(no subject)

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Comments

[morgulis.livejournal.com]

Yes, there are 2-parent poor families in the USA. But there are from 10 to 30 times more 1-parent poor families in the USA. Please see the chart above.

[yelena-r0ssini.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that has nothing to do with what I asked you or what you originally said, so.

[morgulis.livejournal.com]

Then you won :)

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

And in Australia that number is about 2-3 times. In a country with a much more generous welfare system.

[morgulis.livejournal.com]

That's because Australia is not US. I will not wonder if in New Zealand the ratio differs from both Australia and US.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

You: Welfare causes child poverty. In America the child poverty rate is 30 times in sole parents.
Me: Australia has even more welfare, and our child poverty rate is lower.


I appreciate that that's not all there is to it, perhaps Australians are just smarter, harder working and overall more bootstrappy than the US, but I'd suggest our more generous welfare system would probably have something to do with our lower rate of child poverty.

No wonder your opinions are so out of whack, you have no idea how evidence works.

[morgulis.livejournal.com]

but I'd suggest our more generous welfare system would probably have something to do with our lower rate of child poverty.

No, it can not be the only reason. More than 17% of Australian children live in poverty by Australian standards ( http://www.acoss.org.au/uploads/ACOSS%20Poverty%20Report%202012_Final.pdf )
There are many countries with much less generous welfare systems and lower percentage of children in poverty (Italy for example).



Also interesting that Australian society actually produces more people in poverty than many countries, say, Spain, and then after distribution of income makes the percentage equal to Spain. Distribution gives resources to poor, that's true, but does not make causes of poverty weaken. Оn the contrary, it preserves and reproduces poverty.

For a single parent family before transfer poverty in Australia is much higher than in US (70% vs 58% in poverty):

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/eiip/eiipid35.asp (first table)

So THE CAUSE of poverty is in family, not in generosity of welfare distribution.

http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/11/why-are-so-many-single-parent-families-in-poverty/265078/

"Single-parent families are significantly more likely to live in poverty across the OECD."

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

Also interesting that Australian society actually produces more people in poverty than many countries, say, Spain, and then after distribution of income makes the percentage equal to Spain

Relative poverty, look it up.

Your graph supports my argument, not yours.

I've already addressed why sole parent families are more likely to be in poverty. So you either accept that the welfare system helps those families and reduces child poverty or you accept a society where women are beaten by abusive husbands (it's *not* a small proportion, and before no fault divorce it was much higher, hell, in this country it wasn't illegal to rape your wife until the 80s), or children are stolen from single mothers at birth.

You want to put your morality on other people, consequences be damned. I say we should try to help everyone to live safe and happy lives.