4 ms·
> this commitment translates into a 28% poverty rate The table used to calculate federal poverty level doesn't scale correctly to high numbers of children. Yo
by ars 7y ago
> this commitment translates into a 28% poverty rate
The table used to calculate federal poverty level doesn't scale correctly to high numbers of children.
You can make rather a lot of money, yet be considered poor if you have lots of children.
Additional children don't cost as much as the federal government thinks.
- klank 7y agoCan you back that up with some additional data? According to this: https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fpl/ https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fp... A family of 8 is under the poverty level if they make less than $43,430. I'd not consider that to be a "rather a lot of money" if raising 8 children is involved.
- xyzzyz 7y agoIf you have 5 children already, the additional cost of raising another one is greatly smaller than is the cost of raising the first one. The most likely scenario is that there is already a full time stay at home parent, so they will get additional workload, but won’t incur much additional expenses beyond some more food expenditure, some extra clothing if whatever older siblings have been wearing is too worn out, and extra bed. If the cost of children for you is daycare bills, private school, after school organized activity and college fund, you’re most likely not the kind of person who ends up having 6 children.
- ars 7y ago$43,430 is the number that the federal government considers to be abject poverty. Clearly it's not though. But use your chart to check the 250% level often used as a cut off for services. You can make a 6 figure income and still be considered poor.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]