of American individualism that hit the country in the 1960s and '70s.
The single-mother revolution has been an economic catastrophe for women. Poverty remains relatively rare among married couples with children; the U.S. census puts only 8.8% of them in that category, up from 6.7% since the start of the Great Recession. But more than 40% of single-mother families are poor, up from 37% before the downturn. In the bottom quintile of earnings, most households are single people, many of them elderly. But of the two-fifths of bottom-quintile households that are families, 83% are headed by single mothers. The Brookings Institution's Isabel Sawhill calculates that virtually all the increase in child poverty in the United States since the 1970s would vanish if parents still married at 1970 rates.
Decades of research show that kids growing up with single mothers have lower scholastic achievement from kindergarten through high school, as well as higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse, depression, behavior problems and teen pregnancy. All these factors are likely to reduce their eventual incomes at a time when what children need is more education, more training and more planning. The rise in single motherhood was ill-adapted for the economic shifts of the late 20th century.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
save for later
Conservative view: Duh. Told you so. This is the result of a moral breakdown.
Liberal view: Single moms should get checks and tax breaks.
The slimes actually published this.... wow.
>The single-mother revolution has been an economic catastrophe for women.
Well DUH! What other possible outcome could there be?
From this: Imagine an America with 70 percent fewer juvenile delinquents, 70 percent fewer teenage births, 63 to 70 percent fewer teenage suicides, and 70 percent to 90 percent fewer runaways and you will appreciate what the sainted single mothers have accomplished.
Soon it will be single gay parents. Get your kid early so you can start hormone treatments.
“The slimes actually published this.... wow.”
Now I might actually be impressed if they (and the rest of the lib press) apologized for crapping all over Dan Quayle back in the day.
Dan Quail was right.
The single-mother revolution shouldn’t need much introduction. It started in the 1960s when the nation began to sever the historical connection between marriage and childbearing and to turn single motherhood and the fatherless family into a viable, even welcome, arrangement for children and for society.
Translation: Social enginering once again, via OPM, broke up the family (particularly the black family) and turned otherwise healthy and productive people into dependent sadsacks.
Probably created hirer crime rates because people have a justification. Its other rich people’s fault I am poor..etc
It’s not just a catastrophe for them- when the government subsidizes this, it becomes a catastrophe for all of us. Most of these single moms get welfare benefits and get to bring up their offspring with crap like WIC. If they have enough kids and compound it with some ‘disability’ then they can approximate a salary easily equal to many full-time jobs. And yet somehow it is impossible to be a fiscon and a socon....bs.
Hell might be a few degrees cooler, but it hasn't frozen over yet.
Lots of information, but it's a pity the author didn't bother to mention the number one reason for the so-called single-mother revolution:
In the 1960s, the government implemented many welfare programs that in effect paid women many benefits to have children out-of-wedlock. A kid out-of-wedlock soon became the ticket to a government financed, lower middle class lifestyle. More and more takers ever since.
"So, how's mah "Great Society" workin' out for ya, Phadnah?"
Candice Bergen Agrees with Dan Quayle (July 11, 2002)
bfl
There are a lot of single parents struggling to do whats right.I’ve worked with many of them. I won’t lump them in with the single parents who just do what they want and let the grandparents and the government worry about their children.
Now I might actually be impressed if they (and the rest of the lib press) apologized for crapping all over Dan Quayle back in the day.
Dan Quayle was a victim of the Crapping ON Americans (and America) “Revolution”.
All in the name of the left’s grand sense of social fairness and justice that they exclusively pocess.
We can’t expect them to ever take responsibility for the unintended consequence of their actions.
= millions of lives ruined in the name of saving the few (=ObamaCare of late)
Anyhow, they are beyond reproach.
Besides they’re far to busy profiting off other’s misery.
I deal with these people all the time.
What truly gets me angry is that the WIC girls bring their boyfriends/husbands to the store and pull out their WIC checks and get their free items while the guy is just standing there smiling. Many times the girl asks HIM if he’s sure he wants apples INSTEAD OF oranges OR strawberries. She then pulls out her EBT card to pay for pop, chips, steaks for bbq, shrimp, cake, icecream, ETC. The guy buys himself 2-3 cases of beer and they leave smiling from ear to ear. There are hundreds like them.
Why work when the Gov is paying you to sit on your fat useless lazy a$$ and so nothing! It’s the taxpayers the Gov is crapping on until we all wake-up and change the way things are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.