in today's atlanta journal-constitution...
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Analyze this, the first sentence of an account of a Michael Bloomberg speech to the National Press Club last week, and then take the quiz on why notable public opinion leaders are reluctant to weigh in on the sensitive question of fathers, marriage and child poverty:
“New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a divorced, billionaire dad, said Tuesday that unwed fathers increase poverty and the government should take steps to get them back with their families.”
A divorced, billionaire dad. Meaning what? A gratuitous insertion in a wire service account, it’s clearly intended to convey a message. But what? That because Bloomberg is divorced, he lacks moral authority to urge that tax laws be amended to entice the absentee male back into children’s lives? That because Bloomberg is rich, he lacks legitimacy to speak of poverty?
The gratuitous reference to his wealth and marital status — both matters unrelated to the issue he addressed or content of his remarks — are noteworthy in that they are warnings to public figures to avoid topics where they risk being accused of hypocrisy. Topics like the epidemic of births to unmarried women and the disadvantage and poverty that results.
Bloomberg wasn’t approaching the hot-button issue at the heart of the problem he addressed. He was, instead, proposing financial incentives to buy men back into their children’s lives, including “a substantial expansion and reform” of the earned income tax credit.
“Why should we expect young mothers to work and not young fathers?” he asked, a reference to the 1996 welfare reform law that, with the EITC, “led millions of people into the labor market, where they attained the dignity of work and a chance to rise out of poverty.” With that, he said, the welfare caseload in New York City had dropped by a third over the past five years.
“Right now,” he continued, “fathers are missing from our strategy to drive down the poverty rate. The gains that we’ve made over the past 10 years have been fueled by mothers. … If we are going to achieve another round of substantial gains … we have to do more to connect fathers to jobs and to their families. We have to increase the rewards for work. …”
Among the changes he suggested is eliminating the EITC “marriage penalty” for families with and without children. “Marriage increase a family’s chances of rising out of poverty — why would government discourage it? It shouldn’t. … The EITC should be a catalyst for fathers to fulfill their obligations as responsible spouses, parents and citizens.”
No hot-button cultural rhetoric there. Dry. Nuts-and-bolts.
To the extent that influential voices are dissuaded from addressing vital issues, such as the consequences of the missing father, because they themselves aren’t poor or have failed marriages, everybody loses. Imagine the treatment had Bloomberg chosen to talk about the real dynamic driving poverty, the creation of babies without bothering to marry.
Bloomberg started his conversation with the usual pabulum about education as “one of the best ways to fight poverty.” It is of course true. No question. But when 69.3 percent of black children, 46.4 of Hispanic and 24.5 of white children are born to unmarried women, the die is cast long before the first schoolteacher enters their lives. And even then, it’s fantasy land to believe any public school system anywhere in America can backfill the hours of guidance and teaching the walkaway father might have provided.
When the War on Poverty was first launched in 1964, single women headed 30 percent of the poor families with children. Today it’s double that. The Brookings Institution, to which Bloomberg delivered the same speech, noted in 2002 that in 2000, 40 percent of the children in female-headed families were poor, compared to 8 percent of the children in married families. Only 20 percent of children in families with incomes of less than $15.000 a year live with both parents.
Marriage reduces poverty. Now, because we’re reached the tipping point where the crisis of out-of-wedlock births is so deeply rooted, few public figures who wish to cultivate a following dare mention it. So they walk around it and talk around it.
But sooner or later, leaders rich and poor, married and divorced, do have to start the conversation. And we have to encourage them.
• Jim Wooten is associate editor of the editorial page. His column appears Tuesdays, Fridays and Sundays.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
Bingo.
dont breed'em if ya can't feed'em
12:58 p.m. Say it man say it. It should not matter if you are wealthy or just regular folk you should be responsible for your offspring. The children need to know that they have a dad and that he will support them. It should not be the responsibility of the taxpayers to take care of your children.
D#@! Media Bias!
What says Scoop about our SAT scores? Does he side with Sonny and crow about how we are marginally less horrible as a result of his enlightened governorship?
"Marriage reduces poverty."
Thanks Captain Obvious, I never could have figgered dat out for meself.
80% of the divorces in the US are initiated by the woman for whatever reason. Feminism has taught women in this country staying with the "baby daddy" is not necessary or even desirable.
Given the above, why is anyone surprised we have the current mess?
there is a whole new race of mixed breed children out there that are going to be growing up with only one parent what is going to happen with them?am i the only one who is wondering this, what will they fill out on their forms,other? other what? just walk through Ingles and look its amazing whats going on in this town? is it some kind of fad to bed down with someone of another race and have a kid?this is F'd up big time folks
6:46 let us guess your wife left your sorry as#$ because she got tired of getting the shi@# kicked out of her and you can't understand why,crazy woman
you have dog shi@# for brains
I don't know any women who left a man on a whim. As a matter of fact when I think about it the opposite is true. Most women I know tend to stick with even the most controlling, self-centered, abusive men if they can find any justification at all to stay.
That is why there are so many battered and emotionally damaged women.
Generally a man has to seriously abuse a woman to provoke her enough to leave when she has dependent children. Women are exceptionally driven to protect their offspring even if they put up with a lot of crap just for food or shelter.
The real problem is we have raised a generation of thugs and self-centered males. Women are just there for sex, cleaning, and cooking. They are given a subsistence diet of affection; care, money, and respect while the man just steam-rolls over the woman.
Until men start to realize women have feelings and life is partnership families will continue to disintegrate.
Young people are a different problem, especially in the rural ghetto in an America without jobs. The males are even less of a man than the old beat your wife down to nothing and make her cook and clean crowd. Modern trash men don't even have jobs. They can't or won't support the family, so why would a woman stay with them?
8:59, you have made some excellent points.
I was married to one of these "modern trash men". I stuck around alot longer than I should have trying change him.
I finally got the sense enough to leave him, haven't gotten much child support, and funny enough, my child is doing JUST fine. It was actually the best financial decision I have ever made.
I am glad to know I am able to provide a better, more stable life for my son ALONE than I ever would have been able to do with my job-hopping ex-husband.
Good on ya 10:15
Women need to understand how some men are programmed. I was about 25 before I even realized women could actually think and were important as people. There are a lot of men in their 50's who never reach that point.
If they are going to change they have to do it on their own. You can't change them. Move on and let the trash man enjoy his elderly years alone and bitter in trailer someplace drinking cheap beer and wondering why his son never calls. The last thing you need is a person like that molding your son into a miserable person like him.
Do us all one favor though. Have him thrown in jail for non-support. It could be a win-win for everyone. You might get some well-deserved support payments. The rest of us might get a little tax relief. He might find true love there or at least learn what it's like to be a woman.
12:46, Child Support Enforcement in this state is a joke. I have tried for the past 4 years to collect. You cannot even get someone in the Griffin office to answer the telephone, much less try to track him down. Everytime they find him, he quits his job. They have refused to do anything until he doesn't pay for 90 days. So he pays $80 bucks, and he is good for 90 days.
His arrears are already at over $6,000 and my child isn't even 5.
Glad to see what our tax money goes for.
you should have thought of that type thing happening before you crawled in bed with his no good as#$ it takes two to tango
all this complaining about these sorry husbands out there,what were you thinking when you married him?did you think you were going to change him?hell no he wont change now you have all these kids being raised by single parents with no father figure,folks WAKE THE HELL UP!! start teaching these kids that if you bed down with some sorry piece of crap and have a kid dont come running to us wanting us to raise the thing,get an education wait untill you find someone thats responsible then start start a family when you can afford one
thats why abortation is so improtant in todays society
11:28, When I married him, he had a good job, and we went to church every Sunday, etc. We all know that when you are dating someone they try to put their "best face" forward. The true colors often shine through afterwards, which happened about a year after we married. We are both educated people and I thought he would be a stand up guy and take care of his family, as my father always did. We were married when I got pregnant, and to the poster who said that is why abortion is so important today, I totally disagree. Abortion is murder. Plain and simple. You basically just told me that I should have murdered my precious child. I hope you feel like the scum that you are for saying that.
I don't care what anyone says, The women today are just as devious, scandalous and hard hearted as any man ever was. In my office we have about 80% female. and to hear them talk and see some of the things I see. So you can male bash all you like, Women are just as low down as men. The difference is they just hide it better.
12:08 said "and we went to church every Sunday" that was your first mistake,thinking just because you went to church every sunday made any difference,it dosent,now you know that there are just as many, if not more, nut cases in church than any place else the reason they are there is because they cant cope with reality,and have been brainwashed into beleiving that all people that go to some church are good hearted people,when in reality most who do are not, thats why they feel the need to go to be with their own kind,maybe next time you will keep this in mind before choosing a mate
all men are PIGS--i know because i am one,a man is visually stimulated he is going to get excited at the sight of a female,unless your are a jocksniffer then a man turns you on
1:53- I have wised up alot since then. I am probably one of the most skeptical people you have ever met.
1:53 your child is very lucky to have you for a mother,all the best to you and your child
I say take half their money and make them pay support.
If they aren't paying support throw them in jail.
If the legal system doesn't work, let's start a campaign to make it work or publicly post the names of these deadbeat dads. We need to fix that broken enforcement system so we quit paying for kids that aren't ours.
AMAN to that one
I agree with 10:15. What's best for your child is the most important thing. And to 6:55...what does mixed breed children have to do with anything. Last time I checked America was founded on people trying to be free. People from OTHER RACES trying to make a better life for themselves!
Marriage is sacrificial on both the man and the woman's part.
If you are not willing to sacrifice your own selfish wants, then forget about getting married!
Remember though, if both are willing to sacrifice, then each will be rewarded by the other.
It takes two to tangle.
In order to avoid the tangle,
Men, love your wives. (That's what she desires)
Ladies, support your husbands. (That's what he desires)
Those two basic rules are a necessity, especially if you have children.
If this is too much of a sacrifice for either of you, then I hope that you have no children.
If you cannot sacrifice for one another and you have children, then the children are the ones with the right to complain!
BTW, children won't complain, but they will cry, and rightfully so!
No condemnation intended.
Just truth intended for the sake of the marriage and any children.
I agree 1:43.
When I married, I thought that I had found a man among men. A true gem. I thought he was old school.
After I spent a few years, I was shocked to find out that he was more like a pair of old worn out shoes instead.
Self-sacrifice was never a quality he had and I was just too blinded by love to see the selfishness that ruled our relationship. Once I did, I stuck it out for years. Trying to stuggle to overlook the failing, trying to provide for my kids alone with little financial support from him.
We're divorced now and he still only sees the "me" not "we" in everything he does. I would go farther to say these men aren't just dead beat dads. They're dead beat humans as well. No decency or compassion for others' suffering at all, particularly those who love them the most.
It is so sad. I honestly don't want to ever date again since I'm so afraid I'll get another wolf in sheep's clothing and find out, once again, too late to save my heart.
Women, too, are guilty, I agree. Too many women mess with married men, too many married men mess with married men.
Loyalty doesn't seem to be a quality that is wanted or needed anymore.
Anyone who has been married has been unhappy at some point. If they say they haven't then they're lying. You just suck up those bad times and try to get back to the basics of why you love them. And, if you can't do that, you need to look into your precious children's eyes and see what divorced parents change about their whole mental outlook on relationships.
Divorce is very rarely worth the sacrifice.
Post a Comment