Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gargoyle.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!mhuxt!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes
From: carnes@gargoyle.UUCP (Richard Carnes)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.women
Subject: Re: Have welfare programs hurt the poor?
Message-ID: <166@gargoyle.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 25-Aug-85 18:38:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: gargoyle.166
Posted: Sun Aug 25 18:38:02 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 29-Aug-85 20:21:31 EDT
Reply-To: carnes@gargoyle.UUCP (Richard Carnes)
Followup-To: net.politics
Organization: U. of Chicago, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 15
Xref: linus net.politics:9995 net.women:6668
Summary: Effects of liberalized AFDC benefits on mothers

In *Losing Ground*, Charles Murray claims that the liberalization in
Aid to Families with Dependent Children benefits that has occurred
since the mid-60s has imposed the following social "costs":

  High AFDC benefits:
  --allow single mothers to set up their own households;
  --allow mothers to end bad marriages;
  --may make divorced mothers more cautious about remarrying.

Most people I know would consider these "costs" to be benefits.  Is
this keep'em-barefoot sexism on Murray's part, or is it just
conservative dogmatism:  that welfare benefits *must* have a bad
effect on the recipients?

Richard Carnes, ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes