Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (53881)	6/21/1999 3:43:00 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

<<brees, I don't have any studies on this but I actually believe the low point for family relations was in the late 60s up until the mid 70s vs. today. So, if TV is worse now than then, to me that would mean that it has little influence as far as I'm concerned.>> I agree with the 60's and 70's comment. The impact of the tv messages is not defining who we are in a direct way, at least on the surface. One of the things that the article pointed out is that a lot of the finger pointing toward the character of the bumbleclot tv dads of the 90s is really criticizing the less involved dads of earlier generations. The problem for me is the stereotyping that I see coming out of this is being laid on modern males (right or left) that don't deserve it. It is often used to justify the kind of negative bias toward us that reduces gender harmony and blocks our ability as a society to cope with the issues of our generation. We will be hearing about it from the next generation, guaranteed.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (53881)	6/21/1999 4:47:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

It appears that the single factor we can correlate with the economic success of a family home is the presence of a Father. This being the case, it would seem to behoove the estranged left wing to attempt reconciliation on this issue. Hillary, always with her finger to the wind, has been proposing this in all of her preemptive speeches. FEMALE-HOUSEHOLDER FAMILIES MOST LIKELY TO STAY POOR, CENSUS BUREAU SAYS Persons in female-householder families were the most likely demographic group to be chronically poor, according to the results of a survey released today by the Commerce Department's Census Bureau. One in five female-householder families (19.5 percent) reported income below the poverty threshold during the 24-month period of 1991-92. That was more than any other age, race, or Hispanic-origin, employment, disability, or family status group discussed in the report. The finding is reported in "Dynamics of Economic Well-Being: Poverty, 1991 to 1993" (P70-45), based on data collected in the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Compared to persons in female-householder families, 1.3 percent of persons in married-couple families were poor for all 24 months in 1991-92. The median time spent in poverty during this period for persons in female-householder families was 6.4 months compared with only 3.9 months for persons in married-couple families. Other findings: Among children under 18, 8.5 percent were chronically poor, compared with 3.2 percent of adults 18 to 64. Children constituted 48 percent of the chronically poor. Of persons who were poor in 1991, 21.6 percent were able to escape poverty in 1992. Of all the population subgroups looked at in the report, only African Americans lost ground in the likelihood of their escaping poverty. For those who were poor in the previous year, their exit rate dropped from 17.4 percent in 1991 to 13.0 percent in 1992. Half of all periods of poverty lasted longer than 4.3 months. The median duration of poverty was longer for African Americans (5.8 months) than for Whites (4.1 months). For Hispanics, it was 5.0 months, not statistically different from the other groups. The median duration of poverty during 1991 through 1993 period was 4.0 months for adults 18 to 64; 4.7 months for children under 18; and 7.0 months for the elderly (65 and older). The Office of Management and Budget determines the official poverty index for families based on such factors as family size, family income, number of children under 18 years old, and the consumer price index. Chronic poverty refers to a situation in which families stay below the poverty cutoff every month during the 1991 to 1992 period. As in all surveys, the data in the report are subject to sampling variability and other sources of error.