Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Marriage and income gap inseparably linked--Joseph Perkins

And that was the headline of the opinion page in the Jan. 26, 2000 Dixon (IL) Telegraph. I had saved the paper because it announced my mother's death on January 24. Today I was cleaning out a sack of old calendars and found it.

I'm not familiar with the work of Joseph Perkins (hated by Democrats for leaving their plantation), a black columnist for the San Diego Union-Tribune (at that time). I don't think any person who's seen the research doubts the relationship between wealth and marriage, or crime and a father in the home. Perkins points to a "new study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute which said that "the gap between rich and poor was significantly greater in the late 1990s than during the 1980s." Don't they always say that with a moving clock? At that time our country was in the longest period of economic expansion with the economy generating more than 20 million new jobs and $2 trillion in additional economic output since WWII, but the "rich have gotten richer, while the poor have remained in place."

Perkins says it doesn't have to do with tax policy or Republicans or spending on anti-poverty programs. "The reality is that the single biggest determinant of a family's upward or downward mobility is whether the family is headed by a married couple. . . Only one out of 20 married couple families are poor. He goes on to point out that single parent families have grown during the past three decades (1970s through 1990s).
    The problem of the poor is not the availability of jobs, for the economy has generated so many new jobs during the past decade that anyone who can't find a job just doesn't want to work. And the problem isn't taxes because most poor folks don't pay taxes, and many actually receive checks from the government in the form of the earned income-tax credit. No, to close the income distribution gap, the next president will have to have the courage to say that the path to upward mobility for the nation's least-well-off begins at the marriage altar."
And here it is 11 years later, we don't have a 3.5% unemployment rate, and still our leaders think the solutions are rehabing houses, more stimulus money, and jobs programs. But women need to keep their legs closed and men need to keep their pants zipped, and they need to finish school and get married before they start a family.

Perkins apparently left his post in 2005, I found him as a columnist more recently at Examiner.com, but his e-mail bounced.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

And of course, it would be helpful if spouses did not die...

Norma said...

That goes without saying for lots of reasons, not just income and parenting, but I can't think of any government program that could change that.

Soapbox Jill said...

Family is the answer, even to dealing with a spouse's death and the hard times following. In the past, family would take in the spouse/children. The family unit, based on a married couple, is the building block of a stable, strong society. Each unit works together for the benefit of each other, and this extends into the community. This is the opposite of the government trying to "take care" of people, which is inefficient and lacks the personal quality of family.