The American family has never been weaker. In 1960, 75% of all households included a married couple, and fewer than 10% of children were born to single women. The married household was the fundamental building block of society.
Today, just 49% of all households include a married couple, and almost 45% of children are born to single women. The married household is becoming extinct.
Institute for Family Studies senior fellow Laurie DeRose argues that income inequality is behind the fall of the American family, and while I agree with each of the policies she identifies in her piece, I still think inequality is the wrong focus.
I don’t want to put words in DeRose’s mouth or unnecessarily build a straw man, but when most people think of inequality, the first thing they think of is raising taxes on the wealthy. Again, this is not a solution to inequality that DeRose endorses in her latest article, but it is something that inevitably comes up when the problem is framed as “income inequality” and not something else like making more men able to support themselves.
Every single one of the specific policies DeRose does identify is geared toward making men more able to support themselves, whether that is through more vocational apprenticeship programs, making it easier to get a college degree in four years, not requiring a college degree for jobs that don’t need one, or making it easier for convicted criminals who have served their time to reintegrate into society.
I’m for all those things.
What worries me is that if we frame the problem as fighting income inequality, then the focus switches from helping men support themselves to making high-income people relatively poorer. And by itself, I just don’t see how that helps anyone.
