Data and Numbers, oh my!

What happens when grandma isn't around?

2011-02-23T10:34:00.000-08:00

I often get calls from researchers, reporters, etc. regarding the common forms of child care. It is often quickly apparent that the standard definition of child care and the perceived and maybe even more "public" definition of child care very different.

I analyze child care used by both working and non-working mothers and broadly define child care providers under two groups: relative or nonrelative. Relatives includes mothers, fathers, siblings, grandparents, etc. Whereas nonrelatives includes babysitters, neighbors/friends, child care centers, nursery schools, etc.

I find the "public" perception of child care is usually limited to nonrelative care, namely organized child care such as centers and nursery/preschools. Certainly organized child care use has grown over the last twenty years, but relatives still play a vital role in helping working mothers. Grandparents prehaps play the biggest role. In 2005, 4.6 million preschoolers were cared for by their grandparents (Who's Minding the Kids: Spring 2005).

This brings me to Allison Gilbert's recent book, Parentless Parents. Gilbert examines how the lack of grandparents impacts families. Changes in fertility and mobility have made it increasingly likely that parents may not have access to their own parents to help look after their children or pass on family traditions. It's an interesting and often ignored issue. I suggest checking the book out, plus I think Gilbert cites me but I can't promise what I said was any near brilliant ;)

Comparing Measures: Child care costs, CPS, and SIPP

2011-02-23T09:36:00.000-08:00

As part of the Census Bureau's mission to develop a supplemental poverty measure, a colleague and I recently completed a working paper comparing child care costs between the 2010 Current Population Survey's Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC) and the 2004 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) Child Care topical module.

The CPS ASEC is one of the main surveys used by the Census Bureau (and the bench mark for much of the federal government) to measure poverty. Child care expenses are an important part of the supplemental poverty measure and it is important that accurate data is collected. New questions regarding child care costs were added to the 2010 CPS ASEC. Our paper compare those results with SIPP (the best source of child care related expenses).

We found that costs estimates collected by CPS ASEC were similar to SIPP, with a few limitations.

The full paper can be found here.

Census Data Release Schedule 2010-2011

2010-09-30T08:06:00.000-07:00

The folks over at Data Detectives complied a schedule for data and statistical releases for the next year for the 2010 Census, the American Community Survey (ACS), and other Census products. So, instead of reinventing the wheel, I will just share their handy information for all you data geeks.

Late September 2010
2009 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year estimates for areas with a population of 65,000 or more.

Mid-December 2010
2005-9 5-years estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) for geographies down to the block group level.

December 2010
2010 demographic analysis estimates of national population by age, sex, and race (Black and nonblack). Not from the 2010 Census, but estimates based on historical data on births and deaths and estimates of immigration and emigration. This information is used, in part, to estimate the accuracy of the 2010 Census.

By December 31, 2010
The apportionment counts will be delivered to the President will be delivered to the President within nine months of Census Day (on or before December 31, 2010), as required by law. This report will show the apportionment population counts, by state, and the number of seats in the US House of Representatives apportioned to each state.

February-March 2011
2010 Census Redistricting Data (P.L. 94-171) Summary File - redistricting data to the 50 states consisting of small-area data the states will need to redraw districts for the state legislature:
* State population counts for race and Hispanic or Latino categories
* State housing unit counts by occupancy status (occupied units, vacant units)
Media: Internet tables, DVD, download capability
Lowest level of geography: Blocks

April 2011
National Summary File of Redistricting Data:
* Population and housing unit counts for the United States, regions, divisions, and American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian Areas
Media: Internet tables, download capability
Lowest level of geography: American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian areas

May 2011
Demographic Profile:
* Selected population and housing characteristics
* Includes Congressional Districts of the 111th Congress
Media: Internet quick tables, download capability
Lowest level of geography: Places/Functioning Minor Civil Divisions

June-August 2011
Summary File 1 (SF 1) for States:
* Population counts for 63 race categories and Hispanic or Latino down to block level.
* Population counts for many detailed race and Hispanic or Latino categories, and American Indian and Alaska Native tribes down to Census tracts.
* Selected population and housing characteristics down to blocks/Census tracts.

November 2011
Summary File 1 (SF 1) National Update:
* Counts for the United States, regions, divisions, and geographic areas that cross state lines such as American Indian Areas and Core-Based Statistical Areas.

December 2011-April 2012
Summary File 2 (SF 2):
* Population and housing characteristics iterated for many detailed race and Hispanic or Latino categories, and American Indian and Alaska Native tribes down to Census tracts.

Dates To Be Determined
Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) Files
* Includes age, sex, race, Hispanic or Latino origin, household type and relationship, and tenure data with identifying information removed, down to PUMAs of 100,000+ population.
Media: DVD, download capability

Summer child care arrangements vary

2010-08-17T06:39:00.000-07:00

At last! My report is now public. From the press release:

Children are less likely to have regular child care arrangements during the school break in the summer — about 55 percent of preschoolers and 58 percent of grade-schoolers were not in a regular child care placement during the summer of 2006. According to a new U.S. Census Bureau report, those children who do have regular arrangements typically spend more hours in child care during the summer than the rest of the year.

Relatives continued to play an important role in child care during the summer with half of preschoolers and nearly half of all grade-schoolers of employed mothers receiving child care from relatives. These findings are in a new report from the U.S. Census Bureau based on the 2005-2006 Survey of Income and Program Participation.

The report, Who's Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements: Spring 2005/Summer 2006 [PDF], provides an analysis of data released in February 2008. These data show the number and characteristics of children in different types of child care arrangements, the differences between child care for preschoolers and older children and the extent of self-care. Information is also provided about the cost of child care arrangements and the number of fathers providing care for their children. Additionally, the report examines new topics such as summer child care arrangements for both preschoolers and grade-schoolers.

“The most recent data provide us with a unique opportunity to examine child care arrangements during summer months and shed light on how families manage the gap between the school year and summer,” said Lynda Laughlin, a family demographer with the Census Bureau.

Several factors can explain the difference between child care in the summer and the rest of the year. For example, school itself is an important source of child care; children are not typically enrolled in school during the summer. Other factors include the closing of child care facilities, the irregularity of work schedules and the occurrence of vacations.

The amount of time spent in organized care for grade-schoolers increased from three hours per week in spring 2005 to 13 hours per week in summer 2006.

Overall, employed mothers were more likely to have regular child care arrangements than nonemployed mothers. In summer 2006, of the 23.7 million grade school-age children whose mothers were employed, 52 percent were in a regular arrangement, compared with 20 percent of the 12.3 million grade school-age children of nonemployed mothers.

Other highlights:

In spring 2005, 23 percent of preschoolers were regularly cared for by a grandparent and 16 percent were cared for by their father.
Self-care was much more prevalent among middle school-age children than among those in elementary school: 6 percent of children ages 5 to 11, and 37 percent of ages 12 to 14, regularly cared for themselves. Among all children, the average time spent in self-care was six hours per week.
Families with an employed mother and children younger than age 15 paid an average of $6,000 a year for child care, an increase of more than $1,000 from a generation ago.
Families in poverty who paid for child care in 2005 spent a greater portion of their monthly income on child care than did families at or above the poverty level (29 percent compared with 7 percent).
The percent of the family monthly income spent on child care stayed relatively constant between 1997 and 2005, at around 7 percent.

More child care information can be found on the Census Child Care webpage.

Children are "economically worthless but emotionally priceless"

2010-07-08T14:13:00.000-07:00

Maybe it just me, but it seems like interwebs are full of pieces about the hassle of children and the growth of childless couples. I used to think I wanted children, but that was when I was in a different relationship status. Now, I don't know what I think about this whole baby thing. Does it make me selfish? Would having children make me happy? Maybe, maybe not. According to a recent article in the New York Magazine...children are making my generation miserable. Oh, the torture of modern life.

From the article:
"From the perspective of the species, it’s perfectly unmysterious why people have children. From the perspective of the individual, however, it’s more of a mystery than one might think. Most people assume that having children will make them happier. Yet a wide variety of academic research shows that parents are not happier than their childless peers, and in many cases are less so. This finding is surprisingly consistent, showing up across a range of disciplines."

The whole article reminds of the brilliant book, The Way We Never Were by Stephanie Coontz. We continue hold up the family of the past as this relic and something to be admired and achieved. Yet, there are benefits and disadvantages to every new generation of families and it's time that researchers, especially demographers and sociologists, push to examine and define families in a new light. Children don't serve as workers anymore for the family farm, but have became an emotional investment. For some, the emotional investment is just not worth the time or money...but it certainly doesn't make childless people any less worthy or interesting than those with children. It just means that we are forming different types of families and need new definitions and policies to support all groups appropriately. In the mean time, try not to be sad about the children that you do or don't have.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't

2010-04-22T07:40:00.000-07:00

It seems like everyday a new study comes out regarding the new challenges of modern fertility for American women. If you want too long to have a baby, then you risk having twins, a child with a disability, or just being an old mom. Now new research suggests that women who wait until their 30s to have children fare better economically than women who have their first child in their 20s.

From USA Today:

"Researchers at the University of Maryland in College Park and the University of California at Los Angeles reviewed 35 years of data from some 2,200 women born between 1944 and 1954, and found that women who had kids in the early- to mid-20s or even younger didn't fare as well economically as those who delayed."

One of the authors of the study, Joan Kahn goes on to explain:

"The point, she says, is that women who are younger when they have kids and attempt to get back into the workforce later may not have that up-front investment in education and training, which those who have kids later benefit from. They earned equivalent wages and had higher status occupations just like women who were childless.

"Women get trapped, based on their early decisions," Kahn says."

As I see it, women are trapped either way. Should women challenge their biological clocks and wait to have children, or have children when it biological easier and safer. The biology of child bearing has not evolved with the changing labor force participation of women or even with the fact that women and men are living longer. I hope the take away message from this study is not that women should wait until their mid-30s to have children, but we as a nation need comprehensive work and family policies to support workers and their families.

Economists are not the only social scientists

2010-04-22T07:07:00.000-07:00

A recent piece in the Wall Street Journal highlights how the social sciences are experiencing a rebirth. Part of this rebirth is due to popular books such as The Tipping Point or Freakonomics.

It's not entirely surprising to me that the article focuses primarily on the gaining popularity of economists. There is little mention of sociology. While much of the research performed by sociologists is easily applicable to everyday issues, sociology still struggles to become more public. Certainly part of blame rests on sociologists themselves. When I was in graduate school the only viable job option was to become a professor. However, I quickly realized that was easier said than done and started to broaden my job search outside of the academy. Sociology departments need to be realistic about the "real" job market available to sociology students. While I don't always agree with economic theory and methods, it always seems easier for the public (and employers) to embrace economists. Sociologists are lovable too, we're just a bit judgmental until we get to know you.

You've got the form...Now fill it out and mail it back!

2010-03-17T07:42:00.000-07:00

The official 2010 Census form arrived in mailboxes across the country starting March 15th. It took my maybe 2 minutes to fill it out. So now that you've got the form, mail it back!

A better poverty measure

2010-03-04T16:24:00.000-08:00

Pretty exciting news from the Census Bureau. The Census will begin developing an alternative way to measure poverty. Currently poverty is based on a formal developed in the 1960s, when food costs where a larger share of a household's income. Now food is less expensive and housing, child care, and medical expenses dominate.

While this is a big step forward in terms of better understanding the nature of poverty in the United States, changing the official poverty measure will most likely take years and a lot of political wrangling.

For more detailed information about this change see the Center for American Progress

Depending on how you measure it, marriage has and still benefits men

2010-01-19T04:54:00.000-08:00

A new report from Pew shows that married women have made large gains in earnings and education, sometimes out earning their husbands. Maybe it's because I have been listening to too much punk rock lately, but this quote about the report really set me off today:

"What's radically changed is that marriage now is a better deal for men," said Richard Fry, co-author of the report, published by the Pew Research Center. "Now when men marry, often their spouse works quite a bit. Often she is better-educated than the guy." In 1970, unmarried men "had a higher economic status than married guys," he said, "but no longer." (Source: Washington Post)

Apparently Mr. Fry hasn't had a chance to review work by Heidi Hartmann or Nancy Folbre, but marriage has traditionally benefited men. Stay-at-home wives/mothers don't earn a "wage" for housework and child care but these acts of emotional labor certainly benefit husbands/fathers. Or maybe Mr. Fry also forgot Arlie Hochschild's work on how working wives not only work an 8-hour day but then come home to work a "second shift" of caring for the house and children.

The amount of time fathers spend on housework and child care has increased in the last few decades, but we are still a long ways off from having balanced families where all responsibilities are equally shared. As I see it, neither wives or husbands are gaining as the average family struggles to find affordable housing, must endure long commutes to work, and face an insufficient social welfare system that does not value ALL types of families.

Federal statistics are a bargain for taxpayers

2009-12-24T10:55:00.000-08:00

The New Republic reports the 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act signed by President Obama. The act will provide additional financial support to agencies that generate demographic, economic, and social statistical data. The largest amount goes to the Census Bureau to ensure better data collection and timely products from the 2010 Census, the American Community Survey, and the Local Employment Dynamics Program.

Data from federal surveys is free and easy to use, so this is a win-win for the federal statistical agencies and public data users. Data geeks unite!

Preview the 2010 Census

2009-12-21T09:48:00.000-08:00

Before you now it, the 2010 Census will be here and it is critical that you and your household fill it out. The 2010 Census is the one of the shortest forms in history, with only 10 questions. Most of the detailed social and economic data is now collected by the American Community Survey.

Beginning in March, the Census Bureau will deliver a short 10-question form to every household in America. Respondents should fill out the form to account for everyone living at his/her address as of April 1, 2010. The 2010 Census includes a prepaid envelope with the form, so respondents can mail it back as soon as possible.

You can check out the form here.

Father Involvement with Children Following Marital and Non-Marital Separations

2009-11-18T07:20:00.000-08:00

A paper that I co-authored with Danielle Farrie and Jay Fagan has finally been published in the journal Fathering.

Abstract
Using data from the Fragile Families and Child Well-being Study, the present study examines levels of father involvement with children between married and cohabiting couples post-separation. Differences in father involvement were analyzed using three hypotheses and one research question- repartnering,traditional values, human capital, and relationship quality. Multiple regression analysis revealed that previously cohabitating fathers were more involved with children than previously married fathers, although not all measures of involvement were significantly related to prior marital status. Findings point to several policy implications for low income couples with children.

To cite:
Laughlin, L., Farrie, D., and Fagan, J. (2009). Father Involvement with Children Following Marital and Non-Marital Separations. Fathering, 73(3), 226-248.

The article can be found here.

Employment Opportunities in the New Economy for PhDs

2009-07-08T10:19:00.001-07:00

I will be speaking about employment opportunities outside of academics at the upcoming Sociologists for Women in Society meeting in San Fransisco. I will talk about employment opportunities for sociologists in the government sector as well as the difference between a government and non-government job search. I will also discuss the role of "public" sociology and how to increase the presence of sociologists beyond the ivory tower. If you, or your students, will be at the SWS meeting or the Annual American Sociological Association meeting, I hope you will stop by.

A full description of the panel is below:
Saturday, August 8th
12:30pm

"Beyond the Tenure-Track: Employment Opportunities in the New Economy for PhDs"

Panelists: Lynda Laughlin, Eleanor Lyon, Christine Morton, and Margaret Weigers Vitullo

Co-sponsored by SWS Student Concerns and Career Development Committees.

A group of experts who have held a range of positions provide information and ideas about finding, attaining, and succeeding in a range of jobs including government positions, non-governmental organizations, consulting, and research organizations. Panelists also discuss how to develop professional networks outside academia, how to recognize and develop the skills that are in demand, and how to translate ourselves, skills, and interests to a wider marketplace.

Michele Bachmann is an Idiot

2009-06-29T19:08:00.000-07:00

A co-worker recently brought to my attention what an idiot Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is when it comes to national data. Bachmann told a local news station in Minneapolis that she won't provide any information, beyond the number of individuals in her household, on the upcoming 2010 Census. The Representative cites concerns about the government collecting social and economic information. How nice of her to at least fill out how individuals live in her household, since it is the population count that determines the location of congressional districts. I guess she knows that her job depends on the size of her Congressional district.

Her statements regarding the Census and federal statistical data in general, are dissapointing especially because she is an elected official and should know better. Census data is a vital community tool and provides imporant social and economic information that can be used to improve schools, roads, and other services that individuals in congressional districts like Bachmann's use on daily. If she doen't want the governement to know how much her household makes, does that mean she refuses to file her taxes with the IRS? Compared to corporate American, the federal statistical surveys only provide basic information about the American public. The credit care industry knows more about the income and spending habits of the American public, as do grocery stores. One swipe of the bounus card tracks your spending habits and personal shopping desires. Which probably explains why I get a lot of spam regarding feline care and natural peanut butter.

The Census helps to document the pluse of America and provides vital information about the livliehood of American communities, data that is critical during these economic times. The information provided to the Census is highly protected and privacy is of the upmost concern of the Census and its employees. Bachmann's statements regarding the Decennial Census are insluting to the American people and the good people at the Census Bureau who take their jobs seriously.

Don't listen to Bachmann and fill out your Census come next April. Your community depends on it.

Maybe this is why pregnaut mothers are smug? They're older and know what they want.

2009-05-15T05:40:00.000-07:00

New data from the National Center for Health Statistics shows the number of children born out of wedlock has risen sharply over the past decade. The trend is being driven primarily by women in their 20s and 30s. Single mothers, while still economically disadvantaged, defining who is a single mother is changing. During the 1980s and 1990s, the educational, employment, and occupational attainment of single mothers increased. Thus, women are becoming more financially independent, often putting off marriage, and having children later. Additionally, determining who is a single mother can be difficult. Some single mothers are cohabiting, some live with their parents or other relatives, and many nonresident fathers are very involved in parenting. Families are changing and so are single mama's.

***********************************************************************************

Number of Unwed Mothers Has Risen Sharply in U.S.
Women in 20s, 30s Are Driving Trend, Report Shows

By Rob Stein and Donna St. George
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, May 14, 2009

Katrina Stanfield, 25, is raising her 3-year-old daughter in Middletown, Md., without a husband because she and her boyfriend decided that marriage would not work for them.

Heidy Gonzalez, 21, is living with her two children and their father in Mount Rainier, but tying the knot is not a priority for them now.

Emily Smatchetti, 38, is a single mother of a toddler in Miami because she had not found the right man and worried that time was running out. So she found a sperm donor.

The mothers are part of a far-reaching social trend unfolding across the United States: The number of children being born out of wedlock has risen sharply in recent years, driven primarily by women in their 20s and 30s opting to have children without getting married. Nearly four out of every 10 births are now to unmarried women.

"It's been a huge increase -- a dramatic increase," said Stephanie J. Ventura of the National Center for Health Statistics, which documented the shift in detail yesterday for the first time, based on an analysis of birth certificates nationwide. "It's quite striking."

Although the report did not examine the reasons for the increase, Ventura and other experts cite a confluence of factors, including a lessening of the social stigma associated with unmarried motherhood, an increase in couples delaying or forgoing marriage, and growing numbers of financially independent women and older and single women deciding to have children on their own after delaying childbearing.

"I think this is the tipping point," said Rosanna Hertz, a professor of sociology and women's studies at Wellesley College. "This is becoming increasingly the norm. The old adage that 'first comes love, then comes marriage, then comes baby in the baby carriage' just no longer holds true."

The trend has unfolded despite decades of political and social hand-wringing over the issue, such as Vice President Dan Quayle's attack on the unmarried television mother Murphy Brown, President Bill Clinton's revamp of welfare and President George W. Bush's focus on "family values." President Obama has said that one of his priorities is reducing abortions, in part by helping women who become pregnant and want to keep their children.

Some experts said the trend represents a positive change for many women, allowing them to avoid becoming social outcasts, being forced to give up their babies for adoption or having abortions, and letting them raise children in nontraditional families.

"Women can have children on their own, and it's not going to destroy your employment, and it's not going to mean that you'll be made a pariah by the community," Hertz said. "It's much more socially acceptable."

But others said the trend is disturbing because children who grow up without stable, two-parent families tend not to fare as well in many ways.

"I look at this and say, maybe this trend is what young adults want or stumble into, but it's not in the best interest of children," said Sarah Brown, chief executive of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.

About 1.7 million babies were born to unmarried women in 2007, a 26 percent rise from 1.4 million in 2002 and more than double the number in 1980, according to the new report. Unmarried women accounted for 39.7 percent of all U.S. births in 2007 -- up from 34 percent in 2002 and more than double the percentage in 1980.

"If you see 10 babies in the room, four them were born to women who were not married," Ventura said.

Although experts have been concerned about a recent uptick in births to older teenagers after years of decline, that is not the driving force in the overall trend but more likely a reflection of it, Ventura said. Instead, much of the rise is due to significant increases in births among unmarried women in their 20s and 30s. Between 2002 and 2006, the rate at which unmarried women in that age group were having babies increased between 13 percent and 34 percent, the report found.

The rates increased for all races, but they remained highest and rose fastest for Hispanics and blacks. There were 106 births to every 1,000 unmarried Hispanic women in 2006, 72 per 1,000 blacks, 32 per 1,000 whites and 26 per 1,000 Asians, the report showed.

The percentage of babies born to unmarried women in the United States is starting to look more like that in many European countries, the data shows. For example, the proportion of babies born to unmarried women is about 66 percent in Iceland, 55 percent in Sweden, 50 percent in France and 44 percent in the United Kingdom.

In many of those countries, couples are living together instead of getting married, which is also the case in the United States. Previous research indicates that about 40 percent of births to unmarried women occur in households where couples are cohabitating.

Gonzalez, the mother who lives with her children's father in Mount Rainier, said marriage has not loomed as a necessity for them. "Time goes by and we think about other stuff -- and we think about rent," she said. This holds true, she said, for most of her friends. "Most of the people I know just live with their baby's father or boyfriend and don't get married," she said.

Other couples today feel less compelled to marry just because they are having a child.

"It seems to be more wrong to be in a marriage with someone who you don't love and consider to be your best friend than not to be in a marriage at all," said Barbara Katz Rothman, a professor of sociology at the City University of New York. "It's not that people care less about marriage. In some ways, it's because they care more."

Stanfield and her boyfriend tried living together after she got pregnant, but he moved out when it became clear to both of them that they were not compatible, she said.

"He's a good dad and a good person, but he's just not right for me," Stanfield said.

In New Carrollton, Natrice McKenzie, 25, a teller supervisor at a bank, said she did not set out to become a single mother but has no regrets.

"Getting married was something I had in mind, but that basically was not what happened," said McKenzie, pregnant with her third child. She said it can be difficult, and she knows she is far from unique. "Nowadays it's becoming more like, single moms are everywhere," she said.

Alana Hill, 33, sees family history as an important influence. A single mother in Silver Spring who works as a dancer and a dance teacher, Hill was raised by a single mother and was part of a large extended family in which most of the mothers were not married. Except for grandparents, "I didn't have a role model of a husband and a wife who were married for years," she said. Even when she was very young, her foremost wish, she said, was motherhood, not marriage. "I knew I wanted a child," she said.

Smatchetti, who works as a U.S. attorney in Miami, said she is glad that she had the option of using a sperm donor after a long-term relationship ended.

"I didn't want to pick the wrong person just to have kid, so I just decided to go ahead and do it and work on the relationship later," she said. "It's hard, but in a good way."

So what if you are going to be a mom....

2009-05-13T14:27:00.000-07:00

Yeah, so you're going to have a baby. Well, here's a song for you.

I have a crush on an economist.

2009-05-10T06:48:00.000-07:00

It's true, I have a undeniable crush on an economist. I usually find most economists undesriable because of their strict adherence to economic models that don't allow for irrational thoughts or behavior. But this economist is different. Oh Peter Orzsag, you had me at your first power-point slide at the recent National Academies meeting on the federal statistical system.

Orszag is the director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Basically, he's the budget guy for the entire federal government. He has also held positions with the Congressional Budget Office and the Brookings Institution.

Apparently, I am not alone. He's clearly a smart and accomplished individual and it's no surprise that he has developed a following. However, my crush on him is mostly academic. Dr. Orszag was invited to the National Academies meeting to discuss the importance of the national statistical system. He spoke of the important of having good data in order to make informed policy decisions. Programs that have measured outcomes should be evaluated and funded if they meet their stated goals. Whereas programs that don't have measurable outcomes should be cut (i.e. abstinence only programs). Yes, all fine and dandy, but Dr. Orszag had me at his mention of the importance of sociology. My most basic problem with economists is their reliance on equations that assume that individuals make rational decisions. Models of human action must also take into account sociological and psychological characteristics. While most of us would like to think we act rationally 100 percent of the time, it is highly unlikely we do. Our decisions regarding food, housing, education, employment, family, etc. often are the result of socioeconomic differences and personal desires. In his talk, Orszag highlighted how economics could learn a lot from the other social scientists. Decisions regarding health care, employment, child care, and education can not be made using simple economic models. They are issues that will require a holistic approach if we are going to truly make any kind of difference. My crush on Orszag aside, with the economy in crisis, it is reassuring that a well-rounded economist is over seeing the national budget.

Detroit: Rebuild, Restore, Reconsider!

2009-05-03T18:00:00.000-07:00

I recently went to Detroit for the annual Population Association of America meeting. It was a great meeting. A number of informative presentations and I met a number of individuals that I hope to stay in touch with both professionally and personally. However, the most important part of the trip for me was Detroit. Detroit, at the most basic level, is hurting. The downtown was virtual empty, even during the work week. Businesses, cab drivers and residents I that met were happy that our conference was in town because it meant at least some business. I hope other professional associations will consider Detroit as a meeting destination. The city has so much to offer and if Detroit is to survive it will take the creative minds of Americans across the land. Quoting Sufjan Stevens, “Detroit lift your weary head. Rebuild, Restore, Reconsider!

Similar to other cities in the Rust Belt, Detroit has seen a decline in population. The city's population increased more than sixfold during the first half of the twentieth century, fed largely by an influx of Eastern European, Lebanese and Southern migrants to work in the burgeoning automobile industry. However, since 1950 the city has seen a major shift in its population to the suburbs. The city population dropped from its peak in 1950 with a population of 1.8 million to 916,952 in 2007.

My short visit to Detroit reminded me of my passion for sociology my goal with this blog as well as other blogs I write for (namely Greater Greater Washington). It’s one thing to teach in a classroom, to work with Census data on a daily basis, but a whole different thing to practice public sociology. So here I am to share with you my observations and thoughts about Detroit and my hope for it’s future.

I only had enough time to explore downtown Detroit. My fellow sociologist, Vincent Louis, and I rode the People Mover and explored the empty city streets. We got coffee at a great little coffee shop called Jazzy Café at 212 E. Grand River. The owner, Michael, made me a delicious vanilla latte and is a bit of a sociologist himself. We learned a lot about the troubles Detroit is facing. However, Michael was very optimistic about the future and believes with a little redirection, Detroit can recreate itself. While I didn’t get a chance to get into the more residential parts of Detroit, there blocks upon blocks of vacant homes across Detroit. The NYT recently ran a piece about the possibility of tearing down the vacant homes and returning the land to farming. I say why not go even further, and put solar panels on the land or wind turbines and sell the energy to the power grid.

From there, we made a stop at very vibrant barber shop on Broadway so Vincent could get a haircut with a barber that Michael recommended, Tony T. The place was buzzing with conversations about the days events. Vincent waited a least an hour for his cut, but it was well worth it!

My visit to Detroit also involved a baseball game to see the Tigers, Greektown (highly recommend Astoria Bakery) and a fabulous bar called the Grand Trunk. The most memorable moment of the trip was when the bartender at Grand Trunk exclaimed, "I love my empty city!" on a Friday night to a nearly empty bar. Oh, and yes I did make it to a couple of sessions at the PAA meeting, but Detroit is a temptress and I can't wait to go back!

Younger women saying yes to motherhood?

2009-02-04T09:21:00.000-08:00

There has been a lot of press about the slight decline in the average age at which women are having their first baby. In 2006, the average age fell to 25.0 from 25.2 in 2005. The author of the article (see below) rightly points out that a one year decline does not represent a trend. It will be interesting to see what the new data shows and how the downturn in the economy may affect the choice to join the mommy club.

***********************************************************************************

No Waiting: Younger Women Are Saying Yes to Motherhood
By Sue Shellenbarer
Wall Street Journal

For nearly 40 years, women have been delaying childbirth longer and longer, partly to launch careers. Now, this trend may be ending.

For the first time since government records have been kept, the average age at which women have their first babies posted a decline -- according to newly released data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Mothers' mean age at their first childbirth fell to 25.0 years in 2006, the most recent figures available, from 25.2 in 2005. Women ages 20 to 24 led the shift, with a 5% increase in the rate of first births.

A one-year reversal doesn't make a trend, of course. But the study lends weight to anecdotal evidence that young women are tuning in more closely to their biological clocks. "It's the first time it's ever gone down, and certainly that's noteworthy," says Brady Hamilton, co-author of the study.

Other factors are at work too, including rising numbers of Hispanics, who tend to start families sooner, says Steven Martin, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Maryland. A 4% rise in the rate of first births to older teens, ages 15 to 19, is also playing a role. And the sheer size of the baby boomlet generation, now entering the child-bearing years, may be skewing new mothers' mean age lower.

But some experts also see a shift in attitudes. More young women today just assume they'll have both a career and a family, and on their own timetable, says Stephanie Coontz, director of research for the Council on Contemporary Families. Young women feel less compelled to spend a decade proving themselves on the job before kids, she says.

Sarah Distel, an at-home mother in Oxford, Ohio, and her husband, Christopher, a research technician, had their two children, now 1 and 3, in their mid-20s. Ms. Distel, a college graduate, sees her generation as unique. "We weren't fighting for careers like the older generation. It was something we take for granted," she says. After watching the struggles she has seen older moms face juggling established careers and child-care, Ms. Distel has decided to wait to launch her own planned career in library administration until her children are in school.

Candace Parker, the biggest star in women's basketball, shocked league officials and fans last month by announcing she was pregnant -- at the age of 22. If anyone had a career reason to defer child-bearing, Ms. Parker did; she was the 2008 league MVP and Rookie of the Year for the Los Angeles Sparks and had become the face of the sport in various marketing campaigns.

But after years spent striving to please others, says Ms. Parker, who is married to Sacramento Kings forward Shelden Williams, "this decision obviously was for myself and my husband and my family." Ms. Parker's parents were in their 30s when she was born, and "I kind of missed out" on shooting hoops with her dad and other shared play, she says. She wants her children to have the benefit of young parents.

Close bonds with their own grandparents are important to young women, too. Heather Allen of St. Cloud, Minn., an art teacher whose husband is still in college, had her first baby at 21. She wants her children, now 4 and 1, to know their great-grandmother, 76; she considers extended family "part of the village" it takes to raise a child.

It's unclear whether the country's current economic woes will affect the move toward younger child-bearing. Historically, recessions have reduced family size, but their impact on the age at which women start families is less clear. In any event, Dr. Martin says, "demographers will continue paying very close attention" to whether a cultural sea change is under way.

Write to Sue Shellenbarger at sue.shellenbarger@wsj.com

IPUMS Data Users on Facebook

2009-01-26T09:09:00.000-08:00

IPUMS - one of the best sources on the internet to find US Census data going back to 1850's - now has a Facebook Page. Check it out, join the group, and share with others who are data geeks!

Access to Grocery Stores

2009-01-22T11:37:00.000-08:00

Check out a recent post I did at Greater Greater Washington about access to grocery stores in DC.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=1598

Conscious and Unconscious Preferences

2009-01-12T07:53:00.000-08:00

Project Implicit represents a collaborative research effort between researchers at Harvard University, the University of Virginia, and University of Washington.

At their website you can assess your conscious and unconscious preferences for over 90 different topics ranging from pets to political issues, ethnic groups to sports teams, and entertainers to styles of music.

I took a couple of surveys, and found it interesting and entertaining! Apparently, I would have a nurturing parenting style and have a gendered perception of math skills. Go figure!

Sociologist = Great job!

2009-01-07T13:28:00.000-08:00

Wow, sociologist makes the top 10! Coming in at 8th. I'm just happy to be ahead of economists!

From the Wall Street Journal:

By SARAH E. NEEDLEMAN

Nineteen years ago, Jennifer Courter set out on a career path that has since provided her with a steady stream of lucrative, low-stress jobs. Now, her occupation -- mathematician -- has landed at the top spot on a new study ranking the best and worst jobs in the U.S.

Scott Brundage

"It's a lot more than just some boring subject that everybody has to take in school," says Ms. Courter, a research mathematician at mental images Inc., a maker of 3D-visualization software in San Francisco. "It's the science of problem-solving."

The study, to be released Tuesday from CareerCast.com, a new job site, evaluates 200 professions to determine the best and worst according to five criteria inherent to every job: environment, income, employment outlook, physical demands and stress. (CareerCast.com is published by Adicio Inc., in which Wall Street Journal owner News Corp. holds a minority stake.)

The findings were compiled by Les Krantz, author of "Jobs Rated Almanac," and are based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau, as well as studies from trade associations and Mr. Krantz's own expertise.

According to the study, mathematicians fared best in part because they typically work in favorable conditions -- indoors and in places free of toxic fumes or noise -- unlike those toward the bottom of the list like sewage-plant operator, painter and bricklayer. They also aren't expected to do any heavy lifting, crawling or crouching -- attributes associated with occupations such as firefighter, auto mechanic and plumber.

The study also considers pay, which was determined by measuring each job's median income and growth potential. Mathematicians' annual income was pegged at $94,160, but Ms. Courter, 38, says her salary exceeds that amount.

Her job entails working as part of a virtual team that designs mathematically based computer programs, some of which have been used to make films such as "The Matrix" and "Speed Racer." She telecommutes from her home and rarely works overtime or feels stressed out. "Problem-solving involves a lot of thinking," says Ms. Courter. "I find that calming."

Other jobs at the top of the study's list include actuary, statistician, biologist, software engineer and computer-systems analyst, historian and sociologist.

The Best and Worst Jobs

Of 200 Jobs studied, these came out on top -- and at the bottom:

The Best	The Worst
1. Mathematician	200. Lumberjack
2. Actuary	199. Dairy Farmer
3. Statistician	198. Taxi Driver
4. Biologist	197. Seaman
5. Software Engineer	196. EMT
6. Computer Systems Analyst	195. Garbage Collector
7. Historian	194. Welder
8. Sociologist	193. Roustabout
9. Industrial Designer	192. Ironworker
10. Accountant	191. Construction Worker
11. Economist	190. Mail Carrier
12. Philosopher	189. Sheet Metal Worker
13. Physicist	188. Auto Mechanic
14. Parole Officer	187. Butcher
15. Meteorologist	186. Nuclear Decontamination Tech
16. Medical Laboratory Technician	185. Nurse (LN)
17. Paralegal Assistant	184.Painter
18. Computer Programmer	183. Child Care Worker
19. Motion Picture Editor	182. Firefighter
20. Astronomer	181. Brick Layer

More on the Methodology

For methodology info and detailed job descriptions, go to http://careercast.com/jobs/content/JobsRated_Methodology
See the complete list of job rankings
Read about the last study of the best and worst jobs.

Mark Nord is a sociologist working for the Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service in Washington, D.C. He studies hunger in American households and writes research reports about his findings. "The best part of the job is the sense that I'm making some contribution to good policy making," he says. "The kind of stuff that I crank out gets picked up by advocacy organizations, media and policy officials."

The study estimates sociologists earn $63,195, though Mr. Nord, 62, says his income is about double that amount. He says he isn't surprised by the findings because his job generates little stress and he works a steady 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. schedule. "It's all done at the computer at my desk," he says. "The main occupational hazard is carpal tunnel syndrome."

On the opposite end of the career spectrum are lumberjacks. The study shows these workers, also known as timber cutters and loggers, as having the worst occupation, because of the dangerous nature of their work, a poor employment outlook and low annual pay -- just $32,124.

New protective gear -- such as trouser covers made of fiber-reinforcement materials -- and an increased emphasis on safety have helped to reduce injuries among lumberjacks, says Paul Branch, who manages the timber department at Pike Lumber Co. in Akron, Ind. Still, accidents do occur from time to time, and some even result in death. "It's not a job everybody can do," says Mr. Branch.

But Eric Nellans, who has been cutting timber for the past 11 years for Pike Lumber, is passionate about his profession. "It's a very rewarding job, especially at the end of the day when you see the work you accomplished," he says. Mr. Nellans, 35, didn't become discouraged even after he accidentally knocked down a dead tree and broke his right leg in the process four years ago. "I was back in the woods cutting timber in five weeks," he says.

Other jobs at the bottom of the study: dairy farmer, taxi driver, seaman, emergency medical technician and roofer.

Mike Riegel, a 43-year-old roofer in Flemington, N.J., says he likes working "outside in the fresh air." Since he runs his own business, which he inherited from his father, he can start and end his day early in hot weather or do the opposite when it's cold.

The study estimates roofers earn annual incomes of $34,164, which Mr. Riegel says is consistent with what he pays new employees. Roofers also ranked poorly because of their hazardous working conditions. "You obviously can't be afraid of heights," says Mr. Riegel, who once fell two stories while working on a rooftop in the rain but luckily landed safely on a pile of soft dirt. "I missed some cement by 10 feet."

Can we quantify love and emotions?

2009-01-06T12:22:00.000-08:00

Don't miss out on this great This American Life radio program called Numbers. It's a fun look at how we can use numbers to quantify obvious and not so obvious aspects of everyday life. For example, it's easy to count how many times you say, "I love you"...but how do you quantify the more emotional parts of love and relationships. Fun listen!

Women are teachable

2009-01-06T06:54:00.000-08:00

Came across an interesting blog post about women and work issues during World War II. During this time period there were a number of assumptions made about female workers and many companies produced booklets for employers to help them deal with "women issues". My favorite recommendation to employers is to "Avoid horseplay or 'kidding', she may reset it." Check out the full post here.

How times have changed! While women still face a number of obstacles in the workplace, women have made tremendous advances in education which should translate into advances in the workplace. According to the 2007 Current Population Survey, about 33 percent of young women 25 to 29 had a bachelor’s degree or more education, compared with 26 percent of their male counterparts. Also more women are enrolled in college. More than half of undergraduates (56 percent) – as well as 59 percent of graduate students – were women.

Trouble paying the Mistress?

2008-12-30T08:21:00.000-08:00

Having trouble paying your mistress? Well, apparently you are not alone. Interesting post in the Wall Street Journal detailing a new survey showing that 80 percent of multimillionaires with mistresses plan on cutting back on gifts and allowances. Who knew there was such a survey! I would love to see exact wording of the "mistress question". Follow link below for full post.

Rich Cut Back on Payments to Mistresses

How is Race defined? Why does it Matter?

2008-12-23T10:35:00.000-08:00

Listen to this great piece from Radiolab about the various ways that Race is defined and what it means.

Find the show here: Race

Excerpt from the show:

The U.S. Census defines five races, and an "other" category. When the human genome was first fully mapped in 2000, Bill Clinton, Craig Venter, and Francis Collins took the stage and pronounced that "The concept of race has no genetic or scientific basis."

Great words spoken with great intentions. But what does that mean and where does it leave us? It doesn't seem to have wiped out our evolving conversation about race.

Child Care Constraints Among America's Families

2008-12-21T14:45:00.000-08:00

A paper I presented at the 2008 American Sociological Association meeting is now posted on the web.

In general, I found that mothers who used nonrelative child care were more likely to experience child care problems that interfered with work. Whereas mothers who used organized child were less likely to report child care problems.

You can access the paper here:

Child Care Constraints Among America's Families

Detailed tables here

What's in a name?

2008-12-16T18:23:00.000-08:00

I often read the New York Times weddings and celebration section. One thing that I like to look for is how many new brides decide to keep their maiden names. It's usually about half and most mention that the bride is keeping her name for professional reasons.

A recent piece in the Wall Street Journal questions what it means for women to change their names. The author, Joann Lublin talks about her decision not to change her name when she got married 30 years ago when it was seen as radical not to change one's name. Ms. Lublin explains that while happy with her decision she never imagined the difficulty and confusion it would cause in business and social situations.

While we as a society may be more tolerate and supportive of the decisions brides make regarding their names, it is much more common for women to take on their husband's names. Using the 2004 American Community Survey, Gooding and Kreider show that only 6 percent of native women had "non-conventional" surnames (hyphenated, two surnames, kept surname after marriage). Not surprisingly, women with higher education were more likely to have non-conventional surnames. Women with doctorates were about 10 times more likely to have non-conventional surnames.

However, even if a woman keeps her maiden name, that name most likely belonged to her father. I guess the only solution for brides who truly want to break with the male surname norm is to create an entirely new name. Something to think about!

International Data Base

2008-12-16T07:34:00.000-08:00

The International Data Base (Census Bureau) is a wonderful interactive tool to get basic demographic data on countries and areas of the world with a population of 5,000 or more. I've used this tool to teach students about world population trends. The database also provides population pyramids, which are great way to illustrate fertility trends.

The Census recently updated the IDB. Press release below.

*********************************************************************************
Global Births Increasing Even as Fertility Rates Decline

Although fertility rates continue to fall worldwide, the annual number of births is still rising and projected to peak at 137 million in 2013. World population as of July 1, 2008, was estimated to be 6.7 billion.

These and other demographic trends throughout the world are available from the Census Bureau’s online International Data Base.

The worldwide rise in births is related not just to fertility rates but also to the number of women in their peak childbearing ages (20-39). In developing countries, women on average currently have an estimated 2.8 births over their lifetimes <http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html>. Although this fertility rate is below the 3.0 figure in 2001, the number of women at peak childbearing ages in developing countries has increased by more than 73 million over the last seven years as a result of higher fertility in the past. Worldwide, births have increased because this momentum is large enough in developing countries to offset the decline in fertility rates.

In contrast, women in more developed countries average 1.6 births each, well below the number required to replace these children’s parents. Birth numbers in the more developed world have been relatively constant in recent years because both fertility rates and the number of women at peak childbearing ages have remained fairly stable.

Currently, nearly half of the world’s countries or areas have fertility levels that are at or below replacement level. Most of these countries are in Europe but a number are located in Asia, including Singapore, Japan and South Korea. Thirty-two countries in the world — mostly in sub-Saharan Africa — have an estimated lifetime fertility of more than five children per woman.

These and other demographic dynamics can be explored through the Census Bureau’s International Data Base, which provides annual estimates of population, fertility, mortality, net migration and annual growth through 2050 in countries and regions of the world. The latest update of this database includes revisions of population estimates and projections for 29 countries and areas. The International Data Base and additional information can be found at <http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/>. Tables showing world demographic trends are available at <http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html>.

Action: Gender Equity and the Obama Stimulus Package

2008-12-15T09:38:00.000-08:00

A few weeks ago there was an editorial written by Randy Albelda aboutthe lack of gender equity in the stimulus package as proposed by theObama administration - and the need to invest in the care sector/human infrastructure as well as physical infrastructure. A similar op-ed by Linda Hirschman recently appeared in the NYT

Below is a letter composed by a group of feminist historians urging Obama to consider gender equity in his construction of the stimulus package. They would like to gather signatures for the letter - please take a minute to read. To sign on, please send an email with your name and affiliation to Alice O'Connor: aoconnor@history.ucsb.edu Please respond NO LATER THAN 5pm (PST) Monday December 15. Please forward to others.

********************************************************************************

Dear President-elect Obama,

As students of American history, we are heartened by your commitment to a jobs stimulus program inspired by the New Deal and aimed at helping "Main Street." We firmly believe that such a strategy not only helps the greatest number in our communities but goes a long way toward correcting longstanding national problems.

For all our admiration of FDR's reform efforts, we must also point out that the New Deal's jobs initiative was overwhelmingly directed toward skilled male and mainly white workers. This was a mistake in the 1930s and it is a far greater mistake in the 21st century economy, when so
many families depend on women's wages and when our nation is even more racially diverse.

We all know that our country's infrastructure is literally rusting away. But our social infrastructure is equally important to a vibrant economy and livable society, and it too is crumbling. Investment in education and jobs in health and care work shores up our national welfare as well as our current and future productivity. Revitalizing the economy will require better and more widespread access to education to foster creative approaches and popular participation in responding to the many challenges we face.

As you wrestle with the country's desperate need for universal health insurance, we know you are aware that along with improved access we need to prioritize expenditure on preventive health. We could train a corps of health educators to work in schools and malls and medical offices. As people live longer, the inadequacy of our systems of care for the disabled and elderly becomes ever more apparent. While medical research works against illness and disability, there is equal need for people doing the less noticed work of supervision, rehabilitation and personal
care.

We are also concerned that if the stimulus package primarily emphasizes construction it is likely to reinforce existing gender inequities. Women today make up 46 percent of the labor force. Simple fairness requires creating that proportion of job opportunities for them. Some
of this can and should be accomplished through training programs and other measures to help women enter traditionally male-occupied jobs. But it can also be accomplished by creating much-needed jobs in the vital sectors where women are now concentrated. The most popular programs of the New Deal were its public jobs. They commanded respect in large part because the results were so visible: tens of thousands of new courthouses, firehouses, hospitals, and
schools; massive investment in road-building, reforestation, water and sewage treatment, and other aspects of the nation's physical plant--not to mention the monumental Golden Gate and Triborough Bridges, the Grand Coulee and Bonneville dams. But the construction emphasis discriminated against women. At best women were 18% of those hired and, like non-white men, got inferior jobs. While some of the well-educated obtained jobs through the small white-collar and renowned arts programs, the less well educated were put to work in sewing projects, often at busy work, and African American and Mexican American women were slotted into domestic service. This New Deal policy assumed that nearly all women had men to support them and underestimated the numbers of women who were supporting dependents.

Today most policy-makers recognize that the male-breadwinner-for-every-household assumption is outdated. Moreover, experts agree that, throughout the globe, making jobs and income available to women greatly improves family wellbeing. Most low-income women, like men, are eager to work, but the jobs available to them too often provide no sick leave, no health insurance, no pensions and, for mothers, pay less than the cost of child care. The part-time jobs that leave mothers adequate time to care for their children almost never provide these benefits.

Meanwhile the country needs a stronger social as well as physical infrastructure. Teachers, social workers, elder and child-care providers and attendants for disabled people are overwhelmed with the size of their classes and caseloads. We need more teachers and
teachers' aides, nurses and nurses' aides, case workers, playground attendants, day-care workers, home care workers; we need more senior centers, after-school programs, athletic leagues, music and art lessons. These are not luxuries, although locality after locality has had to cut them. They are the investments that can make the U.S. economically competitive as we confront an increasingly dynamic global economy. Like physical infrastructure projects, these jobs-rich investments are, literally, ready to go.

A jobs-centered stimulus package to revitalize and "green" the economy needs to make caring work as important as construction work. We need to rebuild not only concrete and steel bridges but also human bridges, the social connections that create cohesive communities. We need a stimulus program that is maximally inclusive. History shows us that these concerns cannot be postponed until big business has returned to "normal." We look to the new administration not just for recovery but for a more humane direction-and in the awareness that what happens in
the first 100 days and in response to immediate need sets the framework for the longer haul of reform.

Child Child and Hard Economic Times

2008-12-11T13:30:00.001-08:00

Facing economic uncertainty, families are cutting back on costs left and right. One expense that families are cutting back on is child care (see Wall Street Journal article below).

Research has shown that when there is an economic recession, fathers are more likely to provide child care (see Casper and O'Connell 1993). It will be interesting to see if the same trend occurs during the current recession. The Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) collects child care data and the 2008 panel will be in the field later next year, so it might be possible to pick up on such a trend. Can't wait to get my hands on the data!

Families Cut Back on Day Care As Costs - and Worries - Rise

By SUE SHELLENBARGE

Behind the drumbeat of grim economic news, a lot of quiet shuffling is going on as parents pull small children out of paid child care.

Enrollment at some child-care centers is falling and nanny agencies are reporting mounting layoffs as families cut child-care costs -- which rival mortgage payments in many households. An October online survey by the women's Web site BettyConfidential.com found that 12% of 100-plus parents who responded are cutting child care.

Some parents are tapping grandparents or even great-grandparents for help. Others are switching to back-to-back shifts to trade off child-care duties. Still others try to work at home with their children present, or even take them to the office. And many wonder just how deeply they can cut child-care costs without hurting the kids.

Caroline Fafara's 3-year-old son and infant twins used to be in a child-care center full-time. But now, facing soaring food and health-insurance costs and pay cuts on her husband's city job, Ms. Fafara has withdrawn the twins and cut her son's preschool hours to part-time. Filling the gap: an elaborate three-generation scaffolding of relatives.

Ms. Fafara, an inventory manager in Philadelphia, drops off her son at preschool each day and her husband takes the twins to his grandparents' house, where his cousin helps care for them. After preschool, Ms. Fafara's parents bring her son to their house. Then, the couple picks everyone up at day's end. While she's immensely grateful for the help, says Ms. Fafara, all the shuttling around can be hard.

Some 40% of grandparents who live near young grandchildren are regularly providing child care, according to an August survey of 500 grandparents by the National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies. While research shows leaving a baby or toddler with grandparents can be good for them, the trend isn't without its costs. Although Mayra Montano, of Los Angeles, is happy to care for her daughter's three children, her husband was recently laid off and she needs to look for a job herself now. "I'm getting sick from all the stress," she says.

Job hunting without child care can be tough. After losing his job in an aluminum plant last week, Kevin Eaton of Morehouse, Mo., withdrew his 4-year-old daughter from preschool and is doing his best to care for her, preparing meals and keeping her at home during a cold snap. But he already missed out on one job opening after other applicants showed up at the plant to apply in person, he says. Juggling bills, child care and a job hunt, Mr. Eaton -- whose wife works full-time -- describes his state of mind as "confusion."

Other parents are giving up family time. Devorah Hicks, a Hatboro, Pa., teacher, says her husband, a supervisor for an airline, chose to work 10-hour shifts through the weekend so they could cut their toddler's child-care time to two days a week from three. While this is helping save money in case of a layoff, "it's hard not having a full day" together, she says.

All this tends to be hardest on the parents. There's little evidence that changing child care, in and of itself, hurts children, says James Griffin, a deputy chief at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. An institute study of 1,100 children found stability of child care had little predictive impact on development.

Experts cite just three "don'ts." First, try to avoid taking preschoolers out of group care entirely, says Deborah Lowe Vandell, chairwoman of the education department at the University of California, Irvine. Some preschool experience aids development starting around age 2½.

Second, avoid placing a child with someone who isn't warm, caring or responsive, says Ellen Galinsky, president of the Families and Work Institute; that bond with the caregiver matters most.

Finally, parents should guard against their stress spilling over onto children. "Think of them as listening and reading, if not your words, then your feelings," Ms. Galinsky says. Transitions can be positive, if you think of them "as teaching your children to venture out" and learn new skills.

Write to Sue Shellenbarger at sue.shellenbarger@wsj.com

New Census Data for Midsize Areas

2008-12-10T05:43:00.000-08:00

The American Community Survey (ACS) is a project of the U.S. Census Bureau that replaces the long form in the decennial census. It is an ongoing statistical survey, and thus more current than information obtained by decennial census.

Beginning with the next census in 2010, all households will only receive only the short form. Unlike the decennial census (which is a 100 percent count), the ACS is based on a sample of the population. Therefore, one would be unable to make estimates for small geographic areas with 1-year data because the sample would be too small. However, as the ACS continues to be collected one can "pool" together data years to produce estimates for smaller geographic areas. Such data is now available and the Census recently released the 2005-2007 ACS 3-year data. Five-year estimates will be available in 2010.

From ACS page:

The 2007 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year data release provides data products for a set of geographic areas with a population of 65,000 or more. The ACS combines samples across multiple years to produce and publish multiyear estimates for smaller geographic areas.. The 2005 - 2007 ACS 3-year data release provides data products for geographic areas with populations of 20,000 or more. The population sizes for both these 1-year and 3-year data products are based on the July 1, 2007 population estimates from the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program. In the future, areas with population of less than 20,000 will have access to ACS data from 5-year estimates.

Recent Press Release:
*************************************************************************************

American Community Survey Gives Midsized Areas Their First Detailed Update Since 2000

New data released today by the U.S. Census Bureau give more than 2,500 midsized counties, cities and towns [Excel] nationwide (those with populations between 20,000 and 64,999) their first statistical “portrait” since the 2000 Census on a wide range of key socioeconomic and housing topics.

These are the first American Community Survey (ACS) estimates that combine three years of survey responses (2005-2007) to produce data. The technique makes it possible to release a new set of multiyear estimates annually for smaller geographic areas. The three-year data can produce estimates for areas with populations as small as 20,000.

“Today’s release represents an important milestone for data users everywhere,” said Census Bureau Director Steve H. Murdock. “Communities are no longer limited to a once-a-decade look at their population’s characteristics. The ACS’s multiyear data will allow small towns and communities to track how they are changing on an ongoing basis.”

Also released today are three-year estimates for areas with populations of 65,000 or more. The Census Bureau released single-year data for these larger areas in September.

**********************************************************************************

You can download data and make tables on live via American Fact Finder. I highly recommend reading many of the methodology papers on the ACS webpage about how to correctly use multiyear data.

Sociologists and the economy

2008-12-09T10:09:00.000-08:00

The economy is collapsing, but we have heard little from sociologists about what the current financial crisis will mean for millions of Americans. While economists tend to be somewhat narrow in their evaluation of the economy and consequences, sociologists could offer a discussion that is more meaningful to the general public by discussing issues such as race, class, education, and gender outcomes and the future of the American middle class. See the excellent post below from Ron Anderson at the Contexts Blog.

From the Contexts Blog:

Where are the sociologists in a time of financial crisis?

by Ron Anderson on Dec 07, 2008 at 6:56 pm

During the past year 1.9 million Americans lost their jobs, with almost a third of those losing them last month. When the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released these numbers this week, one of the Bureau’s commissioners said the report was probably the most negative report in BLS’s 124 year history.

Meanwhile this year over 2 million houses went into foreclosure. Many of those losing their homes did not lose their jobs; they were at least somewhat fortunate. But the firings and foreclosure together affected over 3 million workers.

In the past year while the stock markets fell by nearly 50%, my retirement savings dropped 25%. I would imagine that most sociologists felt equivalent personal financial losses this year. Even those putting their savings in “fixed income” retirement funds have lost money because of the collapse of the bond markets.

Despite the huge magnitude of this economic trauma, sociologists appear to be silent about the financial crisis. The American Sociological Association’s newsletter, Footnotes, has not mentioned the crisis nor is it a special topic of the forthcoming annual convention. It is even scarcely mentioned in Contexts magazine’s blogs. Isn’t there a big enough hurt yet to talk about?

This month, after economists have begun comparing our current financial crisis to the great depression, the government finally admitted that the United States economy was in a recession. Ironically, they also added that we had been in a state of economic recession for 12 months.

Sociologists, like the American government, have not told the public anything about the financial crisis. Wait, isn’t that criticism a bit unfair? After all, it takes at least a year or two, if not three, to conduct a thorough study. But have we not learned what social effects resulted from previous economic recessions and depressions? Maybe. It is difficult to find discussions in the sociological literature on this topic.

About the only one discussing the sociological effects of the current recession is David Brooks, a journalist who writes Op-Ed Columns for the New York Times. Last month in “The Formerly Middle Class”, he wrote that those on the low rungs of the middle class are those for whom the recession is the most catastrophic. “Recessions breed pessimism,” he wrote, and he claimed that millions of Americans, to say nothing of the billions in the developing world, are “facing the psychological and social pressures of downward mobility.”

Career reversals and job loss yields serious self-doubt, he argued. For the formerly middle-class, housing reversals mean returning from suburban dream homes to run-down apartments, to paraphrase David Brooks’ message.

Brooks’ most interesting theories have to do with social capital and social identity. Quoting Robert Putnam, he argues that economic depression yields social isolation because people have to stay home more and their community bonds break up. In fact, the history of our great depression shows that suicide rates and divorce rates went up while birth rates went down.

These predictable trends yield alienation and social protest, and therefore Brooks predicts that the next big social movements will start from the formerly middle class.

Much of this analysis is conjecture, but isn’t it more relevant than any other sociological topic these days? Economic forecasters share the hunch that the economy will continue to worsen for at least a year. It is very likely that most of us in the middle class will have lost half of the value of our assets before the recession is over. Few will not face sacrifices, struggles and maybe even suffering during the years ahead. What can sociology say now, not next year, to help us understand better what is happening so that we can get through this with greater understanding, and compassion for ourselves as well as for others?

Required reading for the auto industry

2008-12-09T06:25:00.000-08:00

For anyone who wants to understand why the American car industry has been a failure for so long, I highly recommend The Machine that Changed the World: The Story of Lean Production.

This book has forever shaped how I view the car industry and manufacturing. The main lesson that I learned was that American companies are slow to implement change and fail to plan ahead.

Description from Amazon.com:

Based on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's five-million-dollar, five-year study on the future of the automobile, a groundbreaking analysis of the worldwide move from mass production to lean production.

Japanese companies are sweeping the world, and the Japanese auto industry soars above the competition. Drawing on their in-depth study of the practices of ninety auto assembly plants in seventeen countries and their interviews with individual employees, scholars, and union and government officials, the authors of this compelling study uncover the specific manufacturing techniques behind Japan's success and show how Western industry can implement these innovative methods. The Machine That Changed the World tells the fascinating story of "lean production," a manufacturing system that results in a better, more cost-efficient product, higher productivity, and greater customer loyalty. The hallmarks of lean production are teamwork, communication, and efficient use of resources. And the results are remarkable: cars with one-third the defects, built in half the factory space, using half the man-hours. The Machine That Changed the World explains in concrete terms what lean production is, how it really works, and--as it inevitably spreads beyond the auto industry--its significant global impact.

The Politics of Food

2008-12-08T12:36:00.000-08:00

Check out this fascinating class about the Global Politics of Food offered at St. Cloud State. As part of the class, students created facts sheets about the production and consumption of variety of ordinary items and the actions that can be taken to improve the quality of our food and its impact on our communities.

The Course web site:

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/teore/Food/FoodPolitics.htm

2008 Fact Sheets:

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/teore/Food/Facts4/index.html

2007 Fact Sheets:

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/teore/Food/Facts3/index.html

2006 Fact Sheets:

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/teore/Food/Facts2/index.html

2005 Fact Sheets:

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/teore/Food/Facts/index.html

The Dumbest Generation?

2008-12-08T06:28:00.000-08:00

An interesting piece from The Washington Post about how the dumbest generation is not current generation of high school kids, but most likely their parents (those born between the late 1950s to the mid 1960s). This generation scored lower on standardized tests, had lower high school graduation rates, and lacked career ambitions. While the author provides some explanations for this trend, I think he glosses over how the sheer size of this cohort put a tremendous strain on the educational infrastructure and was one of the largest generations to entry the workforce. (Thanks Nathaniel!)

The Kids Are Alright. But Their Parents ...

By Neil Howe
Sunday, December 7, 2008; B01

It is the prerogative of every generation of graybeards to look down the age ladder and accuse today's young of sloth, greed, selfishness -- and stupidity. We hear daily jeremiads from baby boomers who wonder how kids who'd rather listen to Linkin Park and play "Grand Theft Auto III" than solve equations or read books can possibly grow up to become leaders of the world's superpower. The recent publication of "The Dumbest Generation" by Mark Bauerlein of Emory University epitomizes the genre. His subtitle -- "How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future" -- says it all.

Generational putdowns, Bauerlein's included, are typically long on attitude and short on facts. But the underlying question is worth pursuing: If the data are objectively assessed, which age-slice of today's working-age adults really does deserve to be called the dumbest generation?

The answer may surprise you. No, it's not today's college-age kids, nor even today's family-starting 30-somethings. And no, it's not the 60-year-olds who once grooved at Woodstock. Instead, it's Americans in their 40s, especially their late 40s -- those born from the late 1950s to the mid-1960s. They straddle the boundary line between last-wave boomers and first-wave Generation Xers. The political consultant Jonathan Pontell labels them "Generation Jones."

Whatever you call them (I'll just call them early Xers), the numbers are clear: Compared with every other birth cohort, they have performed the worst on standardized exams, acquired the fewest educational degrees and been the least attracted to professional careers. In a word, they're the dumbest.

Obviously, we're talking averages. No one would apply the word "dumb" to Barack Obama (born in 1961) or Timothy F. Geithner, his nominee for secretary of the Treasury (born in the same month). Yet the president-elect himself has written eloquently about how hard it was for him and his peers to obtain a serious education during their dazed-and-confused teen years. Like it or not, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (born in 1964), who stumbled over basic civics facts during her vice presidential run, is more representative of this group. Early Xers are the least bookish CEOs and legislators the United States has seen in a long while. They prefer sound bites over seminars, video clips over articles, street smarts over lofty diplomas. They are impatient with syntax and punctuation and citations -- and all the other brainy stuff they were never taught.

Want proof? Let's start with the long-term results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which is housed within the U.S. Department of Education. Considered the gold standard in assessing K-12 students, the NAEP has been in continuous operation for decades. Here's the bottom line: On both the reading and the math tests, and at all three tested ages (9, 13 and 17), the lowest-ever scores in the history of the NAEP were recorded by children born between 1961 and 1965.

The same pattern shows up in SAT scores. The SAT reached its all-time high in 1963, when it tested the 1946 birth cohort (including such notables as Gilda Radner and Oliver Stone). Then it fell steeply for 17 straight years, hitting its all-time low in 1980, when it tested the 1963 cohort (Mike Myers, Quentin Tarantino). Ever since, the SAT has been gradually if haltingly on the rise, paralleling improvements in the NAEP. In 2005, teens born in 1988 scored better on the combined SAT than any teens born since 1956 -- and better on the math SAT than any teens born since 1951.

Some critics say that the average SAT score should be adjusted for the share of all teens taking the test, since a larger share "dilutes" the average with lower-aptitude kids. Good point, but it only deepens the mystery. Early Xers have both the lowest average score and the lowest share of test-takers. The share taking the SAT peaked at about 40 percent in the mid-1960s, fell to a low of only 30 percent around 1980 and has since been rising again -- to a record high of more than 45 percent during the last few years.

These numbers make the recent rise in SAT scores by the new Millennial generation seem even more impressive -- and the early Xer low even more disappointing. With a lot more kids getting higher scores, the average SAT scores of Ivy League undergrads have jumped since the late 1970s -- from 1230 to 1425 at the University of Pennsylvania, for example. Average scores for nearly all graduate exams have also been rising since the early 1990s, including the GRE, the LSAT, the GMAT and the MCAT.

Now let's turn to education and career outcomes. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Americans born from 1958 to 1962 have the highest share that has never completed high school among all age brackets between 25 and 60. They also have the lowest share with a four-year college degree among all age brackets between 30 and 60, and they're tied for lowest in graduate degrees. Pushed by their passion for enlightenment (and by their fear of being drafted for Vietnam), first-wave baby boomers became obsessive degree achievers. That drive dropped off sharply during the next 10 or 15 years. Less-degreed than their elders, early Xers represent an anomalous back-step in educational progress.

Once early Xers entered the labor force in the 1980s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics noticed something else: For the first time in decades, the share of young adults entering professions such as law, medicine and accounting began to drop. Around the same time, economists began to worry about the stagnation of median income and the decline of household assets among Americans in their 20s. Today, they're worrying about the economic stagnation of Americans in their 40s.

So what explains the smartness deficit (and the related income gap) that has tracked these early Xers throughout their lives? Some say it's demographic pressure. Early Xers were born into large families at the tail end of the baby boom, with a relatively large share of higher-order siblings (just as first-wave boomers have a relatively large share of first-borns). As they grew up, they got crowded out in the competition for parental attention, good teachers and good colleges. Later on, by the 1980s, they arrived too late to enter the most lucrative professions and the cushiest corporations, by now glutted with boomer yuppies. Their only alternative was to pioneer the pragmatic, free-agent, low-credential lifestyle for which Generation X has since become famous.

Yet sheer numbers aren't the whole story. The early Xers' location in history also plays a large role. Quite simply, they were children at a uniquely unfavorable moment -- a time when the divorce rate accelerated, when the media image of children turned demonic and when the "latch-key" lesson for kids stressed self-reliance rather than trust in others. By the time they entered middle and high school, classrooms were opened, standards were lowered, and supervision had disappeared. Compared with earlier- or later-born students at the same age, these kids were assigned less homework, watched more TV and took more drugs.

Most early Xers know the score. Graduating (or not) from school in the early 1980s, they saw themselves billboarded as a bad example by blue-ribbon commissions eager to reform the system for the next generation, the Millennials. Angling for promotions in the early 1990s, they got busy with self-help guides (yes, those "For Dummies" books) to learn all the subjects they were never taught the first time around. And today, as midlife parents, they have become ultra-protective of their own teenage kids and ultra-demanding of their kids' schools, as if to make double-certain it won't happen again.

Does America need to worry that this group is taking over as our national leaders? Probably not. Early Xers have certain strengths that many more learned people lack: They're practical and resilient, they handle risk well, and they know how to improvise when even the experts don't know the answer. As the global economy craters, they won't keep leafing through a textbook. They may be a little rough around the edges, but their style usually gets the job done.

Just don't tell the early Xers that today's youth are the dumbest generation. Not only is that jibe factually untrue, it also calls into question all the family sacrifices the early Xers are now making on behalf of these youth. Let Generation Jones keep the "dumbest" label. They know it fits, and they're tough enough to take it.

Neil Howe is the co-author of "Millennials Rising" and other books on generational issues.

Child Care Research - More complicated than you think

2008-12-05T08:29:00.000-08:00

Anybody who has ever done research on how working mothers find and select child care will undoubtedly tell you that it’s complicated. Each mother brings a unique child, a particular set of individual and family circumstances, employment constraints, and assumptions about what child care means. Furthermore, mothers’ decisions regarding child care often takes place within a mixed market of formal and informal providers, including licensed child care centers and family day care homes as well as individual care givers.

At the Census, I analyze and conduct research related to child care issues using the Survey of Income and Program Participation. The data I work with daily has been discussed most recently in The New Times and Time and further highlights the complexity of child care.

In my own work, I examine the relationship between child care decisions and mothers’ work through the use of “spatial stories”. I borrow the term “spatial stories” from scholars in geography (see Hanson and Pratt 1995) as a way to illustrate the importance of physical and social space in mothers’ ability to manage complex time and space problems in their daily routines when linking together the geographies of home, child care, and work. I will post some of this research soon.

In the meantime, check out these recent reports and data releases:

Taking pressure off families: Child-care subsidies lessen mothers' work-hour problems

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/us/29child.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/08/19/midwestern_moms_most_likely_to/

http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/childcare.html

LOL Cats and the Economy

2008-12-05T06:54:00.001-08:00

New blog via Slate featuring the LOL cats and commentary about the slumping economy. Brilliant. Apparently the author of the blog is accepting photos. Anyone that can make a reference to the economy using Adam Smith and cats is just hot in my book! (Thanks Bri!)

Adam Smith Appears The Big Money

Posted using ShareThis

Cougars and Cougletts

2008-12-04T14:02:00.000-08:00

Sugar mommas. Cougars. Mature women. All of these expressions have been used to describe older women who date younger men. The media is particularly fond of the term "cougar" to describe this group of women. While I find the term somewhat offensive because it suggests that older women are on the prowl and treat younger men as their prey....I can't help using the term myself.

I would general classify single women 40 and older as cougars and single women 30 to 39 as cougars in training...or cougletts if you want to be cute about it. I also wouldn't consider an age difference of 3-4 years cougar like action. I would consider cougars women who are 40 or older dating men in their 20s (think Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher).

Regardless of how much media attention cougars have received, what are the real numbers behind this fade? A 2003 survey conducted by AARP found that 34 percent of women over 40 are dating younger men. Unfortunately, the survey doesn't specify the actual age difference.

Dating a younger man is one thing, but how serious do these relationships become? Does dating a mature women lead to cohabitation and/or marriage?

Data from the Current Population Survey (March supplement 1998) shows that among couples, women who are 2 or more years older than the man are more likely to cohabit with their partners (24 percent) than to marry (12 percent).

I pulled this table from the Census to illustrate current trends in marriage and age and we see in 2007, 13 percent of women 2 or more years older are married compared to 54 percent of men 2 or more years older then their spouse. However, these "older" married women are really not that much older than their husbands. Of that 13 percent I mentioned above, 7 percent are 2-3 years older than their husband. Whereas about 25 percent of married men are 4 to 9 years older than their spouses. So I guess you could say cougletts are more likely to get married while those red, hot cougars are enjoying their single life. Grrr...!

As perceptions about age change and women continue to gain in eduction and the workplace, might we see an increase in marriage between older women and younger men?

Married Couple Family Groups, by Presence of Own Children Under 18, and Age, Earnings, Education, and Race and Hispanic Origin of Both Spouses: 2007
Current Population Survey 2007
(Numbers in thousands.)
All Married Couples	All Married Couples		Without Own Children		With Own Children
	All Married Couples		Under 18		Under 18
	N	%	N	%	N	%
ALL MARRIED COUPLES	60,676	100.0	33,874	100.0	26,802	100.0
.AGE DIFFERENCE
Husband 20+ years older than wife	484	0.8	278	0.8	206	0.8
Husband 15-19 years older than wife	940	1.5	549	1.6	391	1.5
Husband 10-14 years older than wife	3,144	5.2	1,788	5.3	1,357	5.1
Husband 6-9 years older than wife	7,464	12.3	4,194	12.4	3,270	12.2
Husband 4-5 years older than wife	8,101	13.4	4,667	13.8	3,434	12.8
Husband 2-3 years older than wife	12,371	20.4	6,742	19.9	5,629	21.0
Husband and wife within 1 year	19,467	32.1	10,516	31.0	8,950	33.4
Wife 2-3 years older than husband	4,266	7.0	2,429	7.2	1,837	6.9
Wife 4-5 years older than husband	2,054	3.4	1,194	3.5	860	3.2
Wife 6-9 years older than husband	1,555	2.6	935	2.8	620	2.3
Wife 10-14 years older than husband	534	0.9	341	1.0	193	0.7
Wife 15-19 years older than husband	158	0.3	121	0.4	37	0.1
Wife 20+ years older than husband	137	0.2	119	0.4	18	0.1

What makes a man want to marry an older women? Better in bed, more money, more confident? There are probably reasons that I will leave to you to speculate about.

This funny clip from the Today Show discusses a recent British documentary called Sugar Mummies. Put that one in the netflix! (Thanks to Gretchen for the clip)

Because a good Census matters!

2008-12-04T12:45:00.001-08:00

Op-Ed piece from the New York Times:

December 4, 2008

Editorial

Rescue the Census

Congressional investigators recently outlined 13 issues for President-elect Barack Obama to focus on without delay. Most are obvious, such as military readiness, homeland security, financial regulation and Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The 2010 census also made it onto the urgent 13. It deserves to be there.

As with any huge undertaking, the census requires years of planning, but preparations have been systematically sidetracked during the Bush years. The most plausible explanation, beyond incompetence, is that the administration aimed to make it even more difficult than usual to count hard-to-count groups, like minorities, immigrants and the poor, who tilt Democratic. Their numbers, if accurately gauged, could reshape electoral maps.

The White House, with the early support of a Republican-led Congress, shortchanged and delayed financing for the Census Bureau. The administration left top bureau positions unfilled for long stretches and allowed political judgment to dominate bureau management, which damaged morale and impaired performance.

The Census Bureau is currently on its third director in eight years, its third deputy director and its third decennial director, the point person for the 2010 census. None of those senior managers have ever led a nationwide census, and two of them — the deputy and the decennial director — assumed their posts last October. The lack of experience is especially disturbing given that test runs and other preparatory steps for the upcoming census have been scaled back or canceled in the past year.

To put the nation on track for an accurate census, President-elect Obama should nominate a new census director as soon as possible, and the incoming Senate should fast track the nominee’s confirmation hearing.

The new director should be a social scientist with proven leadership ability on large projects executed under pressure. That’s a short list. Kenneth Prewitt, who directed the 2000 census and earned acclaim for its innovation and accuracy, is the obvious choice. Mr. Obama and the American people would be well-served if Mr. Prewitt were offered, and accepted, the position.

The importance of the census cannot be overstated. Among other uses, it determines the number of congressional representatives from each state, the boundaries of congressional districts and the allocation of hundreds of billions of dollars in annual federal aid to states and localities. The census also tells us who we are as a nation and how we’ve changed — information we need to build a strong society and a strong democracy.

Feed the Squirrels!

2008-12-03T17:40:00.000-08:00

It's no secret, I love squirrels! I love them in the city and I love them in the woods. They have so much energy and jump about with such grace. Oh the squirrel! So, this recent story in The Washington Post has got me a little concerned for my favorite creature and is good reminder that animal population changes can tell us a lot about the environment around us. So if you have any extra peanuts around the house, please put them out for the squirrels!

Acorn Watchers Wonder What Happened to Crop
By Brigid Schulte
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 30, 2008; Page A01
The idea seemed too crazy to Rod Simmons, a measured, careful field botanist. Naturalists in Arlington County couldn't find any acorns. None. No hickory nuts, either. Then he went out to look for himself. He came up with nothing. Nothing crunched underfoot. Nothing hit him on the head.

Then calls started coming in about crazy squirrels. Starving, skinny squirrels eating garbage, inhaling bird feed, greedily demolishing pumpkins. Squirrels boldly scampering into the road. And a lot more calls about squirrel roadkill.

Click on link above for full story.

Reverse in Migration - Is China its own Mexico?

2008-12-02T11:50:00.000-08:00

I find the population dynamics of China extremely fascinating. The population of China makes up about a quarter of the world's population. Unlike other developing countries, China made several advances in industrial development and technology, thus providing jobs to a growing population. The growth in jobs has led to a large migration from rural areas to urban areas. A trend not uncommon when looking at population dynamics of more developed countries like the United States.

However, the recent financial crisis has reversed the flow of migration - people are now leaving large cities and going back to the rural country side. A recent article from the Wall Street Journal describes the situation. A large part of the reverse migration is among a group known as the "floating population". This is a population moves back and forth between rural and urban areas to find work. Many of them gave up farming because they were able to find enough work in the cities. However, such jobs are drying up and now they don't even have farm work to go back to. If this trend continues, it will again put further strain on social services in rural areas, another reason why people migrated to urban areas. It will be interesting to see how the government of China deals with this new population dynamic.

I was talking about this trend with a friend (thanks Keith!) and he said it sounds like China is its own Mexico. In the United States, the largest group of immigrants comes from Mexico. The number of immigrants from the Mexico entering the U.S. has declined recently. Part of this decline is because of tougher immigration laws as well as increased boarder patrols. However, the economic downturn in the U.S. is sending Mexican workers back to Mexico and some are not even coming to the U.S. at all. See Mexico Braces for Economic Blow; Immigration Adds to Complexity of the Issue

What would a 21st Century Economic Depression look and feel like?

2008-11-26T06:45:00.000-08:00

The Boston Globe has an interesting article discussing what a economic depression would look like in 2009. For most of us, we've only heard stories or seen pictures of the Great Depression. My father was born during the depression (1935) on a farm in Nebraska. His mother and father (my grandparents) were hit especially hard by the economic downturn of the 1930s and never really ever got over it. My grandparents house had a fully stocked kitchen because they never wanted to go hungry again. My grandmother would also stocked up on shoes, because she often went without shoes as a child and during other hard economic times and vowed to never go with out shoes again in her life. When my grandmother passed away earlier this year, my father found boxes upon boxes of brand new shoes through out her house. My father also tends to stock up on certain items, but not to the extent that my grandmother did.

Family stories and the Globe article got me wondering about how will Americans react if a true economic depression were to happen. Bennett suggests that while we might not see long soup lines or an people jumping from buildings, we will probably see an increase in lines at the ER, more people will stay home and watch tv (leading to a television boom), emptying suburbs, and people will shop more at Walmart and Target.

Prehaps the most interesting result of a 21st century economic depression would be the "desurburbanzation" of America. If home prices continue to sink, homeownership will become less appealing and individuals may find living in the city and better economic investment because commuting costs are cheaper and access to services would be greater. While this would benefit some cities, urban places like Detroit could just disappear.

While the numbers that will likely come out in the coming year regarding poverty, use of government programs such as food stamps, unemployment and so on, will provide further evidence of declining American economy, it will be interesting to see how generations of Americans who have never experienced a depression will react. Do we know how to tighten our belts and how to live with less? Will families take to gardening again and learn to live all together? Only time will tell.

AIDS and Washington, DC

2008-11-22T12:24:00.000-08:00

Washington, DC with a population just over a half a million residents, has one of the highest HIV/AIDS rates in the United States. One in 20 DC residents are HIV positive and the rate of new AIDS cases is 128.4 per 100,000 people, compared to the national average of 13.7 per 100,000 people.

For men in DC, the most common way HIV is spread is through unprotected sex followed by intravenous drug use. For women, sharing needles is the most common mode of HIV transmission. It was only recently that the District was allowed to use federal money to spend on needle exchange programs in hopes of preventing the spread of HIV. Prevention Works provides needle exchange and health services to DC residents.

Even with the amazing advances in research and eduction, HIV/AIDS is still a major health epidemic, particularly in poor minority communities like those in DC. On November 20, activists gathered in DC to demand (and support) that Presidential-elect Obama keep his promise to fight AIDS here in the U.S. and aboard. I was lucky enough to attend the event and march to the White House. Members of Philadelphia ACT UP and NYC AIDS Housing Network then met with members of Obama's transition team. Here's HOPING to a president who will create a real national AIDS strategy and a real national health care system.

Well, I guess this why I am happy!

2008-11-22T11:29:00.000-08:00

I recently decided to do away with television. Well, I actually kept my tv, but just use it to watch movies and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. It was one of the best decisions I ever made. The cost was too much, I am not home enough to watch tv and it gets me out of office talk about last night's episode of Dancing with The Stars.

Well, it turns out that happy people watch less tv and spend more time socializing and going out...this according to researchers at the University of Maryland. While the direction of the relationship is unclear (do people watch tv because they are unhappy or do does tv make people unhappy) I support the idea of less television and more television covers.

What Happy People Don't Do - New York Times

Using my sociological imagination

2008-11-22T11:15:00.000-08:00

Greetings researchers, thinkers, data monkeys, and general public!

I work with a lot of data daily and I enjoy learning and commenting on the social world around me. I hope to use this virtual space to post interesting articles, research, social science data, and statistical methods related to sociology and family demography. I hope you enjoy!