3 ms·

I've seen you regularly bring up these stats, but you never mention that while only 20% are working full time or seeking full time work, 35% are children, which

I've seen you regularly bring up these stats, but you never mention that while only 20% are working full time or seeking full time work, 35% are children, which make a disproportionate amount of the poor. That leave 45% for whom it is a matter of leisure, as you say. However, that study doesn't provide information about how much of that 45% is disabled, and how many are elderly, two more groups disproportionately predisposed towards poverty. If you're being downvoted, it's because you keep bringing up a very straight-forward study and drawing a very extreme social conclusion from it.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
You think that the population as a whole does not include children? (They do have slightly fewer, at 25%.) Excluding children, the country as a whole has a FTLFPR (Full Time Labor Force Participation Rate) of 73%. The poor have a FTLFPR of 15%. That's a calculation that took me 2 minutes. If you really cared about facts, you would have done it yourself. But I guess it's safer to raise questions and assume the answers support your views, rather than actually look into the data. ...and how many are elderly, ...disproportionately predisposed towards poverty. Please stop making stuff up. The poverty rate among children is 27%, working age adults is 18%, and the elderly is 14%. http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=10&cat=1 http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=10&ca... As for the disabled, if you truly believe that the numbers will contradict my case, why don't you post them? (I'm not going to do all your research for you.)