It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In a paper published last month in the Journal of Marriage and Family, Cross looked at the connection between family structure and children’s educational outcomes and found racial and ethnic differences that were counterintuitive and largely unexplained.
As I was reading the existing literature on this topic, I kept noticing the same finding over and over: that even though children who live outside of the two-parent family tend to fare worse than those who live with two parents, minority children are less negatively impacted by this. Scholars have speculated that maybe this has something to do with minority families having a stronger extended family support network than white families or perhaps that they are more frequently exposed to socioeconomic stressors such that the independent effect of living apart from a parent is just not as pronounced.
When children have two parents in the household who are able to pool resources, they are less likely to live in poverty. However, for minority children, and black and Hispanic children in particular, even when they live in a two-parent family they’re still two to three times more likely to be poor. This has a lot to do with the structural disadvantages that these groups face. I don’t mean to suggest that economic resources are the only things that matter for children’s success — parenting and family stability are also important. However, I do find that economic resources play a key role in determining children’s educational success. This is pretty unfortunate and sobering, but I think it’s important because our current welfare legislation, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, emphasizes the importance of this two-parent family model.
One example of this kind of policy is the Healthy Marriage Initiative, implemented under the administration of George W. Bush. States were given the opportunity to take hundreds of millions of dollars allocated for welfare and use the money to create programs to try to encourage low-income families, who are disproportionally families of color, to get married and stay married. Many researchers have found these programs to be largely ineffective, and if we recognize that the benefits of this arrangement aren’t equal [in the first place], then perhaps we shouldn’t divert funds away from these poor families to try to get them to get married. This isn’t to say that I or most researchers think that marriage is problematic, because I don’t, but I don’t think that’s the best solution to fixing poverty.
It is taught. It is kind of a form of PTSD.
You have to remember that police were in fact unfairly targeting and beating the sh*t out of black folks on the regular barely two generations ago.
originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Gryphon66
When you factor in population numbers it is clear homicide is a much bigger problem in the black community than it is in the white community.
The white community is FIVE TIMES as large as the black community, yet the number of murders in each community is similar. This means blacks are committing murder at much higher per capita than whites. So yes, when people bring up black on black violence it is because it is a huge problem within the community, far moreso than in the white community.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated
He ignores that at the rates our own families are degrading, we'll likely start to catch up in a decade or two.
originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Gryphon66
If white homicides were committed at the same rate based on population as blacks, then the white murder rate would be about 17,495.
When you factor in population numbers it is clear homicide is a much bigger problem in the black community than it is in the white community.
originally posted by: jefwane
I'm not seeing anything about these officers being charged, just checked AJC and not seeing anything yet locally. Have I missed something? Anyone who thinks the officer could be convicted by Georgia jury, even in Atlanta, is a fool especially if they are a DA. Only takes one juror to believe what his eyes tell em after watching the video. There ain't gonna be any conviction of the officers on this, nope sorry folks. I highly doubt the GBI will even recommend charges. That Fulton DA is gonna cause the Atlanta Police to quit en mass, his actions have already caused several local governments to refuse to send police as aid to Atlanta with the riots.
And just that quickly, the respect I've earned for Mayor Lance-Bottoms and former Chief Shields over the past couple of weeks is gone.
originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: TheRedneck
Tucker isn't doing so well because his sponsors are dropping him.
When videos like this are around for all to see he probably shouldn't be pandering to guests saying there isn't racism in the police force. As technology gets better police should act like everything they do will be seen by cameras.
Jaywalking
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Grimpachi
Tucker isn't doing so well because his sponsors are dropping him.
Ah, so you only pay attention to people who pander to sponsors? Got it. Money rules; truth is that which is profitable, amirite?
TheRedneck