"A survey of mothers from 65 to 75 years old with at least two living adult children found that about 11 percent were estranged from a child and 62 percent reported contact less than once a month with at least one child."

62 percent! That's terribly sad.

theatlantic.com/family/archive…
The 11 percent figure doesn't strike me as particularly concerning. About one in ten people is probably deeply toxic, and it is the right of children to keep those people out of their lives.

But 62 percent of children who have barely any relationship with their parents! Wow.
And yup, as everyone is pointing out, it's 62 percent of mothers who barely have contact with one of their children - so not 62 percent of mother-child dyads, as it were.

Still!
Excellent point.

If someone rang up my mom after I didn't talk to her for a few days, she might well claim not to have spoken to me for a month as well!

🤣.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Yascha Mounk

Yascha Mounk Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Yascha_Mounk

2 Jan
None of the common metaphors for what a thriving, diverse society might look like work well.

Melting pot: Too much emphasis on cultural homogeneity.

Salad bowl: Too much emphasis on cultural separatism.*

Do you have a better idea for how to talk about this?
* The metaphor of the salad bowl is also way less inclusive than its advocates seem to think.

A good salad needs a chef who makes choices and makes dressing. Or do you want to eat a dry salad that's 90% croutons?

(Same problem goes for "mosaic.")
Agree with everyone that the right answer is likely *not* to be a food metaphor. (The fact that academics all resort to food metaphors has long been fascinating to me.)

But what's better?
Read 5 tweets
23 Dec 20
When the CDC is willing to kill thousands of people in the name of social justice, it's hard to know whom or what to trust.

So I wrote about its shocking failure of judgment, and my crisis of faith in America’s institutions, for
@JoinPersuasion.

THREAD
persuasion.community/p/why-im-losin…
1)

The CDC came scarily close to adopting a plan that would have killed thousands of people *according to its own model*.

This would have inscribed racial discrimination at the heart of American public policy (and... killed lots of African-Americans) in an astonishing manner.
2)

After a big public outcry, the CDC changed course.

The recommendations it ultimately adopted are a real improvement. But though the CDC won’t give us the numbers this time around, they too are likely to lead to needless deaths.

The fight for a just distribution isn't over.
Read 5 tweets
20 Dec 20
Some good news:

Thanks to massive and justified public criticism, the CDC is making adjustments to their recommendations.

Americans over 75 should now get the vaccine alongside essential *frontline* workers.

This is an improvement. But it doesn't solve many of the concerns.
In particular, the CDC's own data *still* suggests that Americans aged 65-74 are much more likely to die from Covid than younger frontline workers.

So this course of action will likely *still* cause needless additional deaths.

How many? This is where things get really worrying.
In the original presentation, Kathleen Dooling admitted that prioritizing all essential workers would likely increase overall deaths by between 0.5% and 6.5%.

In an astonishing sentence, she then called the additional deaths of thousands of Americans a "minimal" difference.
Read 4 tweets
2 Dec 20
Donald Trump has made clear that, even after he leaves office, he'll do what he can to screw with the country.

Most pundits assume that he will succeed.

@TheAtlantic, I make the case for why Trump could (!) fade into irrelevance.

[Thread]

theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
First off, this is not a prediction.

If there's one thing Trump is actually talented at, it's seeking the limelight. And he clearly wants to build a news channel and return to the White House in 2024. He might succeed.

But there are three obstacles that are widely overlooked.
1)

A big reason why Trump won in 2016 is that Americans saw him as a powerful winner.

Now, for the first time, he looks like a sore loser.

His veneer of invincibility is fading. Fear of what he might do next is giving way to laughter. He looks more weak and scared by the day.
Read 7 tweets
24 Nov 20
Why is it so hard to contain the virus?

And why are even well-governed countries like Germany and Canada now experiencing a deadly second wave?

In part because of three biases that keep tempting us into bad decisions.

My latest @TheAtlantic.

Thread.
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
1. Misleading Feedback

Humans can learn difficult skills when they get instant feedback. If you put too much salt in the sauce, your pasta will taste memorably bad.

But when the goal is to avoid rare negative outcomes, instant feedback tends to lead us astray.
Every time I cross a road on red, the world sends me the signal that this was fine: "I wasn't hit by a car! All good."

So I'll keep crossing the road on red even if I am incurring an irrationally large lifetime risk of being killed in a car accident to save a few seconds.
Read 10 tweets
11 Nov 20
I've been off Twitter all day and only now saw this video. Honestly, it makes me livid about how people have reported his remarks.

Pompeo is clearly joking in the first sentence.

Is the joke appropriate? No.

Is he actually doing Trump's bidding here? On the contrary.
Those who reported this (highly inappropriate!) joke as straight news should ask themselves what they're doing.

If your goal is to portray the other side in the worst possible light, congrats!

If your goal is not to give Trump's attacks on democracy oxygen, you failed. Badly.
I have no sympathy for Pompeo, who has been a terrible Secretary of State.

There is no doubt he's being highly irresponsible. And perhaps, as some are saying, he wasn't joking.

But to report this, as the NYT, as a straight prediction of future events is wrong and *helps* Trump.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!