This is a topic that earns conservatives a bad name. Or rather, this is a topic that liberals are easily able to use in order to give conservatives a bad name. This is an unfortunate reality, for IN reality, it is the conservative that gives more to charity than the liberal:
The fact is that self-described “conservatives” in America are more likely to give—and give more money—than self-described “liberals.” In the year 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more dollars to charity than households headed by a liberal. And this discrepancy in monetary donations is not simply an artifact of income differences. On the contrary, liberal families in these data earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families.
So, with that said, let me make it clear that what I describe as policy in no way or manner represents my individual and specific view of the actual person, their plight, human spirit and personal tragedy.
Okay, now, onward.
I caught a Reuters article recently. Specifically detailing the impact of the recession on our children; our homeless children:
In a report issued earlier this month, the National Center on Family Homelessness, based in Needham, Massachusetts, said 1.6 million children were living on the streets of the United States last year or in shelters, motels and doubled-up with other families.
That marked a 38 percent jump in child homelessness since 2007 and Ellen Bassuk, the center’s president, attributes the increase to fallout from the U.S. recession and a surge in the number of extremely poor households headed by women.
To be sure, we have work to do. The problems surrounding kids who don’t have hoes is bad. And getting worse. I don’t think there’s a soul alive who who disagree that something, anything, has to be done. But it’s important to acknowledge that the thing, the “anything, is going to come in two forms:
- Direct assistance to the displaced families right now.
- Actions that will prevent the homeless condition from occurring in the first place.
While noble, I am less interested in the first, as a matter of policy, than I am in the second. Consider this:
As her mother sat in a homeless shelter in downtown Miami, talking about her economic struggles and loss of faith in the U.S. political system, 3-year-old Aeisha Touray blurted out what sounded like a new slogan for the Occupy Wall Street protest movement.
“How dare you!” the girl said abruptly as she nudged a toy car across a conference room table at the Chapman Partnership shelter in Miami’s tough and predominantly black Overtown neighborhood.
There was no telling what Aeisha was thinking as her 32-year-old mother, Nairkahe Touray, spoke of how she burned through her savings and wound up living in a car with five of her eight children earlier this year.
Think of that. This woman is trying to care for a family of 9 on her own. Ms. Touray is 32 years old and has 8 children. In comparison, I had yet to be married at 32. And now, as a professional married to another professional I have two children. Without making any judgements as to decisions or life circumstances, as a 32 year old professional, I’m certain that I would have struggled caring for 8 kids. Even making it to work would be difficult if not impossible.
Again, my interest in the conditions of the poor and homeless in America are more focused on preventing single 32 year-old women from having 8 children. To put this in perspective, if you were to take ALL families in 2011, the percent of them that have 7 or more members is 2.6%. When you look at only female householder, the percentage of families with 6 members is 2.8%. In a perverse fact of life, the problem gets worse as women find themselves raising the family alone.
Certainly I can’t know the journey that Ms. Touray has taken to get to where she is. Her life could be one of immeasurable bad luck and unbelievable twists of fate that have led her to where she is. However, I suggest that another theme exists. One that we can change.
That is, there is a significant portion of our population that makes misinformed and bad decisions that ted to put them in cohort groupings that lead to poor outcomes. Is it perfectly allowable that a single woman would want to make it on her own and raise a family of 8 children? Sure, without a doubt. However, if a trusted friend or sister were to seek your advice on her decision to embark on this path, what might your counsel look like? Would you caution her? Might you recommend that she obtain an education? Perhaps secure income?
What would you counsel your own daughter to do?
And if THAT answer is different than, “I’d do nothing. However, I would continue to lavish untold amounts of mine and my neighbor’s money in order to support her.”, then I ask you:
Why aren’t we making YOUR answer policy? Why aren’t we telling our Ms. Tourays of the world that it’s generally not accepted wisdom to create a condition where you are single with 8 kids? In fact, why is it so “insulting and disparaging” even to merely suggest such advice?