Whoa!
I asked the question about single parenting from the fact that the tv
report gave Britain as 2nd highest, but not which country had the
highest (it seems to be the US - having explored the full report) - it's
the curious (academic?) in me that asks such un-implicated questions! O:-) .
My reason for asking about the best source of GINI data is to try and
see how it relates to the over-all ordering of data in the table (that
Dennis shared from the whole report), since my view - of what I'm told -
is that income inequality (ie the GINI coefficient) predicts (and
causes) all sorts of social ills - and probably this set, too.
So some playful plotting (graphing! ;-) ) would ensue!
But, having said that, my pondering is that it may well be that
long-term income inequality creates (or not) a robustness to further
shocks (this is a preliminary hypothesis regarding a preliminary
reading of suicide statistics - which seem to be highly not-correlated
with GINI/ie income inequality data).
So: that's my reply to Steve's question too - and, were it the case that
localised income data were available, then that'd be helpful, since
other data is/can be locally identified (it seems).
Love 2(u) all
Busily
john
**********
Graeme Bacque wrote:
> So, by inference single parents (who are predominantly women) are
> being blamed.
>
> Since when is this acceptable? And why is no one here challenging this
> prejudice?
>
> Seems to me that properly supporting single-parent families so they
> can give their kids a decent start would be the intelligent,
> compassionate course of action. But society still clings to this
> medieval, 'scarlet letter' mindset about households with kids that
> don't have a male parent (which is usually the case for single-parent
> families) in residence.
>
> As far as I'm concerned single moms are heroes and need to be treated
> accordingly, not vilified and generally treated as lesser beings as
> still happens to this day. The powers-that-be seem to forget that
> whatever consequences they visit upon Mom will also impact with many
> times the severity on her children - and upon society itself with the
> passage of time.
>
> So instead of imposing draconian 'ASBO' orders on troubled kids, the
> U.K. (and governments everywhere) needs to be ensuring that their home
> environment is one that can give them a decent start at life - which
> means ensuring that single parents are properly supported.
>
> John Courtneidge wrote:
>
>> Dear Adam and Dennis
>>
>> Thanks - Fascinating reading.- for this and the following-posted table
>>
>> Two questions:
>>
>> First:
>>
>> Towards the end:
>>
>> "Family
>> Britain has the second highest incidence of young people living in
>> single parent families. Almost 17%compared to just 7% in Italy and 9%
>> in Belgium."
>>
>> What is the full data set for this? Which country is the highest such
>> incidence?
>>
>> Secondly:
>>
>> Where is the best data set for GINI coefficients for these countries
>> (and others) - cross-sectional and longdidtudinal, if possible.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> john
>>
>> ***********
>>
>>
>>
>> Adam P. Coutts wrote:
>>
>>> full report accessible via BBC2 Newsnight website:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/6359161.stm
>>>
>>> http://www.unicef-icdc.org/
>>>
>>> The report on Britain's children makes grim reading Britain's
>>> children are unhappier and feel less loved than those in almost any
>>> of the world's wealthiest nations, according to a Unicef report.
>>>
>>> Unicef considered six factors crucial to children's lives: material
>>> well-being; health and safety; education; family and peer
>>> relationships; behaviour and risks; and subjective well-being.
>>>
>>> Overall the Netherlands fares best, ranking in the top ten for all
>>> six critera. Britain and America come in the bottom third in five of
>>> the six categories, ranking well behind the likes of Greece, Poland
>>> and the Czech Republic.
>>>
>>> The report, revealed exclusively on Newsnight, draws on data from
>>> existing studies by the World Health Organisation and the OECD.
>>>
>>> Grim reading
>>> The report makes grim reading, suggesting that growing up in Britain
>>> may leave children disadvantaged not because the country is
>>> materially poor but because of "relative income poverty" - the large
>>> disparity in wealth between the nation's poorest and the rest.
>>>
>>> Only in the United States is the gap wider. Scandinavia has the
>>> lowest rate of relative income poverty.
>>>
>>> According to Manu Vatish, consultant obstetrician at University
>>> Hospital, Coventry, this is an obvious sign of deprivation.
>>>
>>> "It continues throughout their childhood. It will lead them into
>>> adolescence, it will alter their job prospects and then they'll
>>> continue in a cycle of deprivation into the next generation," he says.
>>>
>>> Drink and drugs
>>> But the American dream lives on: children in the US are the most
>>> ambitious, whereas in the UK, one third expect to find no better
>>> than unskilled work.
>>>
>>> When it comes to sex, drugs and drink, Britain's teenagers are the
>>> worst abusers. Fewer than a tenth of French 11 to 15 year olds,
>>> compared to a third of the UK's, say they've been drunk at least twice.
>>>
>>> As for drugs, only Swiss and Canadian teenagers have used cannabis
>>> more frequently than the British.
>>>
>>> Nearly 40% of British 15 year olds say they have had sex - far more
>>> than the next most sexually precocious, the Germans and the Swedes
>>> where the figure is below 30%.
>>>
>>> Family
>>> Britain has the second highest incidence of young people living in
>>> single parent families. Almost 17%compared to just 7% in Italy and
>>> 9% in Belgium.
>>>
>>> And Britain comes bottom in family and peer relationships and in how
>>> young people feel about themselves. In Switzerland over 80% of
>>> youngsters find their peers kind and helpful.
>>>
>>>> From Portugal to Germany and Scandinavia well over 70% do likewise.
>>>> But in
>>>
>>>
>>> Britain the figure is a dismal 43%
>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------
>>> Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section --
>>> NOT the subject header -- to [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> SIGNOFF SDOH
>>>
>>> DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE
>>> TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.
>>>
>>> To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to
>>> [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
>>>
>>> SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname
>>>
>>> To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
>>> Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if
>>> relevant.
>>>
>>> For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> SET SDOH DIGEST
>>>
>>> To view the SDOH archives, go to:
>>> https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html
>>>
>>
>> -------------------
>> Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT
>> the subject header -- to [log in to unmask]
>>
>> SIGNOFF SDOH
>>
>> DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO
>> THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.
>>
>> To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to
>> [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
>>
>> SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname
>>
>> To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
>> Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.
>>
>> For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]
>>
>> To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to
>> [log in to unmask]
>> SET SDOH DIGEST
>>
>> To view the SDOH archives, go to:
>> https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html
>>
>>
>
> -------------------
> Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT
> the subject header -- to [log in to unmask]
>
> SIGNOFF SDOH
>
> DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO
> THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.
>
> To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to
> [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
>
> SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname
>
> To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
> Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.
>
> For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]
>
> To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to
> [log in to unmask]
> SET SDOH DIGEST
>
> To view the SDOH archives, go to:
> https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html
>
-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT the subject header -- to [log in to unmask]
SIGNOFF SDOH
DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.
To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname
To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.
For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]
To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST
To view the SDOH archives, go to: https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html
|
