Racist Facts

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

JF - speaking of agenda's...
You seem quick to attempt to point out what you perceive as racism, these days.

I haven't noticed

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Thomas Sowell is black.

Black people can't have agendas?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

JF - speaking of agenda's...
You seem quick to attempt to point out what you perceive as racism, these days.

Yea, try to attack me instead of saying:

you know, frog is right. That guy probably should have left anything at all to do with single parent black families from now vs 1960 out of the article. When actually giving his article any thought more than a quick skim it actually weakens his position instead of strengthens it.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I haven't noticed

Thank you, I haven't either.

[Praxeas]

I would say just about everyone has an agenda...that does not mean whatever they write or say is wrong though.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Black people can't have agendas?

Maybe Sowell's agenda is to liberate his people from the liberal white man's plantation.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Maybe Sowell's agenda is to liberate his people from the liberal white man's plantation.

Maybe. I'd think he wouldn't need to resort to fact spinning the decline of the two parent unit as an observation in support of his view that poverty and racism have nothing to do with that is going on.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I would say just about everyone has an agenda...that does not mean whatever they write or say is wrong though.

No, but blatant fact spinning does weaken ones position and undermines the rest of what you write.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Maybe. I'd think he wouldn't need to resort to fact spinning the decline of the two parent unit as an observation in support of his view that poverty and racism have nothing to do with that is going on.

Are you trying to say that you don't agree with statistics saying that single mothers are more likely to live in poverty? He is hitting the root of the problem as statistics say that 82% of children in married families are less likely to live in poverty.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Maybe. I'd think he wouldn't need to resort to fact spinning the decline of the two parent unit as an observation in support of his view that poverty and racism have nothing to do with that is going on.

The number one statistically significant link to poverty is the single parent household.
link
http://www.brookings.edu/research/te...milies-haskins

snippet

"Family Composition

In 2009, the poverty rate for children in married-couple families was 11.0 percent. By contrast, the poverty rate for children in female-headed families was 44.3 percent. [7] The difference between these two poverty rates is a specter haunting American social policy because the percentage of American children who live in female-headed families has been increasing relentlessly for over five decades. In 1950, 6.3 percent of families with children were headed by a single mother. By 2010, 23.9 percent of families with children had single-mother heads. [8] That a higher and higher fraction of children live in the family type in which they are about four times as likely to be poor exerts strong upward pressure on the poverty rate. One way to think of the shift to female-headed families is that even if government policy were successful in moving people out of poverty, the large changes in family composition serve to offset at least part of the progress that otherwise would be made. In fact, a Brookings analysis shows that if we had the marriage rate we had in 1970, the poverty rate would fall by more than 25 percent. [9]