Feel free to go back to the 100+ studies I posted earlier. I guess they were all based on feelings without any actual statistical evidence.
[Reply]

LOL. Okay, internet tough guy. Not sure if you have a job or not, but the US Treasury auctioned off 44bn 3y notes today at 1pm EST and focusing on stuff like that is more of my responsibility than promptly responding to you.
[Reply]

This is a phenomenal article. I teach history, and the protests that athletes like Muhammad Ali and Tommie Smith made are a part of our curriculum. Mahomes will be in our history books someday for a similar reason - and that’s a pretty amazing thing to think about.

An NFL executive on the phone with me Sunday: “Let’s put it this way: The second I saw him in that video, I knew Roger had to act quickly. Everyone, including all the owners, knows he’s the guy.” https://t.co/O8hYReWSx5

— Jason Reid (@JReidESPN) June 8, 2020

[Reply]

You're arguing almost entirely in degrees though, are you not?

And I did reference co-habitation, FYI. Your 'father stays in the home but is unmarried' situation falls directly into it and again - twice as likely to be impoverished even in that scenario.

On stuff like that I don't attempt to give full weight to every number because it's leading with your chin - whether a white child is twice as likely or 6 times as likely to be born into a fatherless home is still arguing degrees and not trends. Ultimately trying to parse things as thing as specific numbers is something I generally avoid even when I'm making the argument because it's leading with your chin - lean heavily into precision and not a trend and being off by a couple points makes your argument fall to shit. So if I'm going to have a discussion on something like this, I'm going to try to do it in a way that 5 times or 2 times as likely differs the degree but not the underlying point. The trend is clear either way.

And the trends have been undeniable over the decades for black children - they are significantly more likely to be born into fatherless homes. Even accepting the 40% on your low side vs. 18% for whites is still a MASSIVE difference. Additionally, that's while not even considering the difference in outcomes for co-habitations which would sweep up the 'unmarried but in the home' population you noted. They wouldn't drive the outcome quite as aggressively, but they'll still continue to push the data against the AA community, no? Homes with cohabitation are not as likely to be beneath the poverty line as solo-parent homes, but they're a tick over twice as likely as families with married parents.

Moreover, all the things I 'didn't consider' I definitely have and believe I've addressed by trying to compare among eras. Regarding social equality and fiscal health, why did those negative trends accelerate when they were experiencing their largest steps forward in equality? Why did they get worse as they were seeing financial gaps closing faster than ever? And why didn't any of those gains translate to at least slow them over the coming decade(s)? The war on drugs that is often cited as the key element of the justice system gap came WELL after these trends had already cemented themselves.

Citing those as catalysts is difficult when the worst trends in legitimacy didn't come at the nadir of social/economic inequality. Nor did they appear to show any inverse correlation to when improvements were made in those regards.

Sure I've considered those things. And somewhere in the margins I do believe they have had some impact - but I can't see them as the overwhelming driver because timelines and trends in data simply haven't overlapped well.
[Reply]

Wow - that's a hell of an overreach.

Ali and Smith did what they did at a time it was incredibly unpopular to do so. Essentially, they took the 'Brees' side of the argument - they went hard against the stream of popular sentiment. Tommie Smith was just savagely berated worldwide and I think Ali actually had to spend a little time in prison for his views. Mahomes, OTOH, is fortunate to be able to say these things behind a wave of massive popular sentiment.

It's not like he was out there leading the charge 2 years ago when there might've been actual consequences.

He did a thing that came completely without risk. Nah - history isn't gonna have much to say about him being the most popular voice among tens of millions. It might've cared if he said it amount tens of thousands.

This was essentially consequence free for him. He put little/nothing on the line. Ali and Smith, OTOH, are different stories entirely. Everyone love's Pat but mentioning him in the same breath as guys like those two WILDLY underestimates the risks they took.
[Reply]

Disagree.

Colin Kaepernick is going to be the direct comparison to Ali and Smith - but the NFL finally saying "blacklivesmatter" is going to be a huge part of that story. Mahomes, the 2018-2019 MVP, the 2019-2020 Super Bowl MVP, and the face of the NFL speaking out is a big reason why that happened and is likely going to be looked at as a signature moment for when the tide shifted in the NFL. Ali is taught at the advent of the protest movement against the Vietnam War, but you can't teach about the protest movement without talking about how protest movement concluded (the end of the Vietnam War, Ali's re-instatement, etc). Further, Joe Frazier is often talked about as a critical ally who supported Ali during his ban and supported his re-instatement, my guess is the same is the same topics are going to be covered when teaching this movement.

Let's check back on this in 20 years. You can clown me then if I'm wrong.
[Reply]

It's absolutely argued in degrees because people here are attempting to point out that blacks are so far off the scale in this regard. Part of the strategy of the opposition is the shock level of the statistic. 70%+ makes it seem like the very, very overwhelming majority are fatherless and that it's out of control. 40% for blacks vs 18% for whites doesn't carry the same weight the way these statistics are being thrown about in an attempt to cloud the issue. So, the spectrum absolutely matters.

RE: this getting worse as inequality ebbed. By what metric are you judging that the wealth gap narrowed?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...ck-households/

And I would presume that single parent homes became more prevalent amongst all races over that period, no?
[Reply]

Credit to Mahomes for saying something now and being a force for social change (it would have been easier to remain apolitical and his mere presence alone puts tremendous pressure on the NFL), but a big name quarterback should have stepped up three years ago when this was initially going on. It could have made all the difference.
[Reply]

I also agree with this. Aaron Rodgers speaking out in 2017 would have been MASSIVE for the conversation.
[Reply]

Rodgers never was against it and would say supportive things but he didn't stand with it either because I don't think he wanted the backlash at the time.
[Reply]

None of them really stood with it. Brady is friends with Trump and a complete dipshit so you can't expect anything from him, but where was Russell Wilson for example? They left Kaep to hang out to dry simply because it was easier not to go against the flow then.

It would have been interesting to see what Mahomes would have done then as a star QB.
[Reply]

Absolutely, I don't even know if Rodgers would have been the right guy to do it since everyone seems to think he's an ass.
[Reply]

Aaron Rodgers taking a knee in Green Bay would have absolutely shifted the conversation.
[Reply]

Twice as likely carries quite the shock value in its own right, does it not? It's damn sure enough to be relevant to the analysis. And when there's a clear line of demarcation between married and co-habitating, culling that figure down to only the 'married v. fatherless' distinction is muddying things just as badly. On situation has clearly preferred outcomes across the board to the other two. If you're suspicious about the motives of picking one extreme, I'm not sure how you can honestly choose the other.

In either event, it's an inescapable problem even at 'twice as likely' and frankly that still understates the issue.

Regarding 'inequality' It was narrowing at the time things started their downward trajectory for AA families (though again - because it's so difficult to put your finger on the exact moment it flipped so hard, it's also difficult to point to a concrete date for review. So you have to do trendline things over a decade here and there). It accelerated most heavily through the civil right movements when genuine legal progress was made.

Like I said - that's about the time that momentum swung that appears to kick off right around the 40s. I've always kinda wondered if that didn't end up swallowing up gains that might have been made in society writ large through the civil rights era. I mean anyone that's truly trying to argue that things are worse societally right now for minorities than they were before the civil rights movement is being pretty disingenuous. Yet, despite longer odds back then, progress was being made.

But maybe because I've tried in the past to focus more on periods in time I haven't considered accumulated wealth, but rather earning potential. That had been closing but there would've been lingering wealth accumulation gaps. That said, it STILL doesn't explain increases in standards of living experienced through the early part of the century for minorities. Why did momentum for the AA community just...stop? Things weren't equal between the races, but they were getting less unequal. It was a slow march forward, but forward it was - so why did things fall to hell right as it seemed that a societal breakthrough was possible?

And for sure, there have been increases throughout the demographics in single-parent homes. Hispanic homes have historically hovered right between black and white homes. But going back to that immediate post-war era, we've seen a roughly 55 point increase in the AA community as compared to a 25 point increase in the white community.

Now what is worth noting is that the era Moynihan was looking at had trends in the AA community that are very similar to some of the upticks we've seen in the white community over the last decade or so. Might there be an exponential growth element to it? Certainly seems possible - family structures tend to be relatively generational.

So is there something of a saturation point or is the AA community simply 60 years ahead of the white community and we'll see the kind of accelerated family decay over the next half-century for white families as well? {Shrug} Do not know.

What I am comfortable saying is that if it DOES happen to the white community, it is something that would need to be addressed directly at the family level. It's a generational shift and not something you can just 'fix'. I just don't think there's a silver bullet here. Which is where I started with DaFace - why is a 50 year trend supposed to be reversed in 12 months?
[Reply]

Exactly my point.

3 years ago it could've changed his entire life. If he's a guy taking controversial stances as a draft prospect, who knows how his draft goes? Lets say it goes the same way - what if he leads the charge 2 seasons ago after the MVP year - if it's so self-evident now, surely it was then as well. Crickets.

Mahomes isn't some kind of force for racially harmony - he simply hopped a bandwagon as it gained steam. It's just a far different thing than putting yourself out there when you don't have a mass of followers to join your banner.

This was EASILY the path of least resistance for him - so why is he to be considered among the most transformative athletes of our time?
[Reply]