The unspeakable link between
family stability and prosperity
The first step to solving a problem is recognising that one exists.
Sara (not her real name) wouldn’t wish single motherhood on anyone. When she and her partner split, it was hard. She remembers the days of shifting emotions and shifting locations. And of course it was hard financially – which, she adds, it still very much is.
For Sara, the idea that family stability leads to economic prosperity is not a tough sell. She believes it’s true for her own family, and also for the country. Others, however, get angry at this claim. For them, it’s not only false, it’s simplistic victim blaming.
But those who believe there is no link between their own family’s stability and the prosperity of the nation need to know that evidence abounds.
Let’s start with unexpected sources. A writer for the finance section of a national Canadian daily recently revealed her number one advice for accruing wealth over the life course: stay married. She herself did not and suffered financially for it.
The research
Statistics Canada further solidifies the link. Data shows (1) single parents are more likely to live in poverty. Of couple households with children, 5.7 per cent are in poverty (as measured by the Low Income Cut-Off, LICO). By contrast, of single female households with children, 21.8 per cent live below the LICO.
Canadian researchers Finnie and Sweetman suggest in a 2003 study that moving from lone parenthood to any other family form significantly decreases the probability of moving into low income. (“Poverty dynamics: empirical evidence for Canada”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 36 (2), p. 306)
A recent Harvard study showed (2) that one of the most important factors for upward mobility for low-income children was their family structure. Even the family structure of neighbouring families had an effect.
Other research shows that children raised by two parents are more likely to finish school, making them better prepared for the job market. Family stability boosts family finance and the economy in many ways.
Why does any of this need to be said? Isn’t it just hurtful, even if it is true?-
(1) Analysis
Introduction
Stability continued in median after-tax income
Provincial stability continued
After-tax income was also unchanged across quintiles
Year-over-year upward absolute income mobility lessened
Short-term relative mobility lessened but longer-term relative mobility is unchanged
The building blocks of after-tax income also remained stable in 2010
Change in median income taxes for non-senior families
Little change in low income at the national level
Few changes in low income across the provinces
Crossing the low-income lines
References
Stability continued in median after-tax income
Provincial stability continued
After-tax income was also unchanged across quintiles
Year-over-year upward absolute income mobility lessened
Short-term relative mobility lessened but longer-term relative mobility is unchanged
The building blocks of after-tax income also remained stable in 2010
Change in median income taxes for non-senior families
Little change in low income at the national level
Few changes in low income across the provinces
Crossing the low-income lines
References
(2) Where is the land of oportunity? Harvard´s study on mobility: obs.rc.fas.harvard.edu
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario