|
It would seem that some of you think that questioning the methods is an invalid form of comment. Nothing could be further from the the truth. Any form of empirical study can and should have it's methods probed for faults. We are at a disadvantage as the brief is not the actual report, which I assume would contain a detailed methods section. That said, in simple statistical terms, 2000 samples of 300,000,000 may indeed be enough; however, the sample is clearly not random, and the data subject to too many variables for me to necessarily believe that. How is family defined? How do you follow multiple families for a generation? How were families chosen? Were some compensated for their participation? There are too many variables not controlled, or not answered, in the brief. Methodology matters.
But, assuming the underlying study is fault free:
roachboy, no one is 'blaming the poor' for moral or cognitive defects. What, I think, most have said is that the poor (as a whole) do share some (but not necessarily all) of the responsibility for being in this position. Cultural forces for both rich and poor have driven us to a consumer, debt-ridden culture. If the tax system does favour the rich over the poor, and historically advantaged whites can maintain their assets while taking on debt; those are structural issues beyond culture.
__________________
Where there is doubt there is freedom.
|