« Well,… January Could Have Been a Lot Worse! | Main | Larry Swedroe »
What Are the Root Causes of Being Poor?
By JLP | February 1, 2008
On page 88 of An Inconvenient Book
- About two-thirds of “poor” children reside in a single-parent homes.
- Poor mothers who married before their baby was six months old were half as likely to be raising the child in poverty five years later.
- Married men drink less, take drugs at a lower rate, and earn between 10 and 40 percent more than single men with similar résumés.
- 92 percent of children who live in families that make more than $75,000 per year live with two parents; 80 percent of those who live in families that make less than $15,000 do not.
- Kids who don’t live with two biological parents are more than five times as liekly to be poor and twice as likely to drop out of high school and have behavioral problems.
- Those who marry and never divorce end up more than four times richer than those who never marry.
Although I suspect that most of these facts are true, I wish Glenn would have stated the sources of his facts. There’s no mention of where he actually came up with his information. How his editor missed this, I’ll never know.
Anyway, it’s what he says after his “facts” that I want to concentrate on because I think he makes a LOT of sense:
What does all of this mean? Number crunchers say that if the nuclear family hadn’t collapsed as it has over the last generation, the poverty rate would be 26 percent lower for white children and 38 percent lower for black children. Another estimate found that if poor mothers married their children’s dads, almost three-quarters would immediately be lifted out of poverty.
Just as important, we’ve got to stop telling people they can’t do it. I’ve come to realize that one of the main keys to success in the capitalist system is simply to believe in it. In other words, if you want to beat ‘em, join ‘em. When you think success is possible, yuou spend more time thinki8ng about how to achieve it and less time complaining about all of the system’s imperfections.
I agree 1,000% with that last paragraph! One of the biggest obstacles to overcoming anything is the mindset that it can’t be done. As a parent, one thing that drives me bonkers is to hear my kids say, “I can’t do it!” My response to them when they say this, “You’ll never be able to do it if you believe you can’t do it.” Of course they look at me like I’m an idiot but that’s okay. Eventually what I say will sink in.
Finally, I’m of the mind that politicians DON’T WANT TO HELP the poor. One party depends on their vote and therefore dangles the carrot in front of them to lead them to the polls. The other party prefers to ignore them all together. For once I would like to see a politician take a real leadership position and address the real causes of poverty. After all, in order to fix something, don’t you need to know what caused the problem in the first place?
I had never heard of Glenn Beck until I saw his book in the bookstore the other day. I don’t agree with everything he says, but I do consider myself a fan of his work. Good stuff!
Related:
The Glenn Beck Show on Headline News
Topics: Miscellaneous |
February 1st, 2008 at 10:23 am
Glenn Beck is the hackiest of hacks. I would recommend browsing this page — http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/tags/glenn_beck?f=h_hot — before you decide to give credence to any of the facts he claims.
February 1st, 2008 at 10:34 am
You may also be interested to know that as the worldwide number of pirates has decreased, the worldwide global temperature has also increased. Therefore, global warming is clearly attributable to the modern decline of pirates. There’s a handy dandy graph of this phenomenon here http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/
February 1st, 2008 at 10:38 am
Alex,
What exactly does that have to do this topic?
February 1st, 2008 at 10:48 am
Correlation and causation? For example, people who abuse alcohol or other drugs probably have a harder time forming solid relationships that lead to marriage. So, does being single lead to drug use or does drug use (including alcohol) lead to being single?
February 1st, 2008 at 11:20 am
“Correlation does not imply causation.”
The lack of sources should probably be a clue that they were either biased or don’t exist. You have to keep his background in mind. He has a vested interest in pushing nuclear families with biological parents at the helm.
The tough part is explaining these statistics to the women with the baby whose father drank, took drugs, and beat her while they were together.
Poverty is a big problem, no doubt. But I don’t think forcing the “sacrament of marriage” down everyone’s throat as the best way to get people out of it.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:38 am
JLP-
Have you read “Freakonomics” or “How to Lie With Statistics”? I would recommend both before giving Beck’s conclusions much credence. I think that’s what Alex is driving at with his comment.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:42 am
Toby said:
“Poverty is a big problem, no doubt. But I don’t think forcing the “sacrament of marriage” down everyone’s throat as the best way to get people out of it.”
My whole point with posting this was to look at the situation from a different point of view. No matter what your stance, you can’t help but wonder if the breakdown of the family has had anything to do with poverty.
Finally, you say that Glenn has a vested interest in pushing nuclear families. Don’t some politicians have a vested interest in telling voters ONLY what they want to hear?
February 1st, 2008 at 11:57 am
The bottom line is that Poor people do not want to hear “what they should do”. Some just want you to have pity on them. Others do want a change but they are not sure what direction to take. When you are constantly surrounded around underachievers, your moral and everthing else goes down.
I think power of association plays to big part in being successful.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:59 am
I never knew much about Glenn Beck, but I picked up that book and devoured about 2/3 of it one day at a relative’s house. I have to say he DOES make a lot of sense, whether or not you give credence to every single stat he quotes.
The point of this is to look at poverty in a different way and consider how we define “the poor,” how those people got to be that way, and what changes could be made to change their status.
Glenn points out that most “poor” households would immediately not be classified as such if they contained 2 working adults (as opposed to one single parent). Simple fact.
I find this and other facts stimulate my thinking and challenge my pre-conceived notions. Whether or not you agree with Mr. Beck on all his issues doesn’t change the fact that he is good at making you think, and thinking isn’t something we Americans do too much of!
February 1st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I agree that he is twisting statistics. He is doing exactly what he claims that Al Gore does about global warming.
February 1st, 2008 at 12:04 pm
I think it’s true that many politicians find poverty useful; poor peoople provide lots of opportunities for demagoguery, they’re good for arguments that we need more taxes/programs “for the children”, and may become a permanent voting block if you can make them dependent on government largesse.
An extreme version of this is Hugo Chavez, who loves the poor and dependent so much he wants to drive everyone else out of the country.
February 1st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Credit Card Reviews said:
“I agree that he is twisting statistics. He is doing exactly what he claims that Al Gore does about global warming.”
Can you explain how exactly Glenn is twisting statistics?
February 1st, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Glenn Beck only hits on the tip of the iceberg, the causes of poverty and the ways out are complex. I read the book “Bridges out of Poverty” by Ruby Payne, and it was an eye opener for me. I suggest if someone is interested in finding out more about this problem to read this book.
February 1st, 2008 at 1:28 pm
I have had a front row seat on this issue, having 1st of all grown up in a relatively poor, single-parent household, amid ghettos and housing projects, 2nd, been introduced to the wealthy side of society thru attending an Ivy League college, and subsequently after many years of hard work, become what you would might call pretty well-off by the age of 40 (I am now 40-something). I might also add that I married into a family, that I would call millionaire next door types. I got no direct financial assistance from them (least you might think I did not work for every single penny), though I got a lot out of learning by observation.
In a sense, I have had a kind of Rich Dad, Poor Dad experience (not that I want to bring up RK in any way). Maybe its more like Rich Dad, Poor Mom.
I have not read any of Beck’s work, but it sounds like some of his points have merit. Cause and effect is hard to figure out in this mess: Are women less likely to marry or stay married if they are poor and have children, or are they poor because they have a tendency to have children out of wedlock? I can’t really say. What is obvious, is that poverty and class is very sticky. It’s really hard to break the cycle. And it usually takes generations.
In my case, I was fortunate. My mom valued education and had a degree from a community college, which enabled her to prepare me for college. And she believed in us, which gave me the gifts of both hope, vision, and confidence. In addition, being part of my wife’s family gave me strong economic examples to follow. I am convinced that class and culture plays a huge role in wealth accumulation. I am also convinced that the wealth and resources of one’s parents plays an even bigger role. From the research I’ve been reading, even small economic benefits such as assistance paying for college, help with a down payment on a home, gifts to your kids from their grandparents, etc., play a huge role in one’s economic future.
The subject is deep and I’m out of time. It’s a very relevant subject that I’d love to explore further.
February 1st, 2008 at 1:30 pm
I haven’t read Glenn Beck’s book, but I have seen stats about marriage leading to higher earning (not because of two incomes, but for a single earner) in another study. I wish I could find the source…
I do think he should have cited the stats he was using, but just because that’s missing doesn’t necessarily mean the stats are wrong.
February 1st, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I don’t know. A couple of things I think contribute to being poor are ignorance of money and its meaning/inability to use it wisely, and the inability to bring enough in. Some people who are employable do best in jobs that happen to be low-paying. Also, if a parent believes that the children must have a full-time parent and consequently have only one wage-earner in the household, income may be less. I say “may” because employment costs money, and it is possible to do better on one income. Our culture does not encourage self-control, independent thinking or wise money management, so it isn’t too big of a surprise that this culture produces many negatives.
February 1st, 2008 at 3:18 pm
To finish the earlier post, I think that what most middle and upper class folks miss about poverty is how the lack of economic resources shapes EVERYTHING. My in-laws are a prime example. Let’s just say that some members of my my in-law family are not the brightest bulbs in the bunch - no smarter or more hard working than many of the less successful people I have known. Yet, they all pretty much own their own homes, and have six-figure household incomes, in some cases based on only one-earner. In some cases, they are millionaires. What accounts for the difference.
For starters, they live in a economically viable community with plenty of high-paying jobs available and where home values have steadily risen. Secondly, they live where schools are good, which helps give people the tools they need to be successful. Third, they have a BIG safety net. One of my BIL’s is a huge scew-up, but mommy and daddy come to the rescue to bail him out even though he’s middle-aged now. He’s successful because he was born on 3rd base as the saying goes.
If I added up all the economic transfers from my in-law parents to their children, it would come to a lot of money: Having college paid for, having weddings paid for, getting a hand-me-down car at a discount, getting bailed out when you don’t have enough cash to meet bills, constantly buying things for the grandkids, etc. This stuff is so typical in middle-class families, people don’t give it a second thought, because its normal where you come from.
If you’re poor and can’t make rent, you’re homeless. If you can’t make the car payment, your car is repo’s and you have no way to get to work. If you need emergency medical care, it could bankrupt you. You don’t even get medical care until its an emergency because you can’t afford it. Even, if your kid makes it to college, they end up with massive student loans that take years to repay, limiting economic choices (such as delayed saving and home ownership). And in poor families, parents are likely to become economic burdens rather than sources of wealth in later years, another double-whammy. I know I won’t be getting an inheritance (though admittedly, my wife will and it could amount to a lot).
One interesting thing to think about is how income and wealth get treated like they are the same by the govt - they are not. Most of the govt stats use income as a measure of wealth. But, there is a vast difference between somebody making $50K a year, with no safety net vs. somebody making $50K a year from a family where they can get some help from time to time.
The solutions to poverty are not just about changing behavior - that’s only half the battle. It really is all about the money. We do not have a level playing field.
February 1st, 2008 at 3:29 pm
MediaMatters? Ha, ha, ha… talk about a hack site… there’s one for you!
February 1st, 2008 at 3:36 pm
A lack of citations usually means that the author has something to hide or does not want to reveal where the data comes from. If a person is to rely on data, the failure to cite its source should immediately throw any argument into doubt.
February 1st, 2008 at 4:54 pm
I think JLP is correct when he says it is a mindset to get out of poverty. We learn from our surroundings; the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. The only way it changes is when someone living in poverty decides that their surroundings aren’t good enough. They become dedicated to doing whatever it takes to get out.
Of course, Miguel brings up some great points, especially since he went through it, that you need some money to get out of poverty. If you can’t get to your job due to no car, you won’t make money.
But, from the folks I have known, read about, or examined, they pulled themselves out of poverty because they envisioned it.
February 1st, 2008 at 4:58 pm
As a single parent, I consider myself lucky because my household doesn’t fit the statistical mold of a single parent household with regards to income, education, success, child behavior and school performance. My income exceeds $100k and my daughter is an athlete, a musician and a college bound honor’s student. However, I do think there’s a hint of truth to Glenn Beck’s assertions and I don’t need to know the source of his statistics when all I have to do is look around me.
Most of the women in my family are single parents. Most of the women I attended high school with are single parents. Most of my childhood friends are single parents. As a society, I think people have become more accepting of giving birth out of wedlock. In my grandmother’s generation, it was damn near blasphemy to do such a thing. But since it’s no longer shameful, people (self included) make decisions without considering the harm it may have on the family unit. Those poor decisions create a domino effect of sacrifice, struggle, and missed opportunities - ultimately resulting in poverty.
Growing up in poverty, one interesting thing I noticed - when one is surrounded by people who lead similar lifestyles, there is no motivation to overcome circumstances and it becomes the acceptable norm. When the norm isn’t considered “bad” or “wrong”, it’s very easy for history to repeat itself. Eventually, you just assume everyone else is living the same way.
It’s a problem that stems many generations - especially in the AA community - and will take many generations to correct. Having lived it, survived it, and escaped it - I don’t want anyone I love to repeat it. Especially my own daughter. Therefore, the very first thing I did was remove her from the environment and exposed her to things that I considered acceptable. She’s more culturally diverse than I ever was, she attends one of the best public HS in the country (according to Newsweek), she plays two instruments, she’s a sprinter and a cheerleader, I nurture her interest in writing and journalism, she will travel abroad for the first time this year, I challenge her when she’s uncomfortable, I push her to be the best in everything she does, and I lead by example to teach her financial responsibility. The only thing I haven’t done, which I can’t control 100%, is demonstrate a loving, nurturing relationship between a man and a woman - but I hope that doesn’t negate everything else I’ve tried to correct.
Now let me speak for the other side. Being a single parent is HARD. Damn hard! In fact, it’s one of the hardest things I’ve ever done in my life. So I don’t think any of these people that contribute to the “poor statistics” planned or chose to be single parents. I think it’s safe to assume that most people firmly believe every child needs two LOVING and NURTURING parents to raise well rounded, productive, young adults - but I also know that life deals different cards to different people. Having two parents just for the sake of counting two income generating adults in the home, regardless of circumstances, is not always in the best interest of the child either. Therefore, I wouldn’t attribute single parent households as the “root cause” of being poor. Although it is a factor, it isn’t the ONLY factor. Some people are just lazy. LOL
Much like Miguel, this is a topic that greatly interests me and I’d love to explore it further.
February 1st, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Single Ma,
I hope your daughter knows how blessed she really is to have a mom like you.
February 1st, 2008 at 5:18 pm
[...] What Are the Root Causes of Being Poor? [...]
February 1st, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Throughout the ages, families have been a survival technique, a way to help survive. Apparently that is still the case. Just think of it as evolution in action.
February 1st, 2008 at 5:33 pm
I see poor people….Walking around like regular people. They don’t see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don’t know they’re poor (as borrowed from sixth sense)
How about the well off poor who have enslaved themselves in debt?
February 1st, 2008 at 5:33 pm
“This stuff is so typical in middle-class families…”
@Miguel: You are grossly mis-informed about the middle-class. You are obviously talking about the “wealthy”. Most middle-class people don’t come anywhere near this level of support. The average MC family makes about $40k and has a net worth of $86k. That is not nearly enough to shower their children with money and silver spoons.
Your in-laws, with their million+ net worth and six-figure salaries, are way up there on the upper-upper-middle class (if not beyond that). You really can’t compare them (top 10%) with those living in poverty (bottom 10%) and just shut the book saying that money solves everything. You’re missing the 80% of people in the middle (aka the actual middle-class).
You say you have worked your way out of poverty and are now well-off. You also claim the solution to poverty is “all about the money”. If so, I challenge you to go back to your old neighborhood and start handing out cash. Go ahead and level the playing field…
…But you already know what will happen, don’t you? I have my share of poor relatives too. I’ve learned hard lessons at the cost of thousands of dollars. Money comes and goes for my poor relatives but year after year they are still mired in the same patch of quicksand they were in 5, 10, 20 years prior. Living paycheck-to-paycheck and every unexpected expense turns into a dire emergency. Money will not solve their problems and it won’t solve poverty either.
February 1st, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I grew up in a middle to lower-middle class household. Single parent, who was a teacher. I had to work through college, and fully financed graduate school. I earn nearly $30K/year more than my husband, and have out-earned him since the day we met. He owns the house we live in, paid cash for his car, and has no debt.
Neither of us is lazy - we both work full-time jobs and are careful with money.
Why the difference in our financial states? His family is extraordinarily wealthy, and they have been ‘passing wealth’ to him for years.
I admit, having an educated single parent who taught school has been a contributing factor in my only REALLY being able to sock away money after I turned 35. It is certainly not the only factor - if, like my husband, I’d had a trust fund, and been receiving $10k/year, tax-free, since I turned 21, then I’d be in terrific financial shape.
Poverty and its causes are simply too complex for the sort of simplistic analysis offered here by Beck. Blaming single parents for their (and, potentially their children’s) poverty is really a cheap shot, and not worthy of discussion, unless one considers other factors, and is willing to actually consider causality. Do you think people should look at educational level in discussing poverty? What about geography? Ethnicity? Amount spent on education where these people grew up? Parental literacy rates? Please, please…. if you’re thinking about publishing research results that don’t offer source citations, are blatantly simplistic, and that push political and moral hot buttons, just don’t.
February 1st, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Toby,
I don’t understand why we can’t discuss these issues without being short with each other.
I think you are way off base in your criticisms of Miguel. Miguel has been a long-time reader and commenter here and I have NEVER found him to be misinformed.
In a lot of respects poverty is “all about the money” because if you don’t have the money, you’ll never rise above the poverty line. I have known plenty of “smart” poor people.
February 1st, 2008 at 5:56 pm
There was a good article on this in City Journal a few months ago.
February 1st, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Cami,
I suggest the next time you’re in a bookstore, read the chapter in Beck’s book (it’s somewhere around page 89). Beck wasn’t saying that these are the ONLY reasons for poverty but that they are things that should be examined further. In other words, could the breakdown of marriage be a potential cause of poverty? I think it could.
February 1st, 2008 at 6:10 pm
@Tody - Slow down there. Would be difficult to put my life story in a post, so there are many details missing. My family runs the full range, from rich to middle to poor. I know people in all the economic buckets.
And my parent in-laws were not always so well-off. They started out totally middle-class. That’s why I call them millionaire next door types. They built wealth bit-by-bit, by saving and thrift. And my FIL eventually did really well in his corporate career over time, got stk options, and retired pretty well-off. But, my wife and her siblings grew up in a middle-class household, with middle-class values, and middle-class benefits. Her and siblings, on the other hand, are upper and upper-middle-class, at least economically. My point is that they had middle-class benefits along the way that made them very upwardly mobile.
Now, we can split hairs about where the income cut-off for middle-class is. But, that’s complicated. In my part of the country, $40K household income would be lower middle. Teachers, cops, firemen, govt workers, other than entry-level, can make much more than that. And most households have two-earners. $100K income is not that unusual for a two-earner household on the coasts and does not necessarily make one upper middle-class without some other measure of attendent wealth.
Now, as far as solutions go, sorry if you misunderstood me. I did not say giving people money was a solution (and yeh, I have tried that from time to time). I am, however, saying that the lack of educational and financial resources account for a lot of the issues and the difficulty of escaping the situation. This deficiency of resources affects people from the day they are born into poverty. I won’t pretend to know the perfect solution. But, I do know that as a culture, we like to blame people for being poor and not being able to help themselves, and I’m just pointing out that I think that is wrong.
February 1st, 2008 at 6:23 pm
@JLP - Thanks for the props. The feeling is mutual.
February 1st, 2008 at 8:15 pm
The money matters, but also knowing that there’s things that one should do and a “game” that should be played matters also. I grew up around numerous immigrants, and have watched many of them grow up.
Among the immigrants I grew up with, many of the Vietnamese did very well; they came here penniless and without speaking English, but they were largely from the professional and up classes in Vietnam, so they knew that if they worked hard, saved money, got themselves and their kids educated, and opened businesses or found professional jobs, they’d do well. Some other immigrants, who were originally farmers or unskilled workers in their home countries, did less well, and while some have made it, many others are still struggling.
The sad truth is it often boils down to education, both the sort one gets at school, but also, probably more importantly, the cultural education one gets from one’s family and surroundings. Learning how to achieve in society can’t be taught by schools if it’s contradicted at home or by one’s peers.
February 1st, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Whoa, I was about to post saying that it appears the book is using fuzzy statistics. Correlation is not causation. But a handful of posters beat me to it - including a nice reference to Freakonomics.
I don’t completely agree with the quotes from the book, but I do agree that they appear intuitive at first glance. But gathering real data for this is hard.
How about this (example from Freakonomics): kids that listen to classical music will be smarter. It’s commonly known as the Mozart affect. It’s conventional wisdom now. Governor Zell Miller even used tax dollars to send classical CDs to parents of newborns.
Well, no one ever blamed Zell Miller of being the brightest bulb on the tree. It turns out the only study that showed positive results was deeply flawed. Couple that with folks “wanting to believe” that classical music has a positive effect and sooner or later tax dollars are spent on dumb things.
Nothing against Mozart, but one needs to be careful when reading.
February 1st, 2008 at 8:57 pm
It seems fairly obvious that one adult earning a wage (or on welfare) will have a harder time supporting a family than two adults (either both earning, or one doing childcare/housekeeping while the other works full-time).
Since single mother’s (divorced/single) are the majority of the single parent’s supporting a family, how about society experiments with providing cheap housing for DUAL single-parent family occupation? Two single mother’s could share housing, thus saving on housing costs and providing each other with the child-raising support that they’d get from their partner in a marriage or de facto relationship. One complication would be that these household structures would be more transient than married/de facto couples, and they’d tend to break up as one or the other of the women decided to move out and establish a new household with a boyfriend/new spouse. Perhaps a household of 3-4 single mother’s and their kids would be more sustainable, as individual departures could be replaced by new arrivals…
It seems that politicians are concentrating on either traditional nuclear families or single-parent households. It’s time to experiment with some alternative choices and see which ones are helpful to eliminate poverty and provide kids with the best home environment in the circumstances.
February 1st, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Our definition of “poverty” in this country is perverted and filled with pathos. As long as we allow emotion to control our response to the issue we will never change anything.
I work in a profession that deals with many people who would be identified as poor. What is sometimes ignored is that many of these people want to live this way. It is simply a lifestyle choice. You can give them a home, pay for their food, utilities, education and even find them a job and they will still choose to do the things that keep them in a lifestyle none of us would want or elect to remain in. It takes a strong work ethic and discipline to be successful and they simply don’t possess that kind of desire.
I think Beck’s point is there are quantifiable ways to live that give you a better chance at success. This make more sense than the redistribution of wealth that our government has mandated over the last 40 years. Their “War on Poverty” has only made the problem worse.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Well I think politicians DO want to help the poor…it’s just there is only such much you can do. At some point people have to help themselves. The govt will set up favorable policies in place, but eventually individual families have to make the final effort. It’s the whole leading the horse to water and unable to make it drink example.
February 2nd, 2008 at 12:45 am
I think the most disturbing part of this post was the title. Like others have said correlation is not causation.
Perhaps the root cause of being poor is having children!! It’s very difficult to be a star performer at work when you have a child who is sick and isn’t allowed to go to expensive daycare. Perhaps instead of suggesting that people get married, we work harder on making sure young people get the right contraceptives and education on sex and birth control.
I would rather see a child grow up in a poor single-parent home than in a two-parent family where the father abuses drugs, the mother or the children.
February 2nd, 2008 at 2:59 am
I agree. I’m so sick of politicians and bleeding hearts acting like the evil “system” is keeping these otherwise outstanding citizens down so a select few can get richer. Sure there is people who just happen to be a in situation where they are simply a victim of the system. Take health care and disability for example, there is no middle ground. If you have a medical condition that makes it difficult to fully support yourself, yet you can contribute something, your hands are pretty much tied. You either have to be really rich to pay for everything yourself, or really poor to get assistance. Same with getting help with college expenses. That drives me nuts, but I’m getting off topic. My point is, sure I’ve met poor people who are genuinely, I hate to use the term, but victimized by the system; however the majority of poor people I have met simply have issues that is all on them. Now what really drives me crazy is when the bleeding hearts then go on to again blame society and the “system” for not only holding them back, but also causing these problems that contribute to their poverty.
February 2nd, 2008 at 7:56 pm
I am not familiar with Glenn Beck, but I feel that many of his arguments may be pointing to another idea. It is that we live in a society where single parenthood is an accepted norm and being critical of it is viewed as some sort of intolerant attitude. It is certainly good that we no longer look at poverty or single parenthood as some sort of character defect, but it may not be so good that we let parents off the hook who have children that they are not prepared (financially, psychologically, or emotionally) to raise properly.
There is nobility in raising your children the best you can with what you have. Accidents happen, but to continue to have children out of wedlock or not improve your earning potential once you have a child depending on you is shameful and selfish. This shameful behavior is compounded by the self-righteous attitude of those who think that parenthood in and of itself relieves them (or others) of responsibilty and self-sacrifice.
Part of a can-do attitude is believing that you can always do more. Any decent person wants more for their children than they have, but a good parent continually works and sacrifices to make it happen.
February 2nd, 2008 at 7:57 pm
[...] What Are the Root Causes of Being Poor? AllFinancialMatters weighs in on Glen Beck’s position… [...]
February 3rd, 2008 at 12:25 am
@julia - “Perhaps the root cause of being poor is having children!!”
I hope that was tongue-in-cheek, or that you were proposing another facetious correlation-not-causation argument. Forgive me for speaking anecdotally, but I and a number of friends have three or more children and are doing just fine. Of course, having said that, I must acknowledge that all of us are one-income households, married, with a stay-at-home parent, so the sick child thing wouldn’t be a big problem for us.
But perhaps that’s Glenn’s point. There are a lot of things that are easier in a two parent household, assuming that the parents get along. The very example that you gave lends support to the idea that a nuclear family is more likely to be well-off than a single parent home.
Putting on my engineering hat, it’s simply cheaper (more money efficient) to house and feed a group of people in a single house than to divide those people among several homes — particularly given the cost of housing in places like the San Francisco area. This is particularly the case when the members of the household are working toward a common goal, like a happy family.
I applaud EnoughWealth’s idea of creating multi-family units. When we moved into our new home, we had to sign an agreement that our home would not be used as a multi-family dwelling. I think that’s ridiculous. We could easily house another (small) family in our home, once we finish the basement this summer. However, I think that implementation of such an idea would inevitably result in frictions among the families living in the home. Arguments over details like payment for utilities usage, food, cleaning, and personality issues would reduce the effectiveness of the idea. But it’s worth trying.
February 4th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
It seems pretty logical to me that there’s a connection between single-parent households and poverty. Like it or not, when you have two adults in a household, you generally have more of a safety net. If one loses a job, develops an illness, or needs to work less because one of the kids has a serious illness, the other is there to help deal with things. If you have only one adult in the house, it’s all on him or her. And if something goes wrong that strikes at his/her ability to support the family, it’s a much bigger deal than if there’s a husband or a wife who can continue to bring in an income.
Is it possible for a single-parent household to not also be a poor one? Of course. Is it possible for a dual-parent household to be poor or to have other problems? Also yes. But I do think there is sense in recognizing that in general, single-parent households lack some of the benefits that– in general– go along with dual-parent households. There are a lot of things in life that are easier if you don’t have to do them alone, and raising a family is one of them.
February 4th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
[...] All Financial Matters asks what are the root causes of being poor. [...]
February 5th, 2008 at 9:56 am
[...] As some of the commenters said on my post last week about the root causes of being poor: [...]
February 6th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
The comment about the marraige study..”I just wish I could find the source” says it all. I ahve a friend who is a conservative fundamentalist, and they ahve been emailing these stats around for over a decade. There really is no study or source. He forwards this crap to me, and it si always a “new study” shows….but never really a study. Some of them are actual publications from these ultra-conservative or religous “think tanks” and are total bunk.
Having come froma two parent modest family but attended a upscale school, but also spending years working in poor cities and bad neighborhoods, I think there is so much variety that any time you see one of these “studies” with such sweeping generalizations you just have to figure your being hoodwinked. Really.