Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Heracles

Study: Single parents cost taxpayers $112 billion

19 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

NEW YORK (AP) -- Divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing cost U.S. taxpayers more than $112 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by four groups advocating more government action to bolster marriages.

art.study.marriage.jpg

Sponsors say the study is the first of its kind and hope it will prompt lawmakers to invest more money in programs aimed at strengthening marriages. Two experts not connected to the study said such programs are of dubious merit and suggested that other investments -- notably job creation -- would be more effective in aiding all types of needy families.

There have been previous attempts to calculate the cost of divorce in America. But the sponsors of the new study, being released Tuesday, said theirs is the first to gauge the broader cost of "family fragmentation" -- both divorce and unwed childbearing.

The study was conducted by Georgia State University economist Ben Scafidi. His work was sponsored by four groups who consider themselves part of a nationwide "marriage movement" -- the New York-based Institute for American Values, the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, Families Northwest of Redmond, Washington, and the Georgia Family Council, an ally of the conservative ministry Focus on the Family.

"The study documents for the first time that divorce and unwed childbearing -- besides being bad for children -- are costing taxpayers a ton of money," said David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values.

"We keep hearing this from state legislators, 'Explain to me why this is any of my business? Aren't these private matters?"' Blankenhorn said. "Take a look at these numbers and tell us if you still have any doubt."

Scafidi's calculations were based on the assumption that households headed by a single female have relatively high poverty rates, leading to higher spending on welfare, health care, criminal justice and education for those raised in the disadvantaged homes. The $112 billion estimate includes the cost of federal, state and local government programs, and lost tax revenue at all levels of government.

Reducing these costs, Scafidi said, "is a legitimate concern of government, policymakers and legislators."

While the study doesn't offer formal recommendations, it does suggest that state and federal lawmakers consider investing more money in programs intended to bolster marriages. Such a program has been in place in Oklahoma since 2001; Texas last year earmarked about $15 million in federal funds for marriage education.

"Because of the very large taxpayer costs associated with high rates of divorce and unwed childbearing, and the modest price tags associated with most marriage-strengthening initiatives ... programs even with very modest success rates will be cost-effective," the study says.

But Tim Smeeding, an economics professor at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University, who was not involved in the study, said he's seen no convincing evidence that the marriage-strengthening programs work.

"I have nothing against marriage -- relationship-building is great," he said. "But alone it's not going to do the job. A full-employment economy would probably be the best thing -- decent, stable jobs."

He also noted the distinctive problems arising in black urban areas where the rate of single-mother households is highest.

"A high number of African-American men have been in prison -- that limits their future earning potential and makes them bad marriage partners, regardless of what kind of person they are," Smeeding said. "A marriage program doesn't address that problem at all."

Another expert not connected to the study, University of Michigan sociologist Pamela Smock, suggested that bigger investments in education would pay long-term dividends -- improving economic prospects even for children from fragmented, disadvantaged families.

"Providing a global number doesn't give us anything to go on," said Smock, who was skeptical of the study's $112 billion estimate.

"We're now nearing 40 percent of kids in America born out of wedlock," she said. "I can't fathom that those marriage programs, even with increased investment, are going to reduce that."

Blankenhorn said it was "fair criticism" to note that the study made multiple references to marriage-strengthening programs while not proposing other strategies for reducing the cost of family fragmentation.

"Maybe we should have been more ecumenical," he said. "Let everybody have their say. Let's try things out. ... Nobody knows exactly the strategies which are going to work."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/04...s.ap/index.html

Interesting to see how the taxpayer ends up footing the bill for people's choices.

Edited by Boo-Yah!

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Panama
Timeline
NEW YORK (AP) -- Divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing cost U.S. taxpayers more than $112 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by four groups advocating more government action to bolster marriages.

art.study.marriage.jpg

Sponsors say the study is the first of its kind and hope it will prompt lawmakers to invest more money in programs aimed at strengthening marriages. Two experts not connected to the study said such programs are of dubious merit and suggested that other investments -- notably job creation -- would be more effective in aiding all types of needy families.

There have been previous attempts to calculate the cost of divorce in America. But the sponsors of the new study, being released Tuesday, said theirs is the first to gauge the broader cost of "family fragmentation" -- both divorce and unwed childbearing.

The study was conducted by Georgia State University economist Ben Scafidi. His work was sponsored by four groups who consider themselves part of a nationwide "marriage movement" -- the New York-based Institute for American Values, the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, Families Northwest of Redmond, Washington, and the Georgia Family Council, an ally of the conservative ministry Focus on the Family.

"The study documents for the first time that divorce and unwed childbearing -- besides being bad for children -- are costing taxpayers a ton of money," said David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values.

"We keep hearing this from state legislators, 'Explain to me why this is any of my business? Aren't these private matters?"' Blankenhorn said. "Take a look at these numbers and tell us if you still have any doubt."

Scafidi's calculations were based on the assumption that households headed by a single female have relatively high poverty rates, leading to higher spending on welfare, health care, criminal justice and education for those raised in the disadvantaged homes. The $112 billion estimate includes the cost of federal, state and local government programs, and lost tax revenue at all levels of government.

Reducing these costs, Scafidi said, "is a legitimate concern of government, policymakers and legislators."

While the study doesn't offer formal recommendations, it does suggest that state and federal lawmakers consider investing more money in programs intended to bolster marriages. Such a program has been in place in Oklahoma since 2001; Texas last year earmarked about $15 million in federal funds for marriage education.

"Because of the very large taxpayer costs associated with high rates of divorce and unwed childbearing, and the modest price tags associated with most marriage-strengthening initiatives ... programs even with very modest success rates will be cost-effective," the study says.

But Tim Smeeding, an economics professor at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University, who was not involved in the study, said he's seen no convincing evidence that the marriage-strengthening programs work.

"I have nothing against marriage -- relationship-building is great," he said. "But alone it's not going to do the job. A full-employment economy would probably be the best thing -- decent, stable jobs."

He also noted the distinctive problems arising in black urban areas where the rate of single-mother households is highest.

"A high number of African-American men have been in prison -- that limits their future earning potential and makes them bad marriage partners, regardless of what kind of person they are," Smeeding said. "A marriage program doesn't address that problem at all."

Another expert not connected to the study, University of Michigan sociologist Pamela Smock, suggested that bigger investments in education would pay long-term dividends -- improving economic prospects even for children from fragmented, disadvantaged families.

"Providing a global number doesn't give us anything to go on," said Smock, who was skeptical of the study's $112 billion estimate.

"We're now nearing 40 percent of kids in America born out of wedlock," she said. "I can't fathom that those marriage programs, even with increased investment, are going to reduce that."

Blankenhorn said it was "fair criticism" to note that the study made multiple references to marriage-strengthening programs while not proposing other strategies for reducing the cost of family fragmentation.

"Maybe we should have been more ecumenical," he said. "Let everybody have their say. Let's try things out. ... Nobody knows exactly the strategies which are going to work."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/04...s.ap/index.html

Interesting to see how the taxpayer ends up footing the bill for people's choices.

I make enough to support my son,so I'm not costing anybody a dime,thank you !


May 7,2007-USCIS received I-129f
July 24,2007-NOA1 was received
April 21,2008-K-1 visa denied.
June 3,2008-waiver filed at US Consalate in Panama
The interview went well,they told him it will take another 6 months for them to adjudicate the waiver
March 3,2009-US Consulate claims they have no record of our December visit,nor Manuel's interview
March 27,2009-Manuel returned to the consulate for another interrogation(because they forgot about December's interview),and they were really rude !
April 3,2009-US Counsalate asks for more court documents that no longer exist !
June 1,2009-Manuel and I go back to the US consalate AGAIN to give them a letter from the court in Colon along with documents I already gave them last year.I was surprised to see they had two thick files for his case !


June 15,2010-They called Manuel in to take his fingerprints again,still no decision on his case!
June 22,2010-WAIVER APPROVED at 5:00pm
July 19,2010-VISA IN MANUELITO'S HAND at 3:15pm!
July 25,2010-Manuelito arrives at 9:35pm at Logan Intn'l Airport,Boston,MA
August 5,2010-FINALLY MARRIED!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 23,2010-Filed for AOS at the International Institute of RI $1400!
December 23,2010-Work authorization received.
January 12,2011-RFE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do :thumbs:

I think he does already...his ex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: K-3 Visa Country: Kuwait
Timeline
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do

So you are against helping one another? Wow what a sad thing to hear, all of us looking out for just ourselves. What is your solution, just turn your head, walk away, not your problem right.


A woman is like a tea bag- you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water.

Eleanor Roosevelt

thquitsmoking3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do :thumbs:

I think he does already...his ex.

I have an ex?


According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do

So you are against helping one another? Wow what a sad thing to hear, all of us looking out for just ourselves. What is your solution, just turn your head, walk away, not your problem right.

While there are people who are genuinely in need, why should everyone else have to pay for a person who, for example, has multiple kids with multiple partners. In that example, that was her choice. So why does everyone else have to pay for it? Is that fair?


According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do :thumbs:

I think he does already...his ex.

I have an ex?

You said something about your former wife in one of threads, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do :thumbs:

I think he does already...his ex.

I have an ex?

You said something about your former wife in one of threads, no?

nah not me.


According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this earlier and think its a little misleading.

This report was funded by a few conservative groups who put focus on the family.

But I think that the real issue is that there are couples/single parents who are having children they can't afford. That costs tax payers no matter if the family stays together or not.


keTiiDCjGVo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Ghana
Timeline
I saw this earlier and think its a little misleading.

This report was funded by a few conservative groups who put focus on the family.

But I think that the real issue is that there are couples/single parents who are having children they can't afford. That costs tax payers no matter if the family stays together or not.

:thumbs:

Having children that you aren't able to support is one thing....labeling people by their family make up, race, and/or gender won't correct anything. I'm a single black female mommy head of household.....no welfare, never any public assistance, well educated, well employed, home owner, etc. etc. etc. Of the many black single female head of households that I am personally familiar with, none of them have ever required any governmental assistance of any sort. Even those that are now retired don't collect social security until they are forced to. We don't fit the "mold" but then we didn't create the mold did we? The mold was created using "well placed assumptions" by "well meaning family advocates". Right.... :blink:


GHANA.GIFBassi and Zainab US1.GIF

I-129F Sent: 6-18-2007

Interview date: 6-24-2008

Pick up Visa: 6-27-2008

Arrive JFK POE: 7-2-2008

Marriage: 7-9-2008

AOS

mailed AOS, EAD, AP: 8-22-2008

NOA AOS, EAD, AP: 8-27-2008

Biometrics: 9-18-2008

AOS Transferred to CSC: 9-25-2008

Requested EAD Expedite: 11-12-2008

EAD Card production ordered: 11-12-2008 changed to 11/17/2008 Why? (I hope it doesn't change every week!)

Received AP: 11/17/2008

Received EAD: 11/22/08 (Praise God!!)

AOS RFE: 1/29/2009

AOS Approved: 3/24/2009

Called USCIS 4/1/2009 told no status change and case not yet reviewed from RFE request.

Received green card: 4/3/2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Panama
Timeline
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do :thumbs:

What a GREAT idea.The children would be known as "Boo-Yah's Kids."

I saw this earlier and think its a little misleading.

This report was funded by a few conservative groups who put focus on the family.

But I think that the real issue is that there are couples/single parents who are having children they can't afford. That costs tax payers no matter if the family stays together or not.

:thumbs:

Having children that you aren't able to support is one thing....labeling people by their family make up, race, and/or gender won't correct anything. I'm a single black female mommy head of household.....no welfare, never any public assistance, well educated, well employed, home owner, etc. etc. etc. Of the many black single female head of households that I am personally familiar with, none of them have ever required any governmental assistance of any sort. Even those that are now retired don't collect social security until they are forced to. We don't fit the "mold" but then we didn't create the mold did we? The mold was created using "well placed assumptions" by "well meaning family advocates". Right.... :blink:

:thumbs: THANK YOU ! :thumbs:


May 7,2007-USCIS received I-129f
July 24,2007-NOA1 was received
April 21,2008-K-1 visa denied.
June 3,2008-waiver filed at US Consalate in Panama
The interview went well,they told him it will take another 6 months for them to adjudicate the waiver
March 3,2009-US Consulate claims they have no record of our December visit,nor Manuel's interview
March 27,2009-Manuel returned to the consulate for another interrogation(because they forgot about December's interview),and they were really rude !
April 3,2009-US Counsalate asks for more court documents that no longer exist !
June 1,2009-Manuel and I go back to the US consalate AGAIN to give them a letter from the court in Colon along with documents I already gave them last year.I was surprised to see they had two thick files for his case !


June 15,2010-They called Manuel in to take his fingerprints again,still no decision on his case!
June 22,2010-WAIVER APPROVED at 5:00pm
July 19,2010-VISA IN MANUELITO'S HAND at 3:15pm!
July 25,2010-Manuelito arrives at 9:35pm at Logan Intn'l Airport,Boston,MA
August 5,2010-FINALLY MARRIED!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 23,2010-Filed for AOS at the International Institute of RI $1400!
December 23,2010-Work authorization received.
January 12,2011-RFE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What a GREAT idea.The children would be known as "Boo-Yah's Kids."

That is a good idea. If I pay for them I might as well bloody have them..


According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Other Timeline
Boo Yah your heart is obviously in the right place. I think you should offer to financially support 1 single mother and her children. It's the right thing to do

So you are against helping one another? Wow what a sad thing to hear, all of us looking out for just ourselves. What is your solution, just turn your head, walk away, not your problem right.

It's the American way, doncha know??? :rolleyes:

To think otherwise makes you a subversive pinko commie!!!



thkirby-1.gifpetblink46.gif
BuddhaEyesGlobe.gif1433707c1j51myzp6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...