I read Huck's analysis of Sidel's work and can understand how he comes to the conclusion that he does. What I'm suggesting is that the types of widespread poverty that we are seeing is not just the sum of a whole bunch of folks making bad decisions, but is much more widespread. I think it helps allow certain structures of inequality to be main- tained and it allows us to feel reconfirmed in the righteousness of our individualism. I have mainly lurked, but it has been great. Thanks also for all the folks who have contributed to this discussion.
Common sense dictates that it is much easier for two people to raise a family than it is for one.
Believe it or not, I agree with you. However, almost all poverty policy since the late '60s has been devoted to supporting single mothers. Conservatives should be criticized for failing to recognize the structural causes of poverty. However the causes of poverty are never as simple as either the liberals or conservatives make it out to be. Since Sidel never recognized that some people are to blame for their poverty, I felt it important to criticize her.