Posted on 02/08/2008 12:52:43 AM PST by a_chronic_whiner
Two trends bedevil America. One is taxes. The second, more important, is marriage.
Those who pay no taxes have no check on their appetite for services. If somebody else is paying, nothing’s unaffordable.
At the federal level, 41 percent of the U.S. population is totally outside the income tax system, according to the Washington-based Tax Foundation. Since 2000, the number of filers with no tax liability, zero, has increased from 29 million to 42 million in 2005. Of 132.6 million returns filed in 2005, only 90.6 million paid taxes. The rest got back all they’d paid in — and more.
The second and more important concern, largely because of its impact on children, is the rise of single-parent households. Over the past 25 years, the percentage has grown from a quarter to a third. In Georgia, 35 percent of children live in single-parent homes and 39.2 percent of births in 2004 were to unmarried women, according to the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Almost 70 percent of black children, almost half of Hispanic and a quarter of white children are born to unmarried women.
The liberal polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research singled out unmarried women and their potential impact on future elections. What it found should chill the spines of those who wish to reverse, or even slow, the growth of government — not so much because of its cost, but because Big Government steals the initiative and enterprise and independence of its wards.
“Because of the often stark economic reality of a single-income family, they [unmarried women] support an active government that will give all Americans a chance to get ahead, not just the affluent,” the organization reported.
As the nation discovered decades ago with welfare policies that pushed men out of the lives of poor women, except for procreation, women who previously found security in marriage turned instead to government. As Greenberg Quinlan Rosner find, unmarried women are a rich vein to be mined by Democrats. From its findings:
• “Marital status is playing an increasingly defining role in elections. For the 2006 congressional elections, the ‘marriage gap’ was 32 points, far bigger than the gender gap, which was just 9 points. Among women, the marriage gap was an even bigger 36 points … unmarried women tend to vote like other unmarried women, regardless of other powerful demographic variables such as age, income and education.”
• “Unmarried women are easily the largest segment of the Democratic base — bigger than Hispanics and African Americans combined.” And the second most loyal, second only to blacks. They favor Democrats over Republicans by a 70-24 margin, and Hillary Clinton over Rudy Giuliani by 66-30.
• “From 1960 to 2006, the percentage of the voting age population that was unmarried grew from 27 to 45 percent … If this trend continues, the unmarried will be a majority of the population within 15 years.”
• Their top economic concern is health care. “This group strongly supports fundamental reform to provide universal coverage that can never be taken away.”
• “In total, there are over 53 million unmarried women of voting age, a number that dwarfs the percentage of seniors, people of color and even union members.” Of those who voted in 2006, two-thirds chose Democrats. Some 20 million, however, did not vote. That’s 41 percent of the unmarrieds. Among the married, it was 29 percent. But “2008 could be very different if progressives see the opportunity before them.” Unmarried women “emerge as the largest contributor to the Democratic vote in 2008.”
Greenberg Quinlan Rosner views them as the “Democrats’ evangelicals.” opining that “if progressives turn them out, unmarried women can be as important to Democrats in 2008 as evangelicals were to Republicans in 2004.”
Combine the two: fewer people who pay taxes and a growing bloc of women who rely on government for their financial security and their household’s well-being.
The challenge for the nation is to rebuild the traditional two-parent family — primarily for the sake of children, but also as a balance to more and bigger government.
So women have discovered that either:
1) a friendly, liberal court system will directly award them part of a specific man’s income without them having to actually put up with the man or put out for the man as they would in a marriage (provided they know who the father is), or
2) a friendly Dem legislature will tax the highest earners, who just happen to be men, with punishing tax rates so the single women can have the joy of children without having to put up with a father’s interference.
So women can be as permiscuous and irresponsible as they want, while following a less stressful career path, and STILL force men to pick up the tab.
Gosh, what a great system !
Ah, yes, that is what they prefer.
Somehow, somewhere hopefully I’ll find a better one than that. Just sick of waiting - time & fun are a wastin’...
I gotta tell ya, if that wasn’t one of the funniest things I’ve seen in a long time. What a hoot. Thanks for the link.
In a rational society, nobody would be ABLE to vote that somebody else pay their way.
The only way to make that work is for government to be limited to those services that do not benefit individuals, but only the nation as a whole. National Defense, Judiciary, and Transportation Infrastructure should be the limits of governmental powers.
They should put contraceptives in the water supply, and make a prescription for the antidote available only after you’ve shown a financial responsibility plan for supporting a child.
They can feel superior to losers. Not too guys like you. It is better to be alone than with one of these loser skanks.
Many here have already added insight to counter-balance your statements.
Let me just say, you need to account for the break-down in SEXUAL MORALITY that happened the same time as the Welfare State truly took over.
Instead of “bringing men UP” (not that I believe most men earlier were constantly sticking their $!#$!s in women not their wives), the “sexual revolution” “brought women down” to the level of being possessed by sex, or at least willingly handing it out to try to get men hooked.
Now, everything is obsessed on sex, and why wait for marriage?
No matter how much birth control we have, you cannot avoid having bastard children sometimes if you insist on giving into your lust (and that’s all it is - that’s not LOVE).
All the sexual revolution did was lower the denominator, and as a result, women are pumping out ILLEGITIMATE babies at huge rates (check out those stat’s since the wonderful ‘60s). And men have nothing stopping them now from sticking that rod everywhere they want - because “sex is wonderful”, period; how dare we judge them for doing what is natural? How dare we stop them from doing something that is harming no-one and the woman wants, too?
Harming no-one. Hhhmmmmph.
I wonder how many conservative/libertarian men are sleeping with these unmarried women and getting them pregnant, then saying such behavior is none of anyone else’s business.
“Women of all marital statuses *have been* ushering in big government ever since they got the vote.”
Not true. Definitely not true in the more restrained, conservative past, and not true of “married women”. Stats show married women are more conservative definitely than single (and I think I mean, TRUE single, not sham pseudo-singles like divorced/widowed).
”keep women poor, dependent, and keep the threat of rape and violence over their heads.”
Oh, so is THAT part of the reason they are so soft, negligent, and conciliatory on crime?
I remember when men were men; they kept a job, stood up straight when the national anthem played, displayed the flag, were proud to be American, didn’t insult their wives in front of the kids, made the kids help around the house.
Nowadays, a very large percentage of men have become useless couch potatoes.
Men would help themselves by stopping the tough talk on women, and walking the line themselves. It just so happens to be that so many women are single, because they found out that the “man” in their lives were losers.
I am a man, but I think I do (most of) it the right way.
Ooooh, ooooh! Can I answer this one?
As long as there are guys here who are scared and intimidated by women, we’ll have these threads.
As long as there are guys here who refuse to admit that they made poor decisions in choosing a mate and, instead of taking responsibility for their actions, would rather blame all women, we’ll have these threads.
As long as there are guys here who couldn’t get a date with a decent woman because they personally aren’t decent (but refuse to admit it), we’ll have these threads.
As long as there are guys here who have such teeny, weeny, tiny, fragile egos, that the only way they can feel good about themselves is to post silly, insulting posts about the gender they know nothing about, we’ll have these threads.
It’s been my observation that the guys who have stable, steady, NORMAL, healthy relationships with women tend to keep their mouths shut when it comes to these ridiculous threads bashing women. Why? Because they’re secure enough in their masculinity and smart enough to show most women some respect.
The rest? Teeny, weeny, tiny....
Hillary has her supporters revved up and like the article says it's a HUGE voting bloc.
Yeah, tell me about it. The men that get the honor of making monthly payments for children they didn’t sire certainly thank you in absentia.
The women have brought this on themselves.
You haven’t a clue what men face in relationships these days.
Start reading up on men who at forty years of age have to face losing everything they’ve worked for twenty years go attain, because their wife is going through a mid life crisis. Access to children is often denied. Even if you do have access you have no say in how the children are raised. The women play games with visitation and the children’s respect for the father. And if I guy addresses this in court, the only important thing is that he keep paying into this unconstitutional rip off scheme.
You want to know why men don’t value relationships like they used to.
You honestly don’t have a clue do you.
I am a single parent, male, and have a business. When my daughter gets sick I have to make do and find a way to take care of her and work too. Its a pain but I make do somehow every time. When my single women employees’ kids get sick, we do something to care for them and make do. It has everything to do with effort and responsibility...too many women are fat a$$ lazy bitches looking for the world to take care of them.
You girls and your logic and facts ... really.
The far left discovered a while ago that the best way to take down America is to attack the family. And sadly, it’s been a pretty effective strategy.
Hi, don’t be too down on it all.
Are you older now? Huge problem with being older is that “they’re all taken” anyway, and you’re left with the scraps (not that they’re all bad, it’s just they’re few and any given population only has so many good for you, anyway).
I had this problem. I finally married at the very tail-end of 35; my husband was 38. We’d only met (on line) at 34/37.
We were never married before. I never had a boyfriend. Many dates mostly thanks to Internet, but no real hooks.
My husband lived alone in a “foreign” place, to him, for 15 years, and had time to get depressed that “no-one wants me” and alternately, “no good women available”. He had friends (many who married while he did not) in the area, but in the latter half many of them moved away out of state.
Thankfully I wasn’t alone much, living much with my wonderful parents who could keep me socializing (I’m a hermit, basically), but that didn’t keep me from sometimes after 30 getting depressed that I didn’t have anyone. When I was in my right mind I realized alot was because I rejected everyone - and probably was largely right to. I am/was very judgemental and very discriminating. I was usually displeased with someone immediately (even if I was ga-ga over their cute looks before a date).
But then it all changed overnight. An e-mail on Dec 15, then finally meeting about a month later. And I kept going out with him (he still says when he saw me in person, he figured, “well, so much for that, I won’t get another date here” LOL).
It’s hard to “be alone”, but keep realizing that sometimes it’s not you, it’s them. You maybe just haven’t run across someone good for you; it gets harder over time exactly because everyone’s married.
My mother and father always said, “Better to be a bachelor than stuck with a jerk/loser”. Just don’t drop your guard and settle for 1 of these welfare or liberal losers, just because you want to be like everyone else who has a spouse. ;-)
What sentient being would want the fiscal liability of a family that odds are will go up in smoke in a few years and send the career of that being into the dumpster?
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.