In most of my classes we discuss the foundational institutions of society and how they need to know their role but also their limits. This is based on Abraham Kuyper's ideas about sphere sovereignty. Much of government policy ignores this reality and tries to reach into other spheres. Some politicians who support this sort of policy point to the very active welfare state of the Scandinavian countries, often Denmark and Sweden, as a model of success (even if they do not quite get it right). There are things to like about Denmark but its system is not all its advertised to be.
The Danish system is supposed to give citizens access to free (government paid) things like health care and education and that in turn is supposed to reduce the advantages the wealthy families have in income, social and professional mobility; if anyone can become a doctor then it will not be just the children of doctors becoming doctors. But recent research by Nobel Prize winning economist James Heckman is casting some doubt on all of this. In some recent research, a podcast discussing it is available here, very accessible, not technical at all) he finds that there is no more income mobility in Denmark than in the US. That yes the very generous social program has some effect in closing the gap between the wealthy and the poor but the largest factor is family condition. A child from a broken family is far more likely to be poor and low skilled and that no social program so far designed and implemented in either country has effectively addressed this and, I would argue, never can.
Marriage is the single biggest factor in predicting if a family is below poverty in the US. Married people are not poor, 97% are above the poverty line. Children from married parents do better than children from broken homes. The best way to prepare the next generation is the Biblical way of married parents raising kids. The government can't do this. When the family breaks down so too will the economy and there is no government program than can fix it.
I would say that this is a very controversial theory to say that children with married parents do better than children from broken homes. I do believe that it can go either way but I would say that the biblical way is the best way to go. Kimberly Howard and Richard Reeves from Brookings press state that " it is important to try and understand why the children of married parents do better. Is it simply because they have, on average, higher family incomes?"[Howard & Reeves, 2022].This is an important thing to note because it takes a lot to raise children and having stability means a lot. On the other hand, there are so many stories about celebrities coming f…
Professor Baugus,
This is a fascinating correlation that you have brought up. The role of having a functioning family unit in the realm of economics is not often brought up, yet it has severe implications for a country's economic future. The decline of the nuclear family in the United States signals a negative shift in the environment children are growing up in. In the Bible, the Lord calls children a blessing to their parents, yet in today's world, they are often viewed as an impediment to a young married couple. One article states, "Yet each and every year for the past 27 years, over one million children have experienced divorce in their families with an associated reduction in Family income…
I will have to agree with Mr.Baugus that married couples do have an economic advantage when it comes to raising children. It gives you more wiggle room or flexibility with various activities you have to do, it also can be a positive with two incomes unless one is a stay at home parent but it gives you the ability to have someone work and the other spend time with the kids but again, if you're both working you'll be economically stable. With Mr.Baugus talking about the Danish public health and education system, it promotes a balance between the communities and helps them achieve equal opportunities. Health, education, and equal opportunity are the subject of serious debate and decisive factor in…
Social programs are meant to be highly effective in restructuring and reorganizing the distribution of wealth and incentives within a society. I agree with Dr. Baugus in the sense that, if there is not a strong foundation for the social programs to fall on, they cannot be fully taken advantage of. Citizens play a key role in carrying out the function of every program. Oftentimes, the government is depended on to fix issues that the Bible instructs us to resolve on our own. Ecclesiastes 4:9-10 says, “Two are better than one, because they have a good reward for their toil. For if they fall, one will lift up his fellow. But woe to him who is alone when he falls…
I agree, especially as a believer, that married couples raising children have an economic advantage. When thinking about this on more simple terms its one income versus two incomes. When resources of two people are combined it creates more flexibility for the family thus allowing child rearing to be more successful and more possible. I also agree with the Danish governmental systems in regards to healthcare, education, and etc. It encourages balance across communities and helps with the access of equal opportunities. In America today healthcare, education, and equal opportunity has been a major discussion and has also been the deciding factor of many elections. Some of the main topics of discussion are centered around the need for political and…