What\u2019s less worthy is basing any debate on misleading analysis. That\u2019s my complaint against the Times essay. Its hypothetical and admittedly unrealistic thought experiment that eliminating poverty among single mothers wouldn\u2019t have much effect on overall poverty is wrong, according to the government\u2019s own figures from the Census Bureau.<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s look at the census figures.<\/p>\n
In 2016, 40.6 million Americans had incomes below the government\u2019s official poverty line, which was $24,339 for a family of four, including two children. Of those below the poverty line \u2014 12.7\u2007percent of the population \u2014 nearly 5 million were moms or dads heading single-parent families; 8.7 million were children under 18 in these single-parent homes.<\/p>\n
Do the arithmetic. Together, single-parent families and their children totaled almost 14 million people, which is roughly a third of all people in poverty. If, magically, a third of America\u2019s poor escaped poverty, the change would (justifiably) be hailed as a triumph of social policy. If we included the children in poverty in two-parent families, that would add more than 7 million to the total (3 million parents and 4 million children). The total of 21 million would equal about half of all people in poverty.<\/p>\n