America's youngest children most likely to live in poor economic conditions

eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-02/cums-ayc020817.php

Available online at nccp.org/publications/fact_sheets.html, the Basic Facts About Low-Income Children fact sheets illustrate the severity of economic instability faced by low-income and poor children throughout the United States. NCCP defines a poor household as one where incomes are below the federal poverty threshold (i.e., $24,036 for a family of four with two children in 2015). Families with earnings less than twice the poverty threshold are considered low income and include poor families (i.e., $48,072 for a family of four with two children in 2015). According to NCCP researchers, the number of children in low-income families increased slightly from 42 percent in 2009 to 43 percent in 2015, and the percent of poor children in the U.S. increased by 1 percentage point.


Why is this happening?

Tl;dr:

Almost half (43%) of all children born into the US will be in a low income household, much more than at the height of the US recession.

Fug. It's hard to live in most areas as a single person on that amount

🍀🍀🍀Inflation🍀🍀🍀 and also idiot parents invest in beer and television instead of investing in themselves.

Oh of course! It's like those damn homeless people with iPhones!

Bump.

One thing I'd like to see this compared with projected growth statistics.

I'd add that if the poor and uneducated tend to have more children, can we expect the majority of America to live in poverty in the near future?

strawman, why would you even consider having kids if you can barely live yourselves

1.) Not a straw man
2.) If that's the case then why is it that the poorest countries tend to have higher rates of population growth?
3.) You're right in that it isn't logical, but that doesn't mean that lower income families don't have more children.

The ideology behind this statement is fairly disgusting, as it makes reproduction, which is the most basic instinct of all life, into a muh privilege to be afforded only to the wealthy.

What's worse is that our government is most likely going to feed into this issue instead of trying to buildup local economic infrastructure. We need to see a rise in Non-Partisan League and Farming Union parties again, and force every state to have a state-operated bank ala Bank of NoDak.

It's a mystery.

Nazi plz

But we must! We need to make it so every state is self-sufficient, and then begin to rapidly adapt our world for the oncoming age of Victorian craft from post-Industrial/Service economy being taken over by automation.

Having kids when you aren't well off not only hurts you and makes you miserable, it does the same to your children. Don't be a selfish cunt, think about the poor souls your bringing into this world. I should know.

Because the lowest incomes have the most kids, duh

They just have to pick themselves by their bootstraps and get a college education! Take out a student loan and work two part-time jobs in your spare time!

Whoa whoa whoa, so what you're telling me is that in a capitalist nation it's inevitable that the majority will live in poverty?

What? So all people should have all the children they want? Now THAT is actually retarded and selfish.

If you know your children will only auffer and grow up in poverty, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE CHILDREN YOU SELFISH PIECE OF SHIT.

MUH INSTINCTS AND MUH HUMAN NATURE ARE
NOT
EXCUSES

There is a natural supply of land that can be used to supply the food necessary to meet the demand of these families, why should the government defend property rights? Clearly they are the problem

...

Holy shit that was awesome.