Quote:
Originally Posted by icecube
I pose this question to you then. Why is it that black and indigenous people have such a lower economic status and in such massively disproportionate numbers?
|
A) Starting at a lower economic status generations ago, and B) having lower rates of those things that correlate to upward mobility (marriage, education, deferred gratification).
Education is one that we can help with public policy. In Canada, we can safeguard our student based funding and be vigilant against ways in which the already comfortable secure greater funding for their children. When it comes to native communities, it's not quite as simple because the conditions in isolated communities make it very difficult to attract and keep teachers. I think a program to encourage bright and ambitious university graduates of all disciplines to spend a year in a native community teaching, and conferring prestige and special accreditation to those who do so would be a good step.
The U.S. is totally messed up when it comes to funding education, which is the biggest reasons there's lower economic mobility in the U.S. than in countries like Canada, Japan, or Germany. But fixing that for all children in poor neighbourhoods and regions would be a better approach than focusing only on black children.
But marriage is the big one. Being raised in a single-parent household is the single greatest handicap to upward mobility. This research on this is overwhelming. The collapse of marriage and enduring two-parent households to raise children in has been a catastrophe for the working class and poor. No social programs can come close to providing the emotional, social, and economic support of two parents dedicated to raising children.
The problem is this reality does not fit into the narrative of modern progressives. Marriage is seen as patriarchal. Calling for the support of traditional family structure is something conservatives do. Pointing out the really bad outcomes of children raised out of wedlock is denounced as victim-blaming.
So the single biggest factor in encouraging economic security and upward mobility is more or less ignored by those who regard themselves as the champions of the disadvantaged. Ideology trumps utility.
And this isn't really a race issue - marriage is now collapsing as an institution among the white working class now too, with the same catastrophic consequences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
That is a fair comment re immigrants. It isn’t surprising that, generally speaking, immigrants will be less wealthy than people who were born in state x. However, in Canada and the United States, two of the most marginalized groups (blacks in the US and indigenous persons in Canada) have been there for nearly as long or much longer than whites.
|
See my comments above. The Philippines is not a rich place. Neither is Vietnam. Or Pakistan. And yet by the second generation, immigrants from those countries are typically on the upward trend, attending post-secondary schools at rates matching non-immigrant populations. Again, the keys are A) children raised in stable homes with two parents, and B) a high value and high expectations placed on education.
If our racist social structures determine outcomes, then it how is it that Asian immigrants have done so well? Why haven't those oppressive structures kept immigrants from the Philippines and China in their place? Why, in the space of 30 years, have Canada's engineering and medical schools gone from overwhelmingly white to barely half white? Whoever is supposed to be defending the privileges of European Canadians seems to be asleep at the wheel.