No it isn't just you. And I have to say that this is the best bit of "scientific research" I have come across in ages, with statements like this:
Quote:
|
Scafidi's calculations were based on the assumption that households headed by a single female have relatively high poverty rates, leading to higher spending on welfare, health care, criminal justice and education for those raised in the disadvantaged homes. The $112 billion estimate includes the cost of federal, state and local government programs, and lost tax revenue at all levels of government.
|
Meh. Economists.
Reminds me of the old joke about the physicist, the chemist and the economist stranded on a desert island, when one day some canned food is washed up on the shore. The three of them try to work out how to open the cans.
The physicist suggests that if they were to use his glasses, he could position the can under the sun with the glass intensifying the sun's heat to melt a hole in the can. But the others point out that this would risk burning the contents of the can too.
The chemist suggests that they could leave the cans in sea water and wait for the metal to corrode. But the others point out that the sea water would render the contents of the can inedible.
The economist thinks about it for a while, then says: "Assume a can-opener..."