8 ms·

I find it odd that the article manages to completely ignore/miss the effect of welfare and the change in incentives it may result in. Also, it appears that stat

I find it odd that the article manages to completely ignore/miss the effect of welfare and the change in incentives it may result in. Also, it appears that statistically, single mothers are much more likely to vote Left than Right. In the sci-fi movie Advantageous, a future society with a lot more automation, has high unemployment rates. Recruitment (which in the movie is mostly done by AI) eventually evolves to a consensus whereby most jobs are assigned to men because otherwise society would become a lot more dangerous to everyone. EDIT: References: [1] 74% of single mothers voting Democrat [2] one quarter voting Republican [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/single-mothers-give-presidential-politics-a-new-perspective/2013/06/02/b8f85702-cb90-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html?utm_term=.dd8a17e22032 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/single-mothers-give-... [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/opinion/sunday/single-mothers-with-family-values.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/opinion/sunday/single-moth...

Drumlin 10y ago
> Also, it appears that statistically, single mothers are much more likely to vote Left than Right. If you're married to the state, then you vote for more of the state. It's one of the many examples where liberty has been eroded in recent decades, but few talk about it because it's a sensitive topic.
- mvitorino 10y ago
  Absolutely. For a country referred to as "the land of the free" you surely have a lot of "sensitive topics". As soon as I posted my comment, I started getting down-voted. I believe the post was quite factual, not offensive in any way or prejudicial, so I can only imagine it was affecting someone's sensitivity.
  - Jill_the_Pill 10y ago
    Why do you attribute it to welfare instead of the habitual villainization of single mothers by Republicans? I wouldn't vote for someone who disparages my life situation, particularly if it were a difficult one.
    - mvitorino 10y ago
      I'm not claiming that welfare is what it should be attributed to. Just saying that I think it should be part of the debate anytime anyone looks into these social issues like the article above does.
    - stagbeetle 10y ago
      > habitual villainization of single mothers by Republicans This is the first I'm hearing of this. I know the right is against "leeches," but I've yet to see them single out single mothers. Unless you're referring to undertones in their (Republicans') way of conduct. If so, then I wouldn't expect single mothers to be able to recognize the subtlety.
      - 467568985476 10y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen That kind of language, in various forms, has been a dogwhistle of the right since Reagan started saying it at campaign rallies.
        stagbeetle 10y ago
        I wasn't able to find a way to calculate the prevalence of "welfare queen," but off-hand that phrase doesn't come up too often in the mainstream.
        467568985476 10y ago
        Here's a Google Trends link: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=welfare%20queen https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=welfare%...
        stagbeetle 10y ago
        That was going to be my go-to, but I remembered that search popularity != usage. Though, I am surprised that the term is hovering around 25%.
- stephancoral 10y ago
  Ah yes, the sweet liberty of being unable to provide for your children. Welfare is a pitifully small percent of the budget compared to military, health, and education not to mention the massive amounts of corporate welfare that happens ("I'll get those taxes down for you"). But you're right it's the left voting single moms that erode our liberty. What about the right-voting single moms? Are they "welfare queens" eroding our liberty too or are they just good people who had to make a tough choice?
  - Drumlin 10y ago
    You aren't looking this from a bigger picture. The more infrastructure that is put in place to protect single parents, the more infrastructure that gets in the way for standard families. Basic building blocks for society like marriage become less appealing because the state is too involved in the process. It doesn't really matter how much welfare costs (obviously it should kept under control like military, health and education) and that's why I didn't mention that aspect. All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent.
    - Arizhel 10y ago
      >The more infrastructure that is put in place to protect single parents, the more infrastructure that gets in the way for standard families. Basic building blocks for society like marriage become less appealing because the state is too involved in the process. Huh? Marriage itself is a legal construct by the state, no different than a corporation. Is a corporation a "basic building block for society" too? Should it be? What makes you think marriage is such a great thing that society should be dependent upon it? Statistics show that it's a massive gamble, and you're more likely to lose with it than you are to benefit. On top of that, the risks are enormous: child support, alimony, and in many cases, bankruptcy. >All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent. That's funny, coming from someone who obviously supports marriage, which is absolutely an example of the state nannying people and becoming involved in an individual's life. Try going through a contested divorce and tell me the state wasn't involved. The simple fact is that your "standard familes" are a complete and utter failure. Society needs an all-new paradigm, because clinging to this archaic institution clearly isn't working.
- curun1r 10y ago
  Or, you know, given how wed conservatives have been to the Evangelicals, you tend not to vote for people that tell you you're a sinner and demonize your lifestyle. Homosexuals similarly vote more Left than Right.
htns 10y ago
I'm not convinced of the effect, especially in the context of single mothers and divorce. Welfare would seem to decrease the incentive to divorce an unemployed husband. I've also seen claims that just 100-150 years ago a lower proportion of men were married, and far more died childless, which would go against the narrative trend if true (but who knows if they are).
- mvitorino 10y ago
  I tend to agree with you in that case. Was not aware of your historical claims. Interesting to know.
nikdaheratik 10y ago
That's because women don't decide to have children in order to get welfare, they decide to get welfare because they got pregnant. Also, as a community starts to go downhill, couples often have less access to birth control and other family planning options, especially those who are "just getting by" to begin with. The only people who actually seem to think that welfare causes these problems, are the ones who don't think we should be paying welfare. People who are on welfare or know those on that kind of assistance know better.

Drumlin 10y ago

> Also, it appears that statistically, single mothers are much more likely to vote Left than Right. If you're married to the state, then you vote for more of the state. It's one of the many examples where liberty has been eroded in recent decades, but few talk about it because it's a sensitive topic.

mvitorino 10y ago
Absolutely. For a country referred to as "the land of the free" you surely have a lot of "sensitive topics". As soon as I posted my comment, I started getting down-voted. I believe the post was quite factual, not offensive in any way or prejudicial, so I can only imagine it was affecting someone's sensitivity.
- Jill_the_Pill 10y ago
  Why do you attribute it to welfare instead of the habitual villainization of single mothers by Republicans? I wouldn't vote for someone who disparages my life situation, particularly if it were a difficult one.
  - mvitorino 10y ago
    I'm not claiming that welfare is what it should be attributed to. Just saying that I think it should be part of the debate anytime anyone looks into these social issues like the article above does.
  - stagbeetle 10y ago
    > habitual villainization of single mothers by Republicans This is the first I'm hearing of this. I know the right is against "leeches," but I've yet to see them single out single mothers. Unless you're referring to undertones in their (Republicans') way of conduct. If so, then I wouldn't expect single mothers to be able to recognize the subtlety.
    - 467568985476 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen That kind of language, in various forms, has been a dogwhistle of the right since Reagan started saying it at campaign rallies.
      - stagbeetle 10y ago
        I wasn't able to find a way to calculate the prevalence of "welfare queen," but off-hand that phrase doesn't come up too often in the mainstream.
        467568985476 10y ago
        Here's a Google Trends link: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=welfare%20queen https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=welfare%...
        stagbeetle 10y ago
        That was going to be my go-to, but I remembered that search popularity != usage. Though, I am surprised that the term is hovering around 25%.
stephancoral 10y ago
Ah yes, the sweet liberty of being unable to provide for your children. Welfare is a pitifully small percent of the budget compared to military, health, and education not to mention the massive amounts of corporate welfare that happens ("I'll get those taxes down for you"). But you're right it's the left voting single moms that erode our liberty. What about the right-voting single moms? Are they "welfare queens" eroding our liberty too or are they just good people who had to make a tough choice?
- Drumlin 10y ago
  You aren't looking this from a bigger picture. The more infrastructure that is put in place to protect single parents, the more infrastructure that gets in the way for standard families. Basic building blocks for society like marriage become less appealing because the state is too involved in the process. It doesn't really matter how much welfare costs (obviously it should kept under control like military, health and education) and that's why I didn't mention that aspect. All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    >The more infrastructure that is put in place to protect single parents, the more infrastructure that gets in the way for standard families. Basic building blocks for society like marriage become less appealing because the state is too involved in the process. Huh? Marriage itself is a legal construct by the state, no different than a corporation. Is a corporation a "basic building block for society" too? Should it be? What makes you think marriage is such a great thing that society should be dependent upon it? Statistics show that it's a massive gamble, and you're more likely to lose with it than you are to benefit. On top of that, the risks are enormous: child support, alimony, and in many cases, bankruptcy. >All I'm concerned about is the state becoming so involved in an individual's life, that it nannies them like a parent. That's funny, coming from someone who obviously supports marriage, which is absolutely an example of the state nannying people and becoming involved in an individual's life. Try going through a contested divorce and tell me the state wasn't involved. The simple fact is that your "standard familes" are a complete and utter failure. Society needs an all-new paradigm, because clinging to this archaic institution clearly isn't working.
curun1r 10y ago
Or, you know, given how wed conservatives have been to the Evangelicals, you tend not to vote for people that tell you you're a sinner and demonize your lifestyle. Homosexuals similarly vote more Left than Right.

htns 10y ago

I'm not convinced of the effect, especially in the context of single mothers and divorce. Welfare would seem to decrease the incentive to divorce an unemployed husband. I've also seen claims that just 100-150 years ago a lower proportion of men were married, and far more died childless, which would go against the narrative trend if true (but who knows if they are).

mvitorino 10y ago
I tend to agree with you in that case. Was not aware of your historical claims. Interesting to know.

nikdaheratik 10y ago

That's because women don't decide to have children in order to get welfare, they decide to get welfare because they got pregnant. Also, as a community starts to go downhill, couples often have less access to birth control and other family planning options, especially those who are "just getting by" to begin with. The only people who actually seem to think that welfare causes these problems, are the ones who don't think we should be paying welfare. People who are on welfare or know those on that kind of assistance know better.