Birth, Fertility, welfare
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=13674
Yes. The teenage birth and fertility rates are way down, particularly among unmarried, out-of-wedlock mothers are way down. Euphemism: The pheonomenon was once called "bastardy."
In the good old days (ubi sunt) welfare families ran 4-6-8 children. In too many cases, "children were having children" to get a larger welfare payment. (I have a tape segment of an interview we did for a Think Tank special in Kansas City MO, where some welfare moms, mostly African Americans but with some whites --- relate and condemn the practice.
You can cjeck it out at PBS.org
Now, thanks to long-overdue welfare reform --- a counter-productive program if ever there was one --- those rate are are down to below two children per woman.
It took many years to change AFDC (Aid to Families withe Dependent Children) fighting some sky-is-falling gloom-mongering.
But the result --- surprise ! --- is better than could have been expected. It costs more, not less. But people who really need a helping hand are getting one. And the cheats, crooks and swindlers are getting way less.
It usually takes government a long time to change a program with a constitueny. There is always the lurking danger of the Neo-Con mantra "The Law of Unintended Side Effects.")
But in this case it seems to have worked out just fine.
Ben
Yes. The teenage birth and fertility rates are way down, particularly among unmarried, out-of-wedlock mothers are way down. Euphemism: The pheonomenon was once called "bastardy."
In the good old days (ubi sunt) welfare families ran 4-6-8 children. In too many cases, "children were having children" to get a larger welfare payment. (I have a tape segment of an interview we did for a Think Tank special in Kansas City MO, where some welfare moms, mostly African Americans but with some whites --- relate and condemn the practice.
You can cjeck it out at PBS.org
Now, thanks to long-overdue welfare reform --- a counter-productive program if ever there was one --- those rate are are down to below two children per woman.
It took many years to change AFDC (Aid to Families withe Dependent Children) fighting some sky-is-falling gloom-mongering.
But the result --- surprise ! --- is better than could have been expected. It costs more, not less. But people who really need a helping hand are getting one. And the cheats, crooks and swindlers are getting way less.
It usually takes government a long time to change a program with a constitueny. There is always the lurking danger of the Neo-Con mantra "The Law of Unintended Side Effects.")
But in this case it seems to have worked out just fine.
Ben
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home