> especially two. Or for that matter, three, since the statement seems to be assuming 3 children and one adult (if there was a second adult, why would it be a

> especially two. Or for that matter, three, since the statement seems to be assuming 3 children and one adult (if there was a second adult, why would it be a single-earner household if they are under the poverty line that way? Surely the other adult should at least be on welfare or disability...)