Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Don't Let Kids Grow Up ‘Red'
San Jose Mercury News ^ | 2/9/07 | Anonymous Editorial

Posted on 02/09/2007 8:08:06 PM PST by ProtectOurFreedom

Mamas, don't let your babies grow up in “red” states.

That's the compelling conclusion of author Michael R. Petit, whose new book, “Homeland Insecurity,” makes a strong case that children in red states are more likely to suffer from poor prenatal care, early death, child abuse and teen incarceration than children in “blue” states.

Petit's argument is that states with anti-tax, anti-government ideology are significantly harming their children's health. His book should be required reading for parents and lawmakers -- especially so in California, which is considering legislation that would significantly improve the health of its children. Petit, president of the Every Child Matters Education Fund and a former commissioner of Maine's Human Services Department, has been studying state government's impact on children for the past 25 years.

California ranks 19th on Petit's child vulnerability index, which is based on 16 different child-focused criteria. Ten of the top 11 states on the list are blue states. No fewer than 24 of the 25 bottom states are red states.

California would rank significantly higher in the overall rankings if it did a better job of insuring its children. More than 12 percent of California's kids -- roughly 800,000 -- have no health care coverage, ranking the state 42nd in the nation. The only states that are worse are all red states: Texas, Florida, New Mexico, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, Oklahoma and Colorado.

California ranks considerably better in the number of deaths of infants per 1,000 (No. 7), per capita child welfare expenditures (No. 5) and child abuse fatalities (No. 21).

(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: marxist; puke; whowritesthiscrap
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last
continued...Just how big is the gap between red states and blue states on children's issues? According to Petit, a child in the overall bottom 10 states is:

• Twice as likely to die by the age of 14.

• Seven times more likely to die from abuse and neglect.

• Twice as likely to be living in poverty.

• More than twice as likely to be incarcerated as juveniles.

The well-being of the nation's children matters. The investment that blue states make in their children not only pays off ultimately in lower medical bills and less need to provide social services, but also creates a higher percentage of productive, well-educated members of society.

The nation's red states should be red-faced about their disgraceful health care response. Their selfish practice of being unwilling to part with tax dollars to help guarantee their children's future is in direct opposition to the American values they so often claim to cherish.

--------------------

With the blue states driving out jobs and losing population, I guess it won't be long before all of our children will suffer thus.

1 posted on 02/09/2007 8:08:07 PM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
"Petit, president of the Every Child Matters Education Fund and a former commissioner of Maine's Human Services Department, has been studying state government's impact on children for the past 25 years."

He doesn't have an Agenda, sure, he doesn't....
2 posted on 02/09/2007 8:09:47 PM PST by decal (Too many people mistake "tolerance" for "approval.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Petit's argument is that states with anti-tax, anti-government ideology are significantly harming their children's health.

Well, this makes sense. Seeing as how children are owned by the state, the government need to have enough money and be big enough to properly "care for" the children they own. They need to be properly "educated" so they can grow up and be content house slaves who will gladly hand over whatever the state demands.

3 posted on 02/09/2007 8:14:43 PM PST by MichiganConservative (If you don't like rape, then don't rape anyone. Don't force your morals on others!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Of the last four bullet points, three completely apply to gang members and the fourth is pretty close. I live in a state that's so blue, Republicans don't have control over anything (yeah, I know, but Arnold's really not a Republican, he just says that). California's gang problem is probably the worst in the nation. Life is very cheap on the streets. Blue state all the way.
4 posted on 02/09/2007 8:16:22 PM PST by originalbuckeye (I want a hero....I'm holding out for a hero (politically!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Blue states or red states, every time I look at the finances of state I see undeclared bankruptcy and insolvency, which will have to be eventually declared when the babyboomers start drawing full force on each state's public pension system. My statistical interpretation would be that blue states will publicly declare bankruptcy before most of the red states. The statistic that this Maine bureaucrat doesn't mention is that our abysmal public school system in EVERY state is failing to make productive citizens and taxpayers out of a large sector of the public school population many of which never complete their education.


5 posted on 02/09/2007 8:21:36 PM PST by Biblebelter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Red states are anti-tax and anti-government? It's news to me.

BTW, hasn't the South always been the poorer part of the nation, since at least 150 years ago? Typical liberal confusing correlation with causation.
6 posted on 02/09/2007 8:22:27 PM PST by billybudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

If you don't believe him about the Joys of Blue, just look at Blue Heavens like New Orleans, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Detroit...


7 posted on 02/09/2007 8:22:35 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

..."studying state government's impact on children for the past 25 years."

Either a total waste of 25 years, or locked into an agenda based focus.


8 posted on 02/09/2007 8:29:14 PM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists...call 'em what you will...They ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
What idiocy. This guy's basic premise is that children are products of the State.

Chilling how mainstreamed Orwellianism is.
9 posted on 02/09/2007 8:30:59 PM PST by TeenagedConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TeenagedConservative

Freedom is slavery, dude.


10 posted on 02/09/2007 8:33:39 PM PST by MichiganConservative (If you don't like rape, then don't rape anyone. Don't force your morals on others!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Petit, president of the Every Child Matters Education Fund and a former commissioner of Maine's Human Services Department, has been studying state government's impact on children for the past 25 years.

Sounds like another wasted life...

11 posted on 02/09/2007 8:51:46 PM PST by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Don't Let Kids Grow Up ‘Red'

At least the headline is more correct than it knows.

12 posted on 02/09/2007 8:58:17 PM PST by Lonely Bull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Is there no barf alert you can attach?


13 posted on 02/09/2007 9:00:39 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
number of deaths of infants per 1,000

I don't believe abortions was included in this number. For New York, there are 500 abortions for every 1000 live births. That might increase the "infant mortality" rate a bit if included.

14 posted on 02/09/2007 9:01:48 PM PST by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

This is slightly off, but didn't they used to switch the state colors in elections like in '96 Dole was blue and Clinton was red etc, seems like we've really been stuck on the '00 election colors especially the media and thats how we're identifying them, will they ever change again?

The thing is when I hear "red" state I automatically think of Socialism and Communism which I more closely associate with the Democratic Party haha.


15 posted on 02/09/2007 9:03:14 PM PST by Nomad817
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Petit's child vulnerability index,



I'd really like to see how this is defined. I'm sure it's a bunch of poppycock, some stupid liberal metrics. How many kids in blue states have a stay-at-home mom/dad? Sorry kid, Mom and Dad can't stay at home with you because I've got to get a job so that I can pay all these onerous taxes.


16 posted on 02/09/2007 9:06:17 PM PST by BamaGirl (The Framers Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Bump


18 posted on 02/09/2007 9:09:12 PM PST by Fiddlstix (Warning! This Is A Subliminal Tagline! Read it at your own risk!(Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

"Petit's argument is that states with anti-tax, anti-government ideology are significantly harming their children's health".

Very scary statement!


19 posted on 02/09/2007 9:10:25 PM PST by OMalley (Just say NO to Rudy "Tootsie" Giuliani-GO Duncan Hunter 08...HI MOM:))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

39,000 gang members in LA


20 posted on 02/09/2007 9:10:50 PM PST by neverhillorat (IF THE RATS WIN, WE ALL LOSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Barf Alert please


21 posted on 02/09/2007 9:10:55 PM PST by Domandred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Petit's argument is that states with anti-tax, anti-government ideology are significantly harming their children's health.

California is anti-tax, anti-government? Wow. I never would have guessed. And exactly where does this conclusion come from that "red states" are more "anti-tax" and "anti-government" than other states? Just because they are "red"? I think we need a little proof for these conclusory statements, Doc.

The investment that blue states make in their children not only pays off ultimately in lower medical bills and less need to provide social services, but also creates a higher percentage of productive, well-educated members of society.

Hahaha, so "Blue States" automatically have more productive and well-educated members of society? My, now we're getting personal, Doc. And this is because they insure a higher percentage of their kids? Hey Doc, if people in the "Blue States" have it so much better than us poor "Red State" denizens, then why do "Blue State" (by which I take it you mean Democrats) candidates do so poorly in so many elections? They should just sweep every election, seeing as how they are so superior from birth and all. But the President is one of those neglected Red Staters. And the military is loaded with those uncared-for Red State people, but the US military is doing just fine. In fact, if you look at the percentage of people who go into physically demanding occupations like the military, I bet the Red Staters have it all over the effete Blue Staters. Sorry, Doc, you're full of Blue State stuff.

22 posted on 02/09/2007 9:11:20 PM PST by KellyAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nomad817


Your #15 is EXACTLY what I was thinking.

And, BTW, I don't think you were "slightly off" at all, but rather very astute!


23 posted on 02/09/2007 9:18:48 PM PST by NH Liberty ("For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus..." [1 Timothy 2:5])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: decal; ProtectOurFreedom

Re: "He doesn't have an Agenda, sure, he doesn't...."

Yeah, ya know how those so-called apolitical non-profits operate.

Our Children's Homeland Insecurity
Michael Petit
February 06, 2007

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/06/our_childrens_homeland_insecurity.php


http://www.everychildmatters.org/index.html


24 posted on 02/09/2007 9:21:27 PM PST by endthematrix (Both poverty and riches are the offspring of thought.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nomad817

I thought that it was earlier than '96, but yes. You aren't alone.


The democrat(ic)s need to try to disassociate themselves from the USSR (and communism in general) to try to get and stay in power. All the while, the whole "dictatorship of the proletariat" thing is still the real goal...


25 posted on 02/09/2007 9:24:30 PM PST by Triggerhippie (Always use a silencer in a crowd. Loud noises offend people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

bump for tomorrow


26 posted on 02/09/2007 9:31:17 PM PST by gidget7 (2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonely Bull

Yeah....guess I'm showing my age.....I thought it meant..."Don't let your kid grow up COMMIE!"


27 posted on 02/09/2007 9:35:50 PM PST by goodnesswins (We need to cure Academentia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Nomad817
Blue used to represent the incumbant party in the White House. In 2000, Democrats were blue and Republicans were red.

It was the "Bush Country" map of counties that really solidified the "Red States" concept in people's minds. I expect that red will always be used for Republicans/Conservatives now.

-PJ

28 posted on 02/09/2007 9:42:05 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: ProtectOurFreedom
Their selfish practice of being unwilling to part with tax dollars to help guarantee their children's future is in direct opposition to the American values they so often claim to cherish.

helping to guarantee my children's futures is the VERY REASON i do not want to part with tax dollars...

30 posted on 02/09/2007 9:52:54 PM PST by latina4dubya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Red tends to mean south and that tends to mean more "undocumented aliens." These shadow people are not going to be as well off as citizens.


31 posted on 02/09/2007 9:55:54 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TeenagedConservative

It's what happens when you've been brainwashed into Marxism your whole life.


32 posted on 02/09/2007 9:58:17 PM PST by darkangel82 (Socialism is NOT an American value.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Don't let your kids grow up blue. Tolerant, fair-minded people don't.


33 posted on 02/09/2007 10:11:25 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Utah = 3rd highest life expectancy in the country. We'd be #1 if we laid off the Funeral Potatoes & the Green Jello.

Utah's infant mortality is going to be a little higher than in Enlightened States because people here are more reticent about aborting a child that might have birth defects.


34 posted on 02/09/2007 10:34:32 PM PST by Utahrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

I think this person has the facts to back up his conclusions about states.

but what about counties which is more relevant.

My guess is red counties are much better for kids than blue counties. A good example is Maryland which is all red except for Baltimore City, PG county and Montgomery county. Montgomery does very well for kids, but Baltimore and PG county are about as bad as you can get.


35 posted on 02/09/2007 10:39:09 PM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utahrd
We'd be #1 if we laid off the Funeral Potatoes & the Green Jello.

You want to lay off jello? Go have an operation. When I had my gall bladder removed a couple of years ago (a week before Ashcroft had his taken out), they fed me Jello during my hospital stay, varying only the color (red, orange, green, red, orange,green.) I couldn't look at the stuff for well over a year. I still am reluctant to eat it.

36 posted on 02/09/2007 10:46:00 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Better dead than Red.


37 posted on 02/09/2007 10:47:39 PM PST by TigersEye (Ego chatters endlessly on. Mind speaks in great silence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Oops! I thought they meant commie by Red. Nuke the blue zones!


38 posted on 02/09/2007 10:49:54 PM PST by TigersEye (Ego chatters endlessly on. Mind speaks in great silence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Lonely Bull

No doubt.


39 posted on 02/09/2007 11:02:33 PM PST by HANG THE EXPENSE (Defeat liberalism, its the right thing to do for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: confederatetrappedinmidwest

i'm with you!!!

I'm in the northern part of michigan and agree with everything you said!

I am so sick of my vote not counting because detroit wants their welfare!

You remember how wonderful and booming this state was under engler?

my family is moving in the spring. we won't be coming back. screw this state! my husband is 5th generation to live on the same land and we will sell it and take the 6th generation with us when we go. its hard but we are not willing to let granholm take our family down the toilet like she is the rest of the state.


40 posted on 02/09/2007 11:20:09 PM PST by annelizly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye
Depends on whether it's geography or demographics: the liberals are concentrated mostly in the coastal south and the Bay Area--the rest of the country is generally not as liberal; and demographically, California is very much a blue state.
41 posted on 02/10/2007 12:51:49 AM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( There are too many liberal, anti-American Wikipedians--and people in general.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Even if you cut off the illegal aliens, many--if not all--of those states would still be poorer. This isn't so much an illegal immigration issue.

California has the largest amount of illegal aliens, and as other freeper(s) have pointed out, there is considerable crime compared to some states. However, it is not comparatively poor. And, of course, it is a blue state.

Texas is a red state, and also has a lot of aliens--and they aren't that poor, either.

42 posted on 02/10/2007 12:56:38 AM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( There are too many liberal, anti-American Wikipedians--and people in general.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

Exactly! the blue states are only "blue" because they they have $hithole urban populations that overwhelm the conservative voters. This article is so insanely backwards. Crime and poverty IS the blue portion of states.


43 posted on 02/10/2007 2:54:22 AM PST by boop (Now Greg, you know I don't like that WORD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: boop
From the U.S. Census.... Current Population Survey The 2005 Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement shows the following results: Income Overview 2004 marked the second consecutive year in which real median household income showed no change. Race and Hispanic Origin Real median household income did not change between 2003 and 2004 for non-Hispanic whites, blacks or Asians or for households with Hispanic householders. Black households had the lowest median income in 2004 ($30,134) among race groups. Asian households had the highest median income ($57,518). The median income for non-Hispanic white households was $48,977. Median income for Hispanic households was $34,241. Comparison of two-year moving averages (2002-2003 and 2003-2004) showed that the real median income for households with householders who reported American Indian and Alaska native as their race was statistically unchanged. The same was true for native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander households. Regions Real median household income remained unchanged between 2003 and 2004 in three of the four census regions — Northeast ($47,994), West ($47,680) and South ($40,773). The exception was the Midwest, where income declined 2.8 percent, to $44,657. The difference in income between the Northeast and West was not statistically significant. The South continued to have the lowest median household income of all four regions. The Northeast and West had the highest incomes among regions. Nativity Real median income remained unchanged for native as well as for foreign-born households between 2003 and 2004. Native and foreign-born households had a median income in 2004 of $45,319 and $39,421, respectively. Earnings Real median earnings of men age 15 and older who worked full-time, year-round declined 2.3 percent between 2003 and 2004, to $40,798. Women with similar work experience saw their earnings decline by 1.0 percent, to $31,223. Reflecting the larger fall in the earnings of men, the ratio of female-to-male earnings for full-time, year-round workers was 77 cents on the dollar, up from 76 cents in 2003. Poverty Overview There were 37.0 million people in poverty (12.7 percent) in 2004, up from 35.9 million (12.5 percent) in 2003. There were 7.9 million families in poverty in 2004, up from 7.6 million in 2003. The poverty rate for families remained unchanged at 10.2 percent. The poverty rate and the number in poverty showed no change for the different type of families. As defined by the Office of Management and Budget and updated for inflation using the Consumer Price Index, the average poverty threshold for a family of four in 2004 was an income of $19,307; for a family of three, $15,067; for a family of two, $12,334; and for unrelated individuals, $9,645. Race and Hispanic Origin (Race data refer to people reporting a single race only.) In 2004, the poverty rate declined for Asians (9.8 percent in 2004, down from 11.8 percent in 2003), remained unchanged for Hispanics (21.9 percent) and blacks (24.7 percent) and rose for non-Hispanic whites (8.6 percent in 2004, up from 8.2 percent in 2003). The poverty rate of American Indians and Alaska natives did not change when comparing two-year averages for 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. The same was true of native Hawaiians and other Pacific islanders. Age For all children under 18, both the 2004 poverty rate (17.8 percent) and the number in poverty (13.0 million) were unchanged from 2003. The poverty rate increased for people 18 to 64 years old (from 10.8 percent in 2003 to 11.3 percent in 2004), but declined for those age 65 and older (from 10.2 percent in 2003 to 9.8 percent in 2004). Nativity The native-born population had increases in both their poverty rate (from 11.8 percent in 2003 to 12.1 percent in 2004) and their number in poverty (from 30.0 million in 2003 to 31.0 million in 2004). Foreign-born naturalized citizens had a 2004 poverty rate of 9.8 percent, compared with 21.6 percent for those who had not become citizens; both rates were unchanged from 2003. Regions The Midwest was the only region to show an increase in their poverty rate – 11.6 percent in 2004, up from 10.7 percent in 2003. In 2004, the poverty rates for the Northeast (11.6 percent), South (14.1 percent) and West (12.6 percent) were unchanged from 2003. The South continued to have the highest poverty rate. Health Insurance Coverage Overview The percentage of the nation’s population without health insurance coverage remained unchanged, at 15.7 percent in 2004. The percentage of people covered by employment-based health insurance declined from 60.4 percent in 2003 to 59.8 percent in 2004. The percentage of people covered by government health insurance programs rose in 2004, from 26.6 percent to 27.2 percent, driven by increases in the percentage of people with Medicaid coverage, from 12.4 percent in 2003 to 12.9 percent in 2004. The proportion and number of uninsured children did not change in 2004, remaining at 11.2 percent or 8.3 million. Race and Hispanic Origin (Race data refer to those reporting a single race only.) The uninsured rate in 2004 was 11.3 percent for non-Hispanic whites and 19.7 percent for blacks, both unchanged from 2003. The uninsured rate for Asians declined from 18.8 percent to 16.8 percent. The uninsured rate for Hispanics, who may be of any race, was 32.7 percent in 2004 — unchanged from 2003. Based on a three-year average (2002-2004), 29.0 percent of people who reported American Indian and Alaska native as their race were without coverage, higher than the rate for native Hawaiians and other Pacific islanders (21.8 percent) and for those of other race groups, but lower than that of Hispanics. Comparisons of two-year moving averages (2002-2003 and 2003-2004) showed that the uninsured rates for American Indians and Alaska natives and for native Hawaiians and other Pacific islanders did not change. Nativity While the proportion of the foreign-born population without health insurance in 2004 (33.7 percent) was unchanged from 2003, the rate for the native-born population increased (from 13.0 percent in 2003 to 13.3 percent in 2004). Regions The Midwest had the lowest uninsured rate in 2004 (at 11.9 percent), followed by the Northeast (13.2 percent), the West (17.4 percent) and the South (18.3 percent). American Community Survey The national findings regarding median income and poverty rate are consistent between the CPS and the ACS. When examining localities of 250,000 or more residents, the 2004 American Community Survey shows the following results concerning income, poverty and earnings: Income For counties of 250,000 or more people in 2004, median household income ranged from $88,133 in Fairfax County, Va., to $24,778 in Hidalgo County, Texas. For cities of similar size, median household incomes ranged from $71,765 in San Jose, Calif., to $24,031 in Miami, Fla. Among the 37 counties with populations of 1 million or more in 2004, 32 experienced no statistically significant change in median household income from 2003 to 2004. Three counties (King, Wash.; Palm Beach, Fla.; and Philadelphia, Pa.) experienced declines; two counties (Fairfax, Va.; and Orange, Calif.) showed increase. Poverty Among counties with 250,000 or more people in 2004, poverty rates ranged from 2.6 percent in Johnson, Kan., to 43.6 percent in Hidalgo, Texas. Among places of a similar size, the poverty rates ranged from 7.4 percent for Anchorage, Alaska, to 33.6 percent for Detroit. Among the 37 counties with 1 million or more people in 2004, seven experienced changes in their poverty rates between 2003 and 2004. Of those seven, Broward, Fla., and Oakland, Mich., showed decreases, while Allegheny, Pa., Bronx, N.Y.; King, Wash.; Nassau, N.Y.; and Wayne, Mich., had increases. Among the nine cities of this size, New York, N.Y., saw its poverty rate rise, while poverty in the other places remained unchanged. Earnings Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and the District of Columbia had among the highest median earnings for both men and women who worked full-time, year-round. In each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, women’s earnings were less than men’s in 2004. The District of Columbia was the area with the greatest parity between men’s and women’s earnings. There, women earned 91 cents for every dollar that men earned. Earnings by Industry Among the 20 major industry sectors, men earned the most in 2004 in the management of companies and enterprises sector ($77,754). For women, there were five sectors where median earnings were about $40,000 or more: management of companies and enterprises ($41,608); mining ($41,516); professional, scientific and technical services ($41,398); utilities ($40,981); and information ($40,447). In each of the major industry sectors, men earned more than women. The sectors where the earnings gap between men and women was the largest were management of companies and enterprises, where women earned 54 cents for every dollar that men earned; finance and insurance (57 cents); and professional, scientific and technical services (60 cents). Earnings by Occupation Among the 22 major occupational groups, men earned the most in legal occupations, such as lawyers, judges and law clerks (more than $100,000). Among women, those in computer and mathematical occupations had the highest median earnings ($56,585). Among the major occupational groups, women’s earnings as a percentage of men’s earnings were about 90 percent or higher for the following groups: installation, maintenance and repair; community and social services; construction and extraction; and healthcare support. In contrast, women’s earnings as a percentage of men’s earnings were about 65 percent or less for legal occupations, sales and related occupations and healthcare practitioner and technical occupations. Estimates from the CPS ASEC may not match the estimates from the ACS because of differences in the questionnaires, data collection methodology, reference period, processing procedures, etc. Both are surveys and are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors. All comparisons made in the report have been tested and found to be statistically significant at the 90-percent confidence level, unless otherwise noted. For additional information on the CPS data, visit . For additional information on ACS data, visit . -X-
44 posted on 02/10/2007 2:58:42 AM PST by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: durasell

Short (more current) version:

In 2005, the poverty rates in the Northeast (11.3 percent) and the Midwest (11.4 percent) were not statistically different from each other. However, they were lower than the other two regions. Poverty rates for the South and the West were 14.0 percent and 12.6 percent, respectively. Both the poverty rate and the number in poverty remained stable in all regions between 2004 and 2005.


45 posted on 02/10/2007 3:01:18 AM PST by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

.


46 posted on 02/10/2007 3:02:19 AM PST by hellinahandcart (Rudy is so far to the left that we can pick up votes in Blue states)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darkangel82

No, don't you understand? They all so much smarter then us, and we's all hicks!

Arrogant liberal know-it-alls are pretty much indistinguishable from the Communist elite who were supposed to be so much better than the masses that they were the rightful leaders. No voting necessary.

If they could apply the Burger court's "one man, one vote" decision on State legislatures to the US Congress, we'd all be in Kulak re-education camps.


47 posted on 02/10/2007 4:39:16 AM PST by Cincinnatus.45-70 (Patriotism to DemocRats is like sunlight to Dracula.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

I hate this whole red state and blue state bs. You know there might be the most conservative people in the blue state but they are already hated here because of the state they are frome. It does not make sense. We need to stop following this media desire to split conservatives. They cntinue to try. I could care less where someone is from as long as they are decent, conservative and nice people.


48 posted on 02/10/2007 4:45:14 AM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

Yes, if the study had looked at counties rather than states, he would have come to a completely different conclusion. But then, that wouldn't have made his point.


49 posted on 02/10/2007 4:49:23 AM PST by TN4Liberty (Sixty percent of all people understand statistics. The other half are clueless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

The blue states happen to be more prosperous at this point (and see a large percentage of their fed tax dollars sent to red states). So there is bound to be natural tension.


50 posted on 02/10/2007 4:51:01 AM PST by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson