DC Econ: The Numbers Game: The Paradox of Household Income

How does the change in the marriage rate for people with low levels of education relative to people with high levels of education affect measured economic growth for the middle class? Those with lower levels of education tend to make less money, and tend to not get married while a married couple with high levels of income tend to make much more, especially if both the husband and spouse are working and bringing in a income.
If the poverty rate didn't change very much when there was economic growth in the recent past, does that mean it will not change much if there is growth in the future? No, it does not mean it will not change much. Those living in poverty today would have been considered rich 100 years ago. The state of living in poverty is mostly just a bracket assigned by the government. Living in poverty is to not have enough, or barely have enough of the food, shelter, and clothing that you need to survive. As people are continually making more, and technology is improving, more people will not be living in poverty.
Why does Roberts raise the possibility that lower marriage rates might be caused by the poor performance of the economy? When people are married, that increases the incentive for the husband to work. He now has a wife, and most likely children he will have to provide for. Also, that man's kids will grow up to be people who contribute to the economy as well. Less kids equals less people working.
If family structure had stayed constant, poverty would have fallen by 25% in the example in the video. But it actually fell by only 4%. Is one of these measures right and the other wrong? How would you decide? I would say these measures are right. It is proven that when people get married and have kids, they work harder and this boosts the economy. Since people have not been getting married as much and having less kids, I think it makes total sense that the poverty olnly fell by 4%/