Child Poverty

[Sonny Clark]

14.7 million children in this country are poor, and 6.5 million of them are extremely poor (living below half the poverty line).

Today, the Children’s Defense Fund is releasing a report entitled “Ending Child Poverty Now” that calls this country’s rate of child poverty “a moral disgrace.”
“America’s poor children did not ask to be born; did not choose their parents, country, state, neighborhood, race, color, or faith. In fact if they had been born in 33 other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries they would be less likely to be poor. Among these 35 countries, America ranks 34th in relative child poverty — ahead only of Romania, whose economy is 99 percent smaller than ours.”

********* Allowing child poverty to remain at these unconscionable levels costs “far more than eliminating it would,” calculating that an immediate 60 percent reduction in child poverty would cost $77.2 billion a year, or just 2 percent of our national budget.
******** “Every year we keep 14.7 million children in poverty costs our nation $500 billion — six times more than the $77 billion investment we propose to reduce child poverty by 60 percent.”
The report cites the M.I.T. Nobel laureate economist and 2014 Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Dr. Robert Solow, who wrote in his foreword to a 1994 C.D.F. report, “Wasting America’s Future”: “As an economist I believe that good things are worth paying for; and that even if curing children’s poverty were expensive, it would be hard to think of a better use in the world for money.”

Britain, which took some of the same steps as a case study of how such an approach can work because they “managed to reduce child poverty by more than half over 10 years, and reductions persisted during the Great Recession.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/o...p-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

We can do something about this shame and disgrace. Supposedly the richest nation on Earth, and we have extreme poverty issues, and those issues include our children. We don't bat an eye when it comes to fighting senseless deadly costly wars, building mosques on foreign soil, supplying weapons to drug lords and terrorists, and paying for the care and support of illegal immigrants, but we stand-by and watch our poorest struggle, and among them are our children, our future.

Where did we go wrong, and what are we willing to do in order to not only address this injustice, but correct it?

 

[Mr. H.]

It is sad and unfortunate. But it's survivable. I survived a childhood of extreme poverty. And without the social "safety nets" of today.

 

[Roadrunner]

It is sad and unfortunate. But it's survivable. I survived a childhood of extreme poverty. And without the social "safety nets" of today.

Back in the Depression, with six mouths to feed, my PaPa brought home a sack of commodity flour being given away free.

My grandmother made him WALK that sack 7 miles back to the train depot where they were handing it out.

 

[Roadrunner]

It is sad and unfortunate. But it's survivable. I survived a childhood of extreme poverty. And without the social "safety nets" of today.

After 30 years in the education business, I am convinced poverty is a state of mind.

 

[Roadrunner]

14.7 million children in this country are poor, and 6.5 million of them are extremely poor (living below half the poverty line).

Today, the Children’s Defense Fund is releasing a report entitled “Ending Child Poverty Now” that calls this country’s rate of child poverty “a moral disgrace.”
“America’s poor children did not ask to be born; did not choose their parents, country, state, neighborhood, race, color, or faith. In fact if they had been born in 33 other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries they would be less likely to be poor. Among these 35 countries, America ranks 34th in relative child poverty — ahead only of Romania, whose economy is 99 percent smaller than ours.”

********* Allowing child poverty to remain at these unconscionable levels costs “far more than eliminating it would,” calculating that an immediate 60 percent reduction in child poverty would cost $77.2 billion a year, or just 2 percent of our national budget.
******** “Every year we keep 14.7 million children in poverty costs our nation $500 billion — six times more than the $77 billion investment we propose to reduce child poverty by 60 percent.”
The report cites the M.I.T. Nobel laureate economist and 2014 Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Dr. Robert Solow, who wrote in his foreword to a 1994 C.D.F. report, “Wasting America’s Future”: “As an economist I believe that good things are worth paying for; and that even if curing children’s poverty were expensive, it would be hard to think of a better use in the world for money.”

Britain, which took some of the same steps as a case study of how such an approach can work because they “managed to reduce child poverty by more than half over 10 years, and reductions persisted during the Great Recession.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/o...p-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

We can do something about this shame and disgrace. Supposedly the richest nation on Earth, and we have extreme poverty issues, and those issues include our children. We don't bat an eye when it comes to fighting senseless deadly costly wars, building mosques on foreign soil, supplying weapons to drug lords and terrorists, and paying for the care and support of illegal immigrants, but we stand-by and watch our poorest struggle, and among them are our children, our future.

Where did we go wrong, and what are we willing to do in order to not only address this injustice, but correct it?

The solution is drastic.

It starts with mandatory teen contraception, a one welfare-child policy, and societal contempt for the dependent class.

 

[Sonny Clark]

14.7 million children in this country are poor, and 6.5 million of them are extremely poor (living below half the poverty line).

Today, the Children’s Defense Fund is releasing a report entitled “Ending Child Poverty Now” that calls this country’s rate of child poverty “a moral disgrace.”
“America’s poor children did not ask to be born; did not choose their parents, country, state, neighborhood, race, color, or faith. In fact if they had been born in 33 other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries they would be less likely to be poor. Among these 35 countries, America ranks 34th in relative child poverty — ahead only of Romania, whose economy is 99 percent smaller than ours.”

********* Allowing child poverty to remain at these unconscionable levels costs “far more than eliminating it would,” calculating that an immediate 60 percent reduction in child poverty would cost $77.2 billion a year, or just 2 percent of our national budget.
******** “Every year we keep 14.7 million children in poverty costs our nation $500 billion — six times more than the $77 billion investment we propose to reduce child poverty by 60 percent.”
The report cites the M.I.T. Nobel laureate economist and 2014 Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Dr. Robert Solow, who wrote in his foreword to a 1994 C.D.F. report, “Wasting America’s Future”: “As an economist I believe that good things are worth paying for; and that even if curing children’s poverty were expensive, it would be hard to think of a better use in the world for money.”

Britain, which took some of the same steps as a case study of how such an approach can work because they “managed to reduce child poverty by more than half over 10 years, and reductions persisted during the Great Recession.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/o...p-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

We can do something about this shame and disgrace. Supposedly the richest nation on Earth, and we have extreme poverty issues, and those issues include our children. We don't bat an eye when it comes to fighting senseless deadly costly wars, building mosques on foreign soil, supplying weapons to drug lords and terrorists, and paying for the care and support of illegal immigrants, but we stand-by and watch our poorest struggle, and among them are our children, our future.

Where did we go wrong, and what are we willing to do in order to not only address this injustice, but correct it?

The solution is drastic.

It starts with mandatory teen contraception, a one-welfare child policy, and societal contempt for the dependent class.

FROM THE ARTICLE: ---
People may disagree about the choices parents make — including premarital sex and out-of-wedlock births. People may disagree about access to methods of family planning — including contraception and abortion. People may disagree about the size and role of government — including the role of safety-net programs.

But surely we can all agree that no child, once born, should suffer through poverty. Surely we can all agree that working to end child poverty — or at least severely reduce it — is a moral obligation of a civilized society.

What would we get for our $77 billion, anyway? Things like the creation of subsidized jobs, an increase in the earned income tax credit, a raise of the minimum wage, an expansion of child care subsidies and housing subsidies, and an increase in SNAP benefits.

The report holds up Britain, which took some of the same steps as a case study of how such an approach can work because they “managed to reduce child poverty by more than half over 10 years, and reductions persisted during the Great Recession.”

We can do this too, if just stop seeing helping these children as an us-versus-them struggle between makers and takers, if we stop getting so hung up on prudishness about sex and traditional views of what constitutes a family, if we stem our impulse to punish children for their mothers giving birth before marriage.

By the way, Britain’s out-of-wedlock birthrate is even higher than ours.

 

[jknowgood]

Liberals declared war on poverty over 50 years ago. I believe after trillions of dollars spent, they are losing the war big time.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I can't say I believe the term 'child poverty' actually means anything. Children don't work or have incomes so how can they be said to be poor? What you're actually talking about is regular poverty, but since not-poor people tend not to care about poor people you changed the terms to an emotion-riddled term harder to oppose. It's marketing.

 

[Roadrunner]

I can't say I believe the term 'child poverty' actually means anything. Children don't work or have incomes so how can they be said to be poor? What you're actually talking about is regular poverty, but since not-poor people tend not to care about poor people you changed the terms to an emotion-riddled term harder to oppose. It's marketing.

Our poor children sure are fat.

If the REAL poor every come over the border in hordes, they'll find plenty to eat.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I can't say I believe the term 'child poverty' actually means anything. Children don't work or have incomes so how can they be said to be poor? What you're actually talking about is regular poverty, but since not-poor people tend not to care about poor people you changed the terms to an emotion-riddled term harder to oppose. It's marketing.

Our poor children sure are fat.

If the REAL poor every come over the border in hordes, they'll find plenty to eat.

Foods likely to make one fat are among the cheapest thus why poor people tend to be obese as well. It's not a reflection of their not being poor since they could afford to eat so much they got fat, it's that what they could afford to eat is the highest obesity-contributing foods in our country.