Read "Teen Pregnancy Prevention: Welfare Reform's Missing Component," by Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution

Is this an example of positive economics, normative economics, or a combination of both positive and normative economics?
Briefly state the positive and/or normative economic arguments that are embedded in this article.

The article involves a mix of positive and normative economics.
Some of the major positive and normative arguments appear below:
Positive economics:

• an increase in output reduces welfare expenditures and caseloads (the reverse occurs during a downturn),


• welfare reform has reduced,


• teenage pregnancy and out-of-wedlock pregnancy are major factors in explaining long-run changes in child poverty and welfare caseloads,


• early childbearing reduces the incentive for individuals to acquire additional education,


• low-income and young parents spend less on education and health care for their children


• the availability of low-cost contraception and abortion resulted in an increase in teenage sexual activity during the 1970s and 1980s,


• AIDS, welfare reform, economic growth, and more stringent enforcement of child support laws have lead to declines in teenage sexual activity during the 1990s, and


• the "marriage penalty" in the tax system reduces the incentive for low-income individuals to marry.

Normative economics:

• society should create an incentive system that discourages welfare dependency,


• it is undesirable to provide children with unequal access to health care and education (this is implicit in the discussion), and


• states should devote more funding to programs designed to reduce teenage pregnancy and discourage out-of-wedlock pregnancy.