No mental health issue in america.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

It's an exact Moynihan quote. Not what someone else wrote. Can't wait to see you explain that away...

Jim, read the report, it's taken out of context. The criticism wasn't about welfare in general, it was about a program that biased benefits in situations where the parents were cohabitating but not married creating a disencetive for the mother to marry.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Jim, read the report, it's taken out of context. The criticism wasn't about welfare in general, it was about a program that biased benefits in situations where the parents were cohabitating but not married creating a disencetive for the mother to marry.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

from the study...."The steady expansion of this program, as of public assistance programs in general, can be taken as a measure of the steady disintegration of the Negro family structure over the past generation in the United States." Daniel Patrick Moynihan


I've lost count of how many times Spence has claimed a "quote" was "taken out of context" and then proceeded to offer a version of what was said or written which had little or no resemblance to what was actually said or written....

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

from the study...."The steady expansion of this program, as of public assistance programs in general, can be taken as a measure of the steady disintegration of the Negro family structure over the past generation in the United States." Daniel Patrick Moynihan


I've lost count of how many times Spence has claimed a "quote" was "taken out of context" and then proceeded to offer a version of what was said or written which had little or no resemblance to what was actually said or written....

I'm going to try and be patient with your reading comprehension challenges.

DPM wasn't saying welfare in general was the reason behind the deterioration of the family structure, but rather that increasing reliance on it was a "measure" of the problem. His entire reasoning for writing the piece was to piggyback on the Civil Rights movement and lobby LBJ to increase Federal assistance programs even to the point of creating government jobs to increase employment.

I know it's easy to cherry pick a single sentence, misinterpret it and then base 50 years of talking points about it. I get it. It's also wrong.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm going to try and be patient with your reading comprehension challenges.

DPM wasn't saying welfare in general was the reason behind the deterioration of the family structure, but rather that increasing reliance on it was a "measure" of the problem. His entire reasoning for writing the piece was to piggyback on the Civil Rights movement and lobby LBJ to increase Federal assistance programs even to the point of creating government jobs to increase employment.

I know it's easy to cherry pick a single sentence, misinterpret it and then base 50 years of talking points about it. I get it. It's also wrong.

Moynihan made the case that there’s a strong connection between the nuclear family and economic stability within that family. Decades of liberal policies in heavily poor and heavily black precincts, don’t show me a lot of progress in that regard. It shows me that Moynihan was obviously correct, and that modern liberalism is going in the opposite direction, providing financial incentives for black teenagers to have babies, and further incentives for young mothers to not marry the fathers, and promoting an addiction to welfare. From where I sit, its not working out so great.

And for suggesting a different approach we are labeled racist, and people like Zimmy thoughtlessly buy into it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Moynihan made the case that there’s a strong connection between the nuclear family and economic stability within that family. Decades of liberal policies in heavily poor and heavily black precincts, don’t show me a lot of progress in that regard.

He would have argued part of the problem was not enough government assistance for a group so disadvantaged by slavery and discriminatory policy.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

He would have argued part of the problem was not enough government assistance for a group so disadvantaged by slavery and discriminatory policy.

right because he would naturally argue part of the problem was not enough government assistance after stating that the steady expansion of government assistance was the problem...

are you OK?...you are having a tough week and it's only Tuesday

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

DPM wasn't saying welfare in general was the reason behind the deterioration of the family structure

"The steady expansion of of this program, as of public assistance programs in general.. can be taken as a measure of the steady disintegration of the Negro family structure over the past generation in the United States."

Daniel Patrick Moynihan

actually he said "disintegration"....it's tough to misinterpret that quote but you are trying mighty hard...are you a paid troll?

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

actually he said "disintegration"....it's tough to misinterpret that quote but you are trying mighty hard...are you a paid troll?

Disintegration and deterioration are synonyms.

Let's try this another way. Why would someone spend their entire scholarly career promoting the benefit and need of welfare only to point to it as the root cause of societal deterioration?

Right, it doesn't make any sense.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Let's try this another way. Why would someone spend their entire scholarly career promoting the benefit and need of welfare only to point to it as the root cause of societal deterioration?

Right, it doesn't make any sense.

moment of clarity?

he was savaged by many on the left for the report and celebrated by many on the right, including the guy that you wrongly attributed the quote to and described as a "hardcore conservative writing an opinion piece in "capitalism magazine."


I appreciate that many things don't make sense to you in Spenceworld

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

moment of clarity?

That doesn't make a lot of sense.

It was a controversial piece for sure and many have twisted DPM's intent...doesn't change the fact that it's a single point in a long and pretty consistent thought process.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Disintegration and deterioration are synonyms.

Let's try this another way. Why would someone spend their entire scholarly career promoting the benefit and need of welfare only to point to it as the root cause of societal deterioration?

Right, it doesn't make any sense.

He warned of the dangers of the evolving liberal view of what welfare should be - send people checks just for breathing, bigger checks for having babies, even bigger checks for having babies without a father. He was afraid (correctly as it turned out) that this would further erode the black nuclear family, which would be a full-blown catastrophe.

He, like every sane person, believed in the concept of a safety net for those who cannot lift themselves up. I have never heard anyone of any party argue against this, not once, ever.

He was in favor of welfare, as long as it didn't provide financial incentives for creating more fatherlessness.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

He warned of the dangers of the evolving liberal view of what welfare should be - send people checks just for breathing, bigger checks for having babies, even bigger checks for having babies without a father.

Mostly wrong. His piece in 1965 had nothing about an evolving liberal view. In the 60's DPM believed that black men would never overcome the effects of the last century unless the government helped lift them to a point of stability. This would mean financial assistance and even creating jobs for them like they did in the New Deal if necessary.

You love to quote him frequently but I'm curious if you've ever actually read anything he published?