Updated Feb 14, 2012 - 10:09 am

Is marriage the antidote to poverty?

Listen to Dave Ross Commentary: Is marriage the antidote to poverty?

Marriage is on the skids, and Rick Santorum has been sounding the alarm:

"We've seen the percentage of people married in this country over the last 30 years has dropped from 71 percent of people over the age of 18 being married 30 years ago, now down to 51 percent," said Santorum.

marriag And it's not just a moral issue:

"It's also important for our economy. Two parent families in America are much less likely to be in poverty," said Santorum.

You've heard this many times: two-parent families are much less likely to be in poverty, therefore, by encouraging marriage, we can bring the economy back. And yet, a Valentine's Day report, just issued by Brookings, tracks marriage rates and incomes over the last forty years...and it finds that for men earning in the top 10 percent, there is no marriage crisis. More than 80 percent are married.

It's for men earning at the bottom that the marriage rate has dropped down to 50 percent.

This was happening before gay marriage. Instead, it seems to track with the disappearance of well-paid working-class jobs.

You see, women still want to get married but with one caveat: "If you like it then you should have put a ring on it," sings Beyonce.

Social scientists call this the Beyonce Ultimatum. They want a ring on it, a picket fence around it, and a roof over it. And a man can't do that unless he has a job.

It's not the two-parent household that will bring the economy back, it's the economy that will bring two-parent household back. What she really wants for Valentine's Day is to see your pay stub.

Subscribe to the Dave Ross Commentary podcast

share this:

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (25)

Add A Comment

0

0
It's me! Ha ha! wrote...

Is marriage the antidote to poverty?

February 14, 2012 9:36 am

Maybe. I don't know. But I do know that voting out these Liberals and this regime will stop our tailspin deeper into poverty and begin the long road to recovering from 4 years of Liberals and this regime.

409333

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
delvin wrote...

the top 10% of male earners are married-DUH! ITS NOT THE TOP % THAT IS THE PROBLEM

February 14, 2012 10:05 am

Dave and Luke-Do you really think that if young men and women were far more careful and didnt pop out babies with no ability to provide for them, but instead waited until the women picks a father who will take responsibility, the women has a job, they both can live in better neighborhoods, with better schools that we WOULDN'T HAVE LESS POVERTY. I dont care if they are married, it is taking personal responsibility for your own kid that makes the difference. It is simple, WELFARE, SECTION 8 HOUSING AND FOOD STAMPS DESTROYS LIVES. Hey don't we have the morning adter pill now? Libs don't care about poverty!!!! They are all talk and no action!!!

409352

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
SeattleNative wrote...

Yes...

February 14, 2012 10:41 am

...I kinda' gotta' believe that single-parent households do utilize more government welfare programs than duel-income households. By a large margin.

409373

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
Sean wrote...

What Dave CONTINUES to NOT GET

February 14, 2012 10:50 am

is that yes, most of us opponents to gay "marriage" do not argue with the fact that two-parent households are better and healthier than single-parent households. THAT'S TRUE. But a gay-parent couple doesn't have to be referred to as "married" to be a LEGALLY united, committed couple with all the same rights as hetero couples. It isn't the LABEL that makes the household healthier, Dave, it's that two caring people are there and involved, hopefully, in their kids' lives. And gee, what's even a BETTER and more NATURAL and HEALTHIER model for those kids? A MAN (father) and a WOMAN (mother). To deny that is to deny that what men and women UNIQUELY bring to their roles as parents and to provide that male/female dynamic and perspective to their children. Dave, were you raised by robots? No, you had a MOM and a DAD -- and I doubt you would deny that they both brought male and female attributes to your childhood that absolutely benefitted you -- and better than a man/man or a woman/woman couple would have. Does that mean that a gay couple would have raised a criminal or a sociopath or a deviant? NO. But I doubt you'd trade either of your parents for the opposite sex. And THAT'S a HUGE part of the case against gay "marriage." we as a society need to uphold THAT model and yes, make a statement -- despite how the gay community cries "victim" -- that SAYS SO. It doesn't mean that a gay couple is immoral or wrong, but it DOES say that we recognize the value of a man/woman parental couple. Gays can whine all they want -- I'm not against them and they should have all the legal rights others have -- BUT WHAT THEY BRING TO THE FAMILY AND PARENT MODEL IS NOT AND WILL NEVER BE THE SAME as a hetero couple. WHY CAN PEOPLE NOT GET THAT WITHOUT CRYING "VICTIM," "PREJUDICE," "INTOLERANCE" AND DISCRIMINATION??????

409378

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
TheSymbolForBoron wrote...

Hey Sean,

February 14, 2012 11:19 am

What data are you drawing your conclusions about gay parenting from? I've known 4 gay couples with children. I would put their parenting skills and the outcomes of their children up against any straight couple. ANY. The gay couples I've known are wealthier, better educated, more loving and caring and are better parents than most hetero couples I've known. How do the gay couples with children you know compare?
People on your side of the argument know a lot more gay people than you think. They keep that information from you for fear of persecution and retribution. Gay couples deal with that every day. Ultimately it makes them stronger and more courageous than your average straight couple.
The real damage the children of gay couples experience comes not from the parents; it comes from the bigotry that perpetrated on their parents and, therefore, the children, by people like delvin, seattlenative and even you.
If you (and people on your side of the argument) really cared about the welfare of the children of gay couples, you would work toward ending their parent's persecution. You don't own the word 'marriage'. You also don't get your way every time. Get over it.
The American way of dealing with issues eventually wins out. Bigotry always loses. Civil rights always win.

409400

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409378

0 Reply Report this as abuse
delvin wrote...

why is this topic always turned into gay marriage?

February 14, 2012 11:44 am

It is about poverty and single women who are dependent on the nanny state, raise kids who are far more likely to grow up dependent, go to prison, have drug problems. You Seattle hip lib people don't seem to understand thank most people couldn't care less about gay marriage and are bloody tired of hearing about it. It is legal in Wash-get married and then shut the blank up!!!!! This has become BORING

409416

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409400

0 Reply Report this as abuse
wonderfulone wrote...

Well, delvin...

February 14, 2012 11:57 am

When you say WELFARE, SECTION 8 HOUSING AND FOOD STAMPS DESTROYS LIVES. And "Libs don't care about poverty!!!!" it doesn't seem like you're much into having a discussion. You sound just like a lot of other right-wingers on this board who believe that the solution to any problem should fit on a bumper sticker. Poverty is a complex issue and it's not just the 'nanny state' that causes it. Your description of poverty and your supposed solutions are just a simple caricature and not really helpful.

409424

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409416

0 Reply Report this as abuse
delvin wrote...

have you read any books on the cycle of poverty? What are they?

February 14, 2012 2:46 pm

Do you give any money to stop the cycle of poverty? What organizations? I am deeply commited to stoping the cycle, rather than enabling the cycle and pretending to care!

409511

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409424

0 Reply Report this as abuse
delvin wrote...

Poverty is a complex issue?? Not really. If men and women who cant afford a kid would use birth control properly (two forms-one as a backup) poverty would decrease

February 14, 2012 3:21 pm

But what we have is men who father the kid and then ignore it and women who must want to get pregnant because pregnancy can be avoided until one is ready. Millions and millions of men and women do this now and have done this before the morning after pill was developed. Poverty is not that complex, it is just that libs like the fact the the poor always vote for the "D's"!

409523

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409424

0 Reply Report this as abuse
Sean wrote...

Uh, no, Delvin, it's NOT

February 14, 2012 1:31 pm

yet legal for gays to marry. It would take effect in 90 days. And it'll be blocked by then. Then it'll be voted on -- AGAIN -- and put down. What a waste of time.

409477

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409416

0 Reply Report this as abuse
rational wrote...

Sean

February 14, 2012 9:07 pm

Leftists don't grasp reality...gays can already get married and always have been able to, just like heterosexuals...to a consenting adult of the opposite gender. Why are liberals so dense they can't grasp reality?

409659

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409477

0 Reply Report this as abuse
maplefish wrote...

Hmmm....

February 14, 2012 11:56 am

Boron, we can see how "tolerant" you are; "You don't own the word 'marriage'. You also don't get your way every time. Get over it". And of course the always popular "Bigot" thrown in. So typical of Liberals. Your "tolerance" ( along with the many in the gay community) is a ONE way street. I have lived in West Seatle for 25 years. I have raised 3 children there I have many gay friends and associate with many gay people and couples and in NO WAY are they or have they EVER BEEN PERSECUTED??? They and their children have always been welcomed in my home and in our community. Your self-righteous, I'll tell everybody what's best LIBERAL agenda is what fuels this problem. Just because people don't agree with you doen't make them a BIGOT or in Obama's case a RACISTS! You are exactly the insecure, whiney idiot that perpetuates this ugly divide.

409423

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409400

0 Reply Report this as abuse
TheSymbolForBoron wrote...

Hey maplefish,

February 14, 2012 12:00 pm

Did you see the lead on mynorthwest.com earlier:
OLYMPIA, Wash. — Within an hour of Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire signing a same-sex-marriage bill into law Monday, Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum was meeting with a group of gay-marriage foes at a church minutes away, offering a message of support for their efforts to repeal the law.
I'm glad 'some of your best friends are gay'. Santorum is a bigot. Look up the definition. Sorry if it fits. LOOK IT UP.
It's the right wing that came up with the current 'war on religion'. Idiots.
The right wing is running a candidate who wants to turn the country into a theocracy. That bothers me. I have no 'tolerance' for that. Never will.
Google BIGOT. Then Google SANTORUM.

409430

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409423

0 Reply Report this as abuse
Sean wrote...

BoronBoy!

February 14, 2012 1:34 pm

Slinging your accusations REALLY doesn't do anything for your case. But if that's all ya got, I guess that's all we'll be hearing, huh?

409479

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409400

0 Reply Report this as abuse
Sean wrote...

"Persecution," Boron?

February 14, 2012 1:35 pm

Hey, a new word for your "victim" arsenal! But such a tired, tired, tired old argument. You got anything else?

409480

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409400

0 Reply Report this as abuse
irony wrote...

yes it is.

February 14, 2012 12:33 pm

2 do better than one combined resources and combined expenses. a husband and a wife can combine their different talents and perspectives. "gay" marriage does not do that becuase they're the same gender and similar personal talents. no benefit combining.

409447

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
RatherbeFree wrote...

What it Takes

February 14, 2012 12:39 pm

Well, Delvin, I am a single mother. Welfare, Food Stamps and Section 8 helped me get a bachelor's degree and a six figure income. One child in college and one will be there in a couple years. Out of wedlock parenting I would not repeat or recommend, but you are an idiot living in a bubble if you think the government doesn't help everyone in some way get success. What is your solution to upward mobility and ending poverty because kicking someone when they are down doesn't help them get back up.

409449

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
delvin wrote...

ratherb-first of all there are exceptions to every rule> I have studied poverty ever since I started doing business in Brazil and in Europe. You are a statistical rareity.

February 14, 2012 2:43 pm

I give money to two orgs-one being planned parenthood. What do you do to stop the CYCLE OF POVERTY. Read up on this subject and quit thinking by pulling the D lever when you vote that you are fighting poverty-you are enabling poverty. By the way, I am part American Indian so don't even begin to tell me that a nanny state, dependent life does not create hoplessness, lack of esteem and a cycle of poverty. Why don't libs like you ever bother to read the many books that study poverty? I say it is because you simply dont give a damm! Plus I dont beleive that you got a BS degree and earn 6 figures. Anybody can make stuff up on a blog.

409509

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409449

0 Reply Report this as abuse
blood brother wrote...

Rather got it free

February 14, 2012 2:54 pm

So did you pay the Government back all that you took? We paid for you to get to this point, are you making payments back to those who you "borrowed" from? I was raised by a single mom and I graduated with a bachelors and no debt to anyone. Yet I have a sister who earned her BA and Masters paid for by the Govmnt through lying to get programs and grants to pay for everything. My mother earned her LPN at the age of 50 with no Government help. It's called hardwork and earning your way through life.

409512

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409449

0 Reply Report this as abuse
SeattleNative wrote...

@ratherbefree:

February 14, 2012 2:07 pm

You made the case perfectly. A single-parent household is likely to use more government welfare programs than a dual-parent household.
And SymbolForMoron: Please explain how is it that when a person supports the traditional definition of "marriage" that makes them a bigot. Perhaps YOU should look up the definition. You'll find that the word "bigot" describes you to a tee.

409494

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

0

0 Reply Report this as abuse
TheSymbolForBoron wrote...

Poverty is a complex issue.

February 14, 2012 6:11 pm

Some people legitimately need public assistance. Fat, white, brainwashed righties despise these people as blood sucking parasites at 'the teat' of the nanny state. You can't reach those people because it's simply more complex than that and they are incapable of complex thought. I'm for taking abuse out of public assistance while realizing that, in a civilized society, some people will always need help. It benefits everyone to help the poor.
As far as the definition of a bigot is:
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
If you believe in 'regular marriage' and oppose 'opposite marriage' I won't treat you in a bigoted manner. I don't care what you think. Think whatever you want. As soon as you start to talk about a 'gay marriage amendment' or an 'anti-abortion amendment', or legalized discrimination, I'll tell to you to cart that crap right back to your church where it belongs.
So yes, I can be a bigot. If you think my bigotry is aimed at people who simply hold different beliefs, you are wrong. I am bigoted against people with different/religion-based opinions who then try to codify those opinions INTO LAW and force people who don't agree TO ABIDE. I don't think your religion deserves special recognition in our law. Hell, we're already subsidizing your church through hefty tax breaks. So just take the money and shut up.
If you decide to force your religious dogma into the laws of this country, you're going to have a problem. I'm going to tell you one last time, your religion does not own the word, or definition of 'marriage'. Your church doesn't have to recognize a gay marriage but the law will. If the law gets overturned, it will eventually win because it is a civil rights and legal issue and this country always, eventually does the right thing according to our Constitution.

409592

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409494

0 Reply Report this as abuse
AJ McCarrell wrote...

Boronmoron

February 14, 2012 6:52 pm

Keep justifying your government assistance checks.....Guilt?

409612

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409592

0 Reply Report this as abuse
delvin wrote...

hey TheSymbol-I will ask you the same thing I asked another poster-What book have you read on the cycle of poverty and what charity do you give to that is involved in end the cycle?

February 14, 2012 6:55 pm

What an idot statement you make when you say in a civilized society some people always need help. DUH!!. Don't ya think I know that disabled, blind, mentaly ill, children, homeless etc need help. What I have sudied and put money into (planned parenthood) are agencies that work to end the cycle. I am a % native american and grew up on a reservation. Do not tell me that white libs who only vote D care about the poor. The pretend and talk like they do, but never bother to read or study this insidious cycle of poverty. If you studied this you would realize that single poor mothers have a terrible statistical likelihood of having their kids not fall into the cycle. Welfare enslaves too often for generations. PS I give to planned parenthood to stop pregnancy of uneducated, poor women who won't have a father for the kid once it is born. I can dominate you in a debate about this. Historians will look at the nanny state and poverty with dismay. Read, I dare you!

409615

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409592

0 Reply Report this as abuse
rational wrote...

TheSymbolForBoron

February 14, 2012 11:11 pm

A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
I can't help but point out how much that sounds like you, at least from what I've seen on MYNW....but then later you actually admit being a bigot in your post. That does make you a quintessential example of a liberal...quite the hypocrite.

409688

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

409592

0 Reply Report this as abuse
53300

{ "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }

Reply Report this as abuse

Ross & Burbank Podcasts

More podcasts »

Updated Feb 14, 2012 - 10:09 am

Is marriage the antidote to poverty?

Ross & Burbank Podcasts

Recent posts

Latest Local News