Black lives matter

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,869
Reaction score
1,000
Points
113
Thanks for the cited numbers and the response.

The main problem I have with it is this: prove to me that all the negative things you're talking about aren't actually caused by lower income, rather than only having one parent.

Very difficult to decouple such factors and thus prove that any single factor is mostly responsible for negative outcomes.


Now if it was changed to "single parent households who are well below average household income, are more likely to result in negative life outcomes for the children", then I'd be more likely to support that idea.
Sure, but you could probably say that about any study involving humans. When all humans are different, how do you limit it down to one variable? At some point, you have to accept there will be differences between the participants, but it doesn’t mean you can’t draw trends from the data.

Of course, some of the negative effects could be associated with a lower socioeconomic status. However, that often goes hand-in-hand with having a single parent household. They are not mutually exclusive. The thing that people like to ignore is that the poverty rate for married couples is crazy low. Irrespective if one or both work, the rate is super low. I’m sure you’ll blast me for this and label me as some right wing nut job, as that seems to be the playbook in the current world we live. But according to the stats, it’s really easy to stay out of poverty- find a partner that isn’t a derelict, get married, and have kids after that. See the first link below. The poverty rate for all married couples is 4%. That is obscenely low. The poverty rate of woman-led households with no male is 22.2%. The poverty rate of male-led households with no female is 11.5%. That’s 5.5x higher and 2.9x higher. Then look at poverty rates of married and non-married people with kids. The poverty rate of a female-only household with kids is 36.5%, which is 5.7x higher than married couples. This doesn’t even take into account job status- this covers all. But the poverty rate of a married couple where both work in any capacity is 0.9% (second link).

https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2020/demo/p60-270/Figure9.pdf

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2020/m...rce-lived-below-the-poverty-level-in-2018.htm
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
25,466
Reaction score
6,133
Points
113
Sure, but you could probably say that about any study involving humans. When all humans are different, how do you limit it down to one variable? At some point, you have to accept there will be differences between the participants, but it doesn’t mean you can’t draw trends from the data.

The point is, it's very difficult to attempt to make meaningful, rigorous claims about single factors having the most individual contribution to outcomes that depend on many factors. Very difficult to do. Doesn't mean that people don't try, and often for the sake or with the agenda of promoting a particular ideology.

Certainly, nothing wrong with analyzing data. Of course not. But care should be taken when attempting to draw conclusions. (captain obvious)

The thing that people like to ignore is that the poverty rate for married couples is crazy low. Irrespective if one or both work, the rate is super low.

...

But according to the stats, it’s really easy to stay out of poverty- find a partner that isn’t a derelict, get married, and have kids after that. See the first link below. The poverty rate for all married couples is 4%. That is obscenely low. The poverty rate of woman-led households with no male is 22.2%. The poverty rate of male-led households with no female is 11.5%. That’s 5.5x higher and 2.9x higher. Then look at poverty rates of married and non-married people with kids. The poverty rate of a female-only household with kids is 36.5%, which is 5.7x higher than married couples. This doesn’t even take into account job status- this covers all. But the poverty rate of a married couple where both work in any capacity is 0.9% (second link).
I have no problem with what you say here, in of itself. But I didn't say anything about income relative to the poverty rate.

In the US, a married household with two kids only needs to bring in more than $70/day (about $25.5k per year) to be above the poverty rate. That's nothing.

If you have two adults working full time, or even just the man working full time (your stats clearly show, and it is widely known, that men still out earn women), I feel like you'd have to try very hard to not get to that level.


Surely, you'd agree that the child of a wealthy, single mother isn't necessarily at a disadvantage? Say, compared to its classmate peers at the (expensive) private school that the mother pays for? I see no reason why it would be.

Thus, again back to the point that was trying to be made: I just don't think you can make meaningful, rigorous claims about child success only when looking at the number of parents/guardians in the household.

I think people who support and want to promote the idea that every household with kids should have a married couple at its head, want to push the idea as true. But I don't think data can reasonably support it, if you're going to ignore the other factors.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
3,755
Points
113
Standard.

New video shows California cops fatally shoot black man after jaywalking stop
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
3,755
Points
113
Looks like Republicans don't give a shit about riots. Who woulda guessed....

Security funding plan for Chauvin trial fails in Minnesota House
 



howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
55,921
Reaction score
12,319
Points
113
Looks like Republicans don't give a shit about riots. Who woulda guessed....

Security funding plan for Chauvin trial fails in Minnesota House
They want them to happen so they can screech about them for the next two years.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
3,755
Points
113
Mesnwhile, the 300 million interactions that didn’t end up in a fatal black shooting while resisting arrest.

Outliers.

Cops decide to tackle man for Jaywalking. Totally standard and appropriate in your eyes.
🙄🙄🙄
 


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
3,755
Points
113
Trooper kicked, dragged Black man who died in custody: police records

A Louisiana State Police trooper has been suspended without pay for kicking and dragging a handcuffed Black man

York was suspended without pay for 50 hours following an internal investigation that also led to the termination of another trooper, Chris Hollingsworth, who died in a single-car crash after learning he had been fired over his role in the incident. The AP last year published a 27-second audio clip from Hollingsworth’s body camera in which he can be heard telling a colleague, “I beat the ever-living f— out of” Greene before he “all of a sudden he just went limp.”
 



LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,670
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
Your weekly reminder that #BLM is a marxist, racist, fraud of an organization. It has set the Black movement back about 40 years.
 

Plausible Deniability

Coffee is for closers
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
942
Points
113
Your weekly reminder that #BLM is a marxist, racist, fraud of an organization. It has set the Black movement back about 40 years.
I have to say though, we should be giving major props to the recent segments/commercials there have been recently with Hollywood celebs and athletes (of course nobody like LeBron) calling attention to human trafficking and child exploitation, child sex abuse. Certainly a worthwhile cause. Very well done, and kudos to those people like Liam Neeson, et al.

I would have a lot more respect for these recent outrages over BLM, police brutality, et al if we would see the same outrage from some of these individuals towards things like drunk and impaired driving, opioid and prescription drug abuse, and most definitely mental health. Those are all 'epidemics' in this country that have far, far greater reaching implications than the rather isolated incidents of cops killing unarmed and innocent minorities, of ANY race.

Speaking out for causes like mental health awareness, substance abuse, etc would also go a long, LONG ways towards UNITY in this country as opposed to the shear divisiveness of BLM. But at the heart of things, the last thing BLM wants is unity; we've seen enough to know that
 


MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
25,466
Reaction score
6,133
Points
113
I would have a lot more respect for these recent outrages over BLM, police brutality, et al if we would see the same outrage from some of these individuals towards things like drunk and impaired driving, opioid and prescription drug abuse, and most definitely mental health.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving are a bunch of frauds, because they don't also speak out against opioid addiction!

:rolleyes:
 



LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,670
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
:ROFLMAO:

You have no clue what the hell you're talking about. Are you from the 50's? Hated the Black Panthers even back then?

I'm talking about #BLM actually being a marxist, terrorist group and not helping the Black movement at all. It can't even be debated. There are racial justice groups out there doing good things. #BLM ain't one of them.
 




tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,500
Reaction score
2,176
Points
113
As the leader of the group was quoted as saying, "We don't even look at the charges." Great idea and leadership. What started as a good idea to combat unfair bail sentencing has been turned into a typical shit show by the ultra left leaders. Numerous criminals have been let go to commit more crimes. Ties to our President and Vice President are there for all to see if they care (which we know most here don't).
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
3,755
Points
113
Violent criminals shouldn't get bail, that's simple.

Bail should not be based on your ability to pay.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
55,921
Reaction score
12,319
Points
113
Ultra left? That's a new term. There's the left, the FAR left, the ULTRA left, The Progs, the Socialists, the Marxists, the Commies and the Atheists (who are also Commies) and of course Antifa!

I'm going to need one of The Fellas "Scary Leftist" handbooks to keep it all straight.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
15,565
Reaction score
2,276
Points
113
Violent criminals shouldn't get bail, that's simple.

Bail should not be based on your ability to pay.
In your world, they do. Those you support make it happen.

It is, and again those you support make it happen.
 


BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
15,565
Reaction score
2,276
Points
113
The courts don't have to grant bail. Take it up with them.
Those you support make it happen. Making it happen leads to murder of innocent people.

That's you, WALLACE! And your Jam Jam Clan.

Own it.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
3,755
Points
113
Rich Racists still have pull. Publicize their names, take their hoods off. Why are these pussies allowed to stay hidden.

“UT needs rich donors”: Emails show wealthy alumni supporting “Eyes of Texas” threatened to pull donations
 

Nax5

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2012
Messages
1,505
Reaction score
854
Points
113
Rich Racists still have pull. Publicize their names, take their hoods off. Why are these pussies allowed to stay hidden.

“UT needs rich donors”: Emails show wealthy alumni supporting “Eyes of Texas” threatened to pull donations
Oof. Some of those emails are repulsive.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,500
Reaction score
2,176
Points
113
Ultra left? That's a new term. There's the left, the FAR left, the ULTRA left, The Progs, the Socialists, the Marxists, the Commies and the Atheists (who are also Commies) and of course Antifa!

I'm going to need one of The Fellas "Scary Leftist" handbooks to keep it all straight.
They are all the same. It's really pretty easy.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
55,921
Reaction score
12,319
Points
113
Rich Racists still have pull. Publicize their names, take their hoods off. Why are these pussies allowed to stay hidden.

“UT needs rich donors”: Emails show wealthy alumni supporting “Eyes of Texas” threatened to pull donations
Ultra Leftist donors I bet....
 







Top Bottom