Posted on 12/10/2014 12:21:41 PM PST by Kaslin
The Census Bureau reported in a study released this week that 65 percent of American children lived in households taking aid from one or more federal program as of the fall of 2011.
"Almost two-thirds (65 percent) of children," said the Census Bureau, "lived in households that participated in at least one or more of the following government aid programs: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Medicaid, and the National School Lunch Program."
How to be dependent on government is now one of the earliest life lessons America is teaching nearly a supermajority of children.
The percentage of children living in households participating in TANF, food stamps, WIC, Medicaid or the National School Lunch Program has been on the rise.
In 2003, according to the Census Bureau, there were a total of 72,658,000 children 17 and under in the United States, and 40,337,000 of these children -- or 56 percent -- lived in households receiving aid from one of more of these programs.
That included 30,023,000 children in the National School Lunch Program, 18,175,000 in households on Medicaid, 8,287,000 in households on food stamps, 4,808,000 in households on WIC, and 2,347,000 in households on TANF.
By 2011, there were 74,294,000 children 17 and under and 47,939,000 of these children -- or 65 percent -- lived in households receiving aid from one or more of these programs.
That included 34,959,000 in the National School Lunch Program; 26,350,000 in households on Medicaid; 17,321,000 in households on food stamps; 6,350,000 in households on WIC; and 2,279,000 in households on TANF.
Children living in households that have never taken federal assistance are now a minority in the United States. In the future, they will be among a minority of adults.
The new willingness among Americans to live on government largesse is matched by another trend: disregard for marriage and traditional family life.
As recently as 1970, according to the Census Bureau, 85.2 percent of American children were living with two parents.
Of the 74,294,000 children 17 and under in the United States in the fall of 2011, 50,442,000 -- or 68 percent -- were living with two parents. However, 3,760,000 of those children were living with two parents who were not married, leaving only 46,682,000 children -- or 63 percent -- living with two married parents.
"The economic status of children living with cohabitating parents more closely resembled single-parent families," the study said. After children living with a single parent, they were the most likely to be in poverty.
Among children living with one parent, 40.9 percent were in poverty. Among children living with two unmarried parents, 37.3 percent were in poverty. And among children living with a guardian (including a grandparent or another relative), 29.8 percent were in poverty.
But among children living with two married parents, only 14.0 percent were in poverty.
The data published in this Census Bureau study also suggests that disrespect for marriage and traditional family life is a homegrown product of the United States. Children who have at least one immigrant parent are more likely to live with two married parents.
Almost 73 percent of children who had at least one foreign-born parent, the study said, lived with two married parents. But only 59.8 percent of children whose parents were both born in the United States lived with two married parents.
The ultimate struggle for the future of America is not political or economic, but cultural. It is between those who believe in self-reliance and traditional family life and those who do not.
This is not because children are poor or needy, its because we live under a de facto Socialist economy. Same with Food Stamps. The media cries about how many people are on Food Stamps as if its an indication that the country is living in poverty but the reality is that Obama has opened Food Stamps up to the middle class.
The Welfare President
Yup. Just like moving from Food Stamps to debit cards, it eliminates the stigma.
= = = = = = = =
I would imagine the .40 cents or so it takes to prepare the lunch is more than offset by the 5 per head count that Unka Sugah is willing to spring for.
It sort of encourages even the most HONEST people to fudge.
The program will REALLY hit its stride when Unka starts paying 10 bucks per head for those that DON’T eat there..which will then result in the system getting 10 bucks a student for NOT eating, then the state/school discourages those from eating.
While each individual school may not reap a whole lot of profit though if you have 1000 students in your school the 10 grand a day adds up to some pretty nice bonuses for creative bookeeping and you can then ‘can’ all those ‘lunch ladies’ so not only no lunches, no kitchen, no staff, each administrator will be getting a bonus for saving money WHILE stealing from the same people.
Gosh, Liberalism is great....
National School Lunch Program
This is the main culprit, most states have removed all requirements around need to qualify and just give lunches for free to all kids.
I want to see the numbers with this removed.
My thoughts exactly. Thank you.
Yes. The commercials talk about how the kids don’t know if they’ll have any food from the time they leave school on Friday until they come back on Monday.
My thinking is that, if this is true, the children should be removed from the parents, and the money benefits being received by that parents should be cut off. Possibly many of these parents should be charged with child neglect.
It seems like the culture of demanding these freebies has allowed and encouraged many millions of parents to be completely irresponsible when it comes to raising their children, but they are rewarded with the money and “aid” that is available.
To be honest I know a lot of middle class people who look at the Food Stamp program and see that big food processors and grocery chains lobby so vociferously to keep it growing. So they figure it is actually corporate welfare, and in that case, they should have no qualms about picking up a bit of benefit from it.
A quarter century ago the stigma would have deterred them from even going there.
I've been reading through the documentation for the National School Lunch Program and can't find any process that lets states officially opt out of the family income requirements. However, I also see from press reports that many school districts are checking only a tiny fraction of the parent applications to see if they're sufficiently needy to qualify, and USDA is letting them get away with it -- with the result that many schools are feeding the entire student population free of charge. It's obviously a grossly corrupt program.
Sounds like it is right in line with the liberal “requirements” being used by the 0bama administration in many, many areas, such as illegal immigrants, those getting social security disability payments, earned income credits paying out real cash without any checks and balances, and so on.
Only the hard-working, tax-paying, law-abiding, God-fearing types are subject to the rules and paying their own way. It is so very sad to see this, and it will take generations to turn around, if it is even possible.
“My thinking is that, if this is true, the children should be removed from the parents, and the money benefits being received by that parents should be cut off. Possibly many of these parents should be charged with child neglect.”
Fully agree; thing is, a lot of these parents are so selfish that they literally keep it all for themselves and leave their kids to struggle to get even an ounce of anything to get them through the day like a normal kid and provide a foundation (psychological and material) for a better life.
I should know, my mother (now dead) was a welfare recipient from when I was a kid to the day she died. She put herself first and I was taken in by my dad, but she was a bad influence. She could do everything but work at a real job and grow up into an adult. A lot of recipients are like her and literally are determined to remain helpless and useless.
I do agree that these kids should be taken in by people who know how to handle them and also provide a good structure and a knowledge of the wider world. Once these kids understand that they don’t have to be loyal to those who don’t look after them, they’ll break ties with the toxic parent and be ready to move on and do better things.
I do believe that auditing of benefits should be done if kids are involved and there should be a regular visit by CPS (let the gov. hassle those on benefits) often as possible.
Every school in our school system serves “free” breakfasts and lunches to all students. Students are allowed to bring their own lunches and snacks. Most of the food goes into the trash. The students do eat their fruit and usually drink the thin milk products or fruit juice. The schools usually serve a variety of fruits, so the children can pick something they like.
This program makes those federal numbers go up when a lot of the students can afford to buy lunches.
"EBT card- it's everywhere you want to be".
Things like this are nearly impossible to roll back. We don’t like it here, but it is what it is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.