Posted on 09/27/2023 8:06:05 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
A new book by economist Melissa Kearney makes a readily apparent but still-provocative argument: Children raised by two married parents do better than children raised by single parents. The difference, Kearney argues, isn’t just financial (although the money matters a lot); the “two-parent privilege,” as her book calls it, is also about parental time investment and familial stability. The problem with the point she makes — and with the firestorm of discussion it’s touched off on the left and the right — is that there are many things that are statistically better for us, but if those things are not available or accessible, knowing that they’re better is, at best, a moot point.
Kearney bills herself as a moderate, but her argument is being taken up by a great many conservatives who argue that her findings, which are robustly supported by the data, demonstrate that liberal mores around family formation have destroyed the nuclear family and left children worse off. The answer, they say, is for liberals to own up to their wrongdoing and for all of us to start promoting marriage.
A closer look at the facts on the ground, though, shows that the problem isn’t a cultural rejection of marriage, or a nationwide feminist rejection of the nuclear family (I wish). Most people want to get married. The problem is that decades of largely conservative policy-making have fueled inequality, gutted the working class, left a generation of men isolated and under-employed and unmoored, impoverished families and made it harder for women to both control their own fertility and find suitable partners.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
As usual the author completely misses conservatives objective of getting back to traditional families with stay at home moms.
This is only "provocative" to idiots.
Fixed it.
None of these slanted political views has anything to do with the question at hand. It comes down to this. Married couples have to understand the word "sacrifice".
I'm suprised this word is still in the dictionary today because it is never spoke about with regards to family.
Minorities, women and children hardest hit...for real, not sarcasm.
Jill thinks most voters are stupid enough to believe this tripe, but then again, she's mainly preaching to the choir anyhow. This is their message. All bad things in our society are the fault of conservatives.
The “Great Society” was neither great or socially beneficial.
Been married 47 years, bought our home, raised 2 kids (one boy-one girl, both very successful), bought my wife 5 new cars over that period of time (my WIFES cars, not mine).
First new truck I have ever owned I bought 2 years ago, I love my RAM 2500 Cummins diesel! ;)
I can’t decide which is worse: her writing skills or her logic.
If conservative policies are to blame for the breakdown of the family, why are stable families more prevalent in conservative areas? She makes no sense.
Well, I gotcha by 4 years ( 7/1/72 ) but yeah 1 girl, 1 boy, doin’ great. 3 GK’s ... who knows what the future holds ?
But yeah, you know what? My memory is slippin’ ... no doubt ... say no more ...
“decades of largely conservative policy-making have...made it harder for women to both control their own fertility and find suitable partners”
Sorry, Toots. It isn’t privilege. It’s a benefit as a result of years of hard work and sacrifice.
EC
It has been very beneficial for Deep State.
WHAT?!
Problem isn’t a cultural rejection of marriage.
Like Chicago?.
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.