Your correlation graph could easily be interpreted as showing the nearly the same relationship between median income and unwed mothers as it apparently does between races.
That is the intent.
Perhaps, but I’ll bet parrot didn’t take it that way.
If you out all the data together it blurs. This way you see you lose income by being an unwed mother.
I thought you were a communist. This shows why capitalism sucks. In a communism, the wages would all be the same.
You are correct.
That is the point.
The difference is, the information in my graph has been consistent over decades.
Cage has sucked for decades and it’s always been socially irresponsible to see his films, but perhaps that’s beside the point.
And is actually meaningful. It helps explain why income levels differ.
Which is the dependent and independent variable here? (Both/Neither).
The rock is one of the best movies ever made.
The problem in the black community is the breakdown of the family unit. Any objective person know this…but if you say the obvious you are racist. It sells more papers if you play the victim card. Black people have been voting Democrat their entire life and the needle hasn’t moved much. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to identify the problem. When you look at areas of the white population in the lower socio economic spectrum you see identical problems.
The reasons for the relationship between poverty and households that have unwed mothers are obvious. However, does this also imply that children who are born to unwed mothers are more likely to subsequently become an unwed mother? If so, is it because they think it is socially acceptable to be dependent on the government or because of the lack of traditional role models in their lives?
This is talked about in the black community. It started after the war on poverty. The question is why. What triggered it.
I had to take black history in high school.
Wintermute - I think there are three main reasons. One is that the war on poverty created a lot more programs for unwed mothers to support a family. Then shortly after the War on Poverty began in the sixties, the woman’s rights movement conveyed the message that men were not necessary. Remember their slogan “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”. It is, also, a lot more socially acceptable now to be an unwed mother who is dependent on the government than it was in the sixties.
That seems to be in the minority communities. I was born in 73. My white friends who had children out of wedlock were scorned.
I don’t think a woman needs a man but I think it’s positive to have two parents. My girlfriend is pleased how well I handled raising her kid. Two is always better than one.
The three things that should be taken away from this;
- This is not new information, this has been known for years.
- Change the variable from race (zip code, school district, city limits, 3rd letter of last name, etc), and the correlation stays the same.
- BLM has actively tried to make things worse in this area.
Do you think a kid born out of wedlock to single mother will have the same opportunities as a kid born to a two parent home?
Births out of wedlock are such a consistent metric because they represent a dissolved nuclear family. When individuals have no foundation to fall back on – no grounding – they are left to wander aimlessly in life.
If you have shitty, unfocused & uninvolved parents, you will spend many more years struggling to succeed, if you ever manage to succeed at all. Exceptions to this rule are extremely rare.
If otoh your parents are engaged, intelligent (both “book smart” & “street smart”), and teach you how to act, you are going to succeed much much quicker and easier. Again, exceptions rare.
This isn’t fucking rocket science, but the left keeps trying to pretend that either the federal government or a 1960s-style movement club (which is merely a lawless blob of unsuccessful people) can somehow substitute for a functioning family.
So their brainless constituents will keep succumbing to the intellectual crack cocaine of leftist propaganda – the belief that the aforementioned fallacy is true. And they will continue to suffer for it themselves. Oh well.