I don't find those talking points convincing. For one, even with your statistics, half of folks employed are school-age. Also, poverty is measured by household

I don't find those talking points convincing. For one, even with your statistics, half of folks employed are school-age. Also, poverty is measured by household. Confusing the math isn't a good way to make a quantitative argument. But mostly your argument is a semantic trick around the word "poverty" to rationalize weighted terminology. Again, I have strong feelings that employers should be conscious of the lives and prospects of their employees. For instance, having policies that lead to irregular patterns of night and day shifts that have to be unhealthy long-term. But we can have rational discussion about these issues.