lumigan tramadol tadalafil

Divorce: The Cause of the Shrinking Middle Class

2006-10-19
By

In 1992, my first major report titled “Generation One” was provided to then-Missouri Governor Ashcroft for inclusion in the 1993 Report of the National Commission on America’s Urban Families: Families First”.[i]

“Generation One” provided a deep analysis of the costs of divorce, the structural drivers, and what we can do to painlessly reverse this trend by allowing marriage to naturally replace the myriad of federal programs presently undermining it.

One principle thesis of my report was to demonstrate that divorce is perhaps the principle driver of the “disappearing middle class”. The average middle class family, which in 1991 required 1.4 median incomes to exist, cannot support two households (and two divorce attorneys) without falling out of the middle class.

Now, a new Harvard University study titled ”The Middle Class on the Precipice”[ii] has finally proved my point (and perhaps even adopted my words):

“Evidence mounts that post-divorce, both women and men are struggling to make ends meet as they try to support two households on the same combined income.”

The study iterates other points I have made many times over the years. Divorce is making retirement difficult, if not impossible. Absent reforms, it will become perhaps the leading predictor of poverty in old age. Divorce also affects the affordability and availability of health care plans, both in the present and future sense. “Hillary Care” was essentially designed to resolve our divorce problem by turning the entire medical industry into yet another welfare state.

These are all problems that Republicans and Democrats have been unable to resolve within the existing beltway mindsets that pretend it is possible to put Humpty Dumpty together again by doing nothing except funding the same old “Great Society” programs that have been destroying families since the early 1960’s.

Voter angst is at an all-time high. A new Opinion Research poll shows that 74% of Americans believe that Congress is out of touch with average Americans. William F. Buckley, Jr. says that the two-party system is broken. It is not the parties that are broken: it is that Democrats and Republicans refuse to deal with the issues, while Libertarians are actively taking them on (and looking attractive for it).

Pollsters have not yet begun asking Americans about their fopinion on Congressional handling of important social reforms that are long overdue, such as child support reforms (to end perverse incentives causing states to encourage divorce), Violence Against Women Act reforms, and elimination of the Parents As Teachers program (which is turning our children into little prescription drug addicts).

Do voters really like the costs of divorce and single-parentedness that so many of them bear, or would they prefer programs that reward and encourage marital responsibility and helps spouses work through the normal stages of marriage and aging? How many Americans have an alcoholic or drug-abusing spouse who can’t get them into treatment because Washington adamantly refuses to help them?

Pollsters and party political analysts cannot report what they do not ask. The items listed above are important questions of significant contemporary meaning.

Why is no-one asking them?

After pollsters and political analysts truly get a grip on the American reality, we must have a vigorous national debate on positive social reforms that many Americans want, so we can finally accomplish them.

When Washington does the right thing, it will free large sums of federal budgetary resources we desperately need for immigration control and the War on Terror.

Since everyone from Harvard to Peoria now knows this, there is no excuse for politicians and pollsters not knowing it and doing something about it.

————————————————-

David R. Usher is Senior Policy Analyst for the True Equality Network, and President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition


[i] Governor John Ashcroft and Honorable Annette Straus, Co-Chairs; National Commission on America’s Urban Families; “Families First” (GPO, January 1993 [ISBN 0-16-041600-0]
[ii] The Middle Class On the Precipice: Rising Financial Risks for American Families; Elizabeth Warren, Harvard University [2006: http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/010682.html]

———————————————

1 views
Didn't make Oprah's Book Club. And Ronnie doesn't care. Man up. Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.


  • David R. Usher

    Usher is a british name, and having spent some time in England, I can speak a convincing Yorkshire accent and play Morris music quite well besides.

    Both parties are presently facing political consequences for their failure to deal with what Americans really want. Libertarians are making fast gains. A three party system could happen, but I suspect that either the R’s or D’s would break down and do the right thing to keep that from happening. My guess is that Republicans will have an awakening after taking a drubbing the 2006 races.

    The Republican meltdown is obvious: See “Republican Woes Lead to Feuding By Conservatives“. The finger-pointing at “social conservatives” is a disingenous way for the party to blame its woes on anyone possible (can anybody blame social conservatives for not being energized this election??). It also speaks to my previous points about how Dobson and others ran the well-intentioned social initiatives of the early 1990′s off a socialist cliff (Welfare reforms simply recast all the expenses as “child support debt”, which did not fix anything and made a lot of men and women more upset than they were at Democrats).

    Speaking of Republican woes: I would point out to Mr. Kirkpatrick that the “Elephant in the Room” is feminism. All the problems Republicans are having with log-cabin mischief would not be taking place had Republicans realized that gays are in fact hard-core feminist operatives closely aligned with N.O.W. These guys are human bombs just waiting to be triggered by remote control. Feminists fired the trigger, and blew up the Republican party just in time for the elections. Now, Republicans have yet another big reason to stop “going along” with radical feminism. Moral: if you would not allow Bin Laden to run for a congressional seat on a Republican ticket, you had better not let feminists do the same.

    Dobson is a huge problem, because he still blames the welfare state and marital problems on male irresponsibility. But, his false prophesy is based on the work of David Blankenhorn, who was the feminist engineer of all this and a major operative behind the scenes back then. His book “Father Absence” beautifully described all the problems that arise from father absence, but falsely blamed everything on men. Republicans did not notice they were following the advice of one of Saul Alinsky’s best students.

    Forces are aligned for an epiphany: there has been much serious journalism of late putting the blame where it belongs: on feminism. Young Republicans are coming around and are beginning to see that they don’t have to repeat the mistakes of the hippie generation. There are a fair number of leading Republicans who are quite aware of the real problem. Its just a matter of refocusing the things that won elections back in the 1990′s, and framing new social policies to disentitle radical feminism and put pro-marriage reforms in place.

    The race is on, Folks. Its just a matter of time, now…..

  • David R. Usher

    Usher is a british name, and having spent some time in England, I can speak a convincing Yorkshire accent and play Morris music quite well besides.

    Both parties are presently facing political consequences for their failure to deal with what Americans really want. Libertarians are making fast gains. A three party system could happen, but I suspect that either the R’s or D’s would break down and do the right thing to keep that from happening. My guess is that Republicans will have an awakening after taking a drubbing the 2006 races.

    The Republican meltdown is obvious: See “Republican Woes Lead to Feuding By Conservatives“. The finger-pointing at “social conservatives” is a disingenous way for the party to blame its woes on anyone possible (can anybody blame social conservatives for not being energized this election??). It also speaks to my previous points about how Dobson and others ran the well-intentioned social initiatives of the early 1990′s off a socialist cliff (Welfare reforms simply recast all the expenses as “child support debt”, which did not fix anything and made a lot of men and women more upset than they were at Democrats).

    Speaking of Republican woes: I would point out to Mr. Kirkpatrick that the “Elephant in the Room” is feminism. All the problems Republicans are having with log-cabin mischief would not be taking place had Republicans realized that gays are in fact hard-core feminist operatives closely aligned with N.O.W. These guys are human bombs just waiting to be triggered by remote control. Feminists fired the trigger, and blew up the Republican party just in time for the elections. Now, Republicans have yet another big reason to stop “going along” with radical feminism. Moral: if you would not allow Bin Laden to run for a congressional seat on a Republican ticket, you had better not let feminists do the same.

    Dobson is a huge problem, because he still blames the welfare state and marital problems on male irresponsibility. But, his false prophesy is based on the work of David Blankenhorn, who was the feminist engineer of all this and a major operative behind the scenes back then. His book “Father Absence” beautifully described all the problems that arise from father absence, but falsely blamed everything on men. Republicans did not notice they were following the advice of one of Saul Alinsky’s best students.

    Forces are aligned for an epiphany: there has been much serious journalism of late putting the blame where it belongs: on feminism. Young Republicans are coming around and are beginning to see that they don’t have to repeat the mistakes of the hippie generation. There are a fair number of leading Republicans who are quite aware of the real problem. Its just a matter of refocusing the things that won elections back in the 1990′s, and framing new social policies to disentitle radical feminism and put pro-marriage reforms in place.

    The race is on, Folks. Its just a matter of time, now…..

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    I see. I wonder if Yamin Zachy ever used the term “wanker”?

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    I see. I wonder if Yamin Zachy ever used the term “wanker”?

  • DadWithGirls

    RK wrote — “Sorry David, for calling you British. I got you mixed up with George Rolph, who is British. You two are so much alike!”

    Well… not.

    David R. Usher is on record as having never used the term “wanker.”

    That’s the only way to tell a Brit from a Yank.

    David prefers the term — “liberal.”
    ;-)

  • DadWithGirls

    RK wrote — “Sorry David, for calling you British. I got you mixed up with George Rolph, who is British. You two are so much alike!”

    Well… not.

    David R. Usher is on record as having never used the term “wanker.”

    That’s the only way to tell a Brit from a Yank.

    David prefers the term — “liberal.”
    ;-)

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    Sorry David, for calling you British. I got you mixed up with George Rolph, who is British. You two are so much alike!

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    Sorry David, for calling you British. I got you mixed up with George Rolph, who is British. You two are so much alike!

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    David, you try so hard to talk sense into the senseless. It is like trying to reason with your fellow “Briton” Yamin Zacky about why we non-Muslims are learning to despise his religion and to side with Israel.
    You see, these people, meaning the family courts and the support enforcers, need to be whacked upside the head.
    Here in America, we have the mechanism of the Antipeonage Act and its criminal provisions, and federal grand juries who force the enforcement of this law if only they know about it. Screaming for the enforcement of the Peonage Law is how to make this awareness general.
    Rush Limbaugh declares his frustration with the fact the economy is presently roaring and yet the American middle class does not believe it.
    He blames it on the media.
    He does not consider that what the middle class feels, however well paid they are presently, the boss has the leverage of outsourcing their work to the dirt poor of the third world and can force them to train their non-American replacements with the threat of withholding their unemployment compensation.
    Please see http://www.despair.com for further details. If only they were exaggerating.
    However good things are today, next year we can all be laid off.
    This did not use to be the case.
    And Rush certainly will not deal with the elephant in the room, which is that for even a well paid salaryman, divorce is the thing that destroys him, he need not do anything wrong, regardless of how everyone else does in this economy, he will not be able to comply with an unreasonable support order should he be laid off.
    It is one thing when lay-offs are caused by a drop in sales of the product. It is another when after the brewery you work at is bought in a corporate merger our government NEVER says no to, big ol’ Pabst or Anhaeuser determines that the beer can be made for penny less a gallon somewhere else.
    Yes, many of us are making considerably more than the inflation equivalent of our parents. But we have far less job security and family security than our parents.
    We know the courts are not there to protect those who are productive, but to rob them.
    And they use our children as the excuse.
    Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for this. Consider that, the anger among the voters is no longer a mystery.

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    David, you try so hard to talk sense into the senseless. It is like trying to reason with your fellow “Briton” Yamin Zacky about why we non-Muslims are learning to despise his religion and to side with Israel.
    You see, these people, meaning the family courts and the support enforcers, need to be whacked upside the head.
    Here in America, we have the mechanism of the Antipeonage Act and its criminal provisions, and federal grand juries who force the enforcement of this law if only they know about it. Screaming for the enforcement of the Peonage Law is how to make this awareness general.
    Rush Limbaugh declares his frustration with the fact the economy is presently roaring and yet the American middle class does not believe it.
    He blames it on the media.
    He does not consider that what the middle class feels, however well paid they are presently, the boss has the leverage of outsourcing their work to the dirt poor of the third world and can force them to train their non-American replacements with the threat of withholding their unemployment compensation.
    Please see http://www.despair.com for further details. If only they were exaggerating.
    However good things are today, next year we can all be laid off.
    This did not use to be the case.
    And Rush certainly will not deal with the elephant in the room, which is that for even a well paid salaryman, divorce is the thing that destroys him, he need not do anything wrong, regardless of how everyone else does in this economy, he will not be able to comply with an unreasonable support order should he be laid off.
    It is one thing when lay-offs are caused by a drop in sales of the product. It is another when after the brewery you work at is bought in a corporate merger our government NEVER says no to, big ol’ Pabst or Anhaeuser determines that the beer can be made for penny less a gallon somewhere else.
    Yes, many of us are making considerably more than the inflation equivalent of our parents. But we have far less job security and family security than our parents.
    We know the courts are not there to protect those who are productive, but to rob them.
    And they use our children as the excuse.
    Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for this. Consider that, the anger among the voters is no longer a mystery.







Right.

Man up.

Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Search