From: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness)
Subject: Re: Marian Wright Edelman Statement on Child Poverty Increase
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin TX
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 01:43:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.011934.13561@samba.oit.unc.edu> Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) writes:
>Here is a press release from the Children's Defense Fund.

>   WASHINGTON, Sept. 3 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement
>of Marian Wright Edelman, president, Children's Defense Fund, on the
>child poverty increase in 1991 to the highest level since 1965; CDF
>calls for immediate enactment of initiative to combat childhood
>hunger and strengthen families:
>
>   Due to the leap in the number of poor children in 1991 reported by
>the Census Bureau today, America now has more children living in
>poverty than in any year since 1965 -- a fact that demands immediate
>action and long-term and comprehensive plans to combat child poverty
>from candidates from all parties at all levels of government.

Bogus statistic report: These numbers do NOT include in-kind
subsidies like food stamps, housing benefits, WIC, and other
non-cash benefits.

Scratch the surface and you will find that the percentage
of people in poverty has, although with dips and rises,
pretty much bottomed out since 1970.
Essentially, it only proves that there are large numbers of people
which do not support themselves sufficiently with their own income.

James J. Kilpatrick had a good column on this. Something like half of
all "poverty" families own their own homes; many have substantial
household assets. cars, boats, pools, etc. The image of destitution does not
apply to all those in "poverty". (Although it certainly applies to some.)

[biased report deleted]

>nation in the world is a moral disgrace.  When will we begin to
>value our children as well as our families and begin the essential
>task of eliminating child poverty in America?

When we end our stupid welfare policies. (see below).

>
>         Table 1: Poverty status of persons younger than 18
>                       (Numbers in thousands)
>
>           TOTAL         POOR            RATE
>
>   1991    65,918        14,341          21.8%
>   1990    65,049        13,431          20.6
>
>   1989    64,144        12,590          19.6
>   1988    63,747        12,455          19.5
>   1987    63,294        12,843          20.3
>   1986    62,948        12,876          20.5
>   1985    62,876        13,010          20.7
>   1984    62,447        13,420          21.5
>   1983    62,334        13,911          22.3
>   1982    62,345        13,647          21.9
>   1981    62,449        12,505          20.0
>   1980    62,914        11,543          18.3
>
>   1979    63,375        10,377          16.4
>   1978    62,311         9,931          15.9
>   1977    63,137        10,288          16.2
>   1976    64,028        10,273          16.0
>   1975    65,079        11,104          17.1
>   1974    66,134        10,156          15.4
>   1973    66,959         9,642          14.4
>   1972    67,930        10,284          15.1
>   1971    68,816        10,551          15.3
>   1970    69,159        10,440          15.1
>
>   1969    69,090         9,691          14.0

Note that this is where progress stopped ... just when
welfare spending took off. hmmmm.

>   1968    70,385        10,954          15.6
>   1967    70,408        11,656          16.6
>   1966    70,218        12,389          17.6
>   1965    69,986        14,676          21.0
>   1964    69,711        16,051          23.0
>   1963    69,181        16,005          23.1
>   1962    67,722        16,963          25.0
>   1961    66,121        16,909          25.6
>   1960    65,601        17,634          26.9
>
>   1959    64,315        17,552          27.3

Gee, so the huge expansion of the welfare state in the late 60's,
that has continued to this day, had exactly the effect the
conservatives have claimed: we have a permanent welfare-dependent,
underclass trapped in poverty, and the poverty rate has not been reduced
despite (or because of) these programs.

>   Table 2: Poverty Rate of Families With Children Younger Than 18
>                            1990 and 1991
>
>                                                    Percentage
>                                                      Point
>                                                    Difference:
>                                                    1991 minus
>                          1990           1991           1990
>
>   Total                  16.4%          17.7%         +1.3%
>
>   Married Parents         7.8            8.3          +0.5
>   Mother Only            44.5           47.1          +2.6
>   Father Only            18.8           19.6          +0.8

Poverty correlates with single parenthood. No kidding.
Would it be too much to suggest that single parenthood is not ....
er, I guess it would.


Pat

PS Children's Defense Fund:
A liberal group using a misleading label to promote their agenda
of greater Government involvement.

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45689 talk.politics.theory:4197