quote:

Who’s on Welfare? 9 Shocking Stats About Public Assistance

Megan Elliott
March 12, 2016

Source: Thinkstock

Welfare programs are controversial. Some people believe the government is responsible for providing a strong social safety to the most vulnerable. Others see welfare as a system that’s rife with abuse and which discourages people from making responsible decisions. Whatever your take on welfare, there’s no denying that these programs to help the poor cost a lot of money. A 2015 study by the University of California at Berkeley found that states and the federal government spent $152.8 billion a year on food stamps, health insurance, and cash assistance programs, more than half of it going to working families who were having trouble making ends meet.

The Berkeley report found that workers in many occupations were dependent on public assistance to supplement their income, including child care, home care, and fast food workers, as well as part-time college faculty.

We know that many people receiving welfare have jobs. But what other trends are there among people who get public assistance? To get a better idea of who was actually receiving public assistance in the United States, the U.S. Census Bureau recently took a closer look at participation in six major welfare programs from 2009 to 2012:

Medicaid
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps
Housing assistance
Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), or cash benefits
General Assistance

The report doesn’t discuss other kinds of support that people might receive, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, free school lunches, the WIC program, Head Start, energy assistance programs, and Pell Grants. While it doesn’t capture the full spectrum of welfare in the U.S., the results still provide a clearer picture of who is receiving public assistance.

Much of what’s included in the report isn’t exactly surprising – while many recipients have jobs, those who are unemployed and who don’t have much education tend to be more likely to rely on benefits for a longer period of time, for example. Nonetheless, some of the data may surprise you. Here are nine facts about who receives welfare benefits in the U.S.


1. More than 20% of the U.S. population receives public assistance

In 2012, roughly one-fifth of the U.S. population, or 52.2 million people, received some kind of means-tested public assistance every month. About 15% of the population was receiving Medicaid and 13% were on food stamps. Just 1% were getting cash benefits through TANF or General Assistance.

In addition, most people probably aren’t receiving most of their income from government programs. A separate report from the Department of Health and Human Services found that in 2011, just 5.2% of the total U.S. population was receiving more than half of their total income in cash benefits, food stamps, or SSI.

2. Participation in welfare programs grew from 2009 to 2012

In 2009, 18.6% of the population was participating in at least one means-tested benefit program. That number was up to 21.3% in 2012. But the increase in welfare participation seems to be leveling off; there was no statistically significant rise in participation from 2011 to 2012.

3. The average monthly benefit was about $400

People received an average of $404 a month in food stamps, SSI benefits, TANF, or general assistance. Those who qualified for SSI (which primarily supports people who are disabled and can’t work) received the most on average — $698 per month. As of 2015, about 8.3 million Americans were receiving SSI.

4. Children benefit the most from public assistance programs

About 39% of children received welfare benefits during an average month in 2012. Roughly 17% of adults between 18 and 64 received benefits and 12.6% of people over age 65 did as well. Those under 18 also received larger average monthly benefits than adults between 18 and 64 ($447/month vs. $393/month).

5. Many people receive benefits for a year or longer

Forty-three percent of people had been receiving benefits for 37 to 48 months. Roughly 30% had been on welfare for a year or less.

Some programs had more long-term participants than others. Nearly half of people receiving housing benefits had been getting them for three years or longer. In contrast, cash assistance was a short-term form of help for most, with just 10% of people receiving benefits for three years or more.

6. Families led by single parents were more likely to receive benefits

Fifty-eight percent of families led by an unmarried mother and 37% headed by an unmarried father received benefits for at least one month during 2012. About 20% of families headed by a married couple received benefits for at least one during the same period.

7. Single mothers tend to receive less in benefits per month

Households headed by an unmarried woman received an average of $337 in monthly benefits, compared to $447 for households headed by single men and $420 a month for married couples.

However, families led by single moms tended to receive benefits for a longer period of time. Fifty-eight percent received benefits for three years or more, compared to 35.2% of single dad households and 34.8% of married couple households.

8. People who attend college are less likely to receive benefits

A little over 13% of people who had attended college for at least one year received welfare benefits at any point in 2012. In contrast, 45% of people who didn’t graduate from high school received benefits during the year. People who didn’t complete high school were also more likely to be long-term benefit recipients.

9. African Americans were more likely to receive public assistance than other groups

In 2012, an average of 41.6% of African Americans received means-tested benefits each month. About 18% of Asians or Pacific Islanders and 13% of whites received benefits each month. Thirty-six percent of Hispanics of any race received government assistance.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

Who’s on Welfare? 9 Shocking Stats About Public Assistance

Megan Elliott
March 12, 2016

Source: Thinkstock

Welfare programs are controversial. Some people believe the government is responsible for providing a strong social safety to the most vulnerable. Others see welfare as a system that’s rife with abuse and which discourages people from making responsible decisions. Whatever your take on welfare, there’s no denying that these programs to help the poor cost a lot of money. A 2015 study by the University of California at Berkeley found that states and the federal government spent $152.8 billion a year on food stamps, health insurance, and cash assistance programs, more than half of it going to working families who were having trouble making ends meet.

The Berkeley report found that workers in many occupations were dependent on public assistance to supplement their income, including child care, home care, and fast food workers, as well as part-time college faculty.

We know that many people receiving welfare have jobs. But what other trends are there among people who get public assistance? To get a better idea of who was actually receiving public assistance in the United States, the U.S. Census Bureau recently took a closer look at participation in six major welfare programs from 2009 to 2012:

Medicaid
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps
Housing assistance
Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), or cash benefits
General Assistance

The report doesn’t discuss other kinds of support that people might receive, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, free school lunches, the WIC program, Head Start, energy assistance programs, and Pell Grants. While it doesn’t capture the full spectrum of welfare in the U.S., the results still provide a clearer picture of who is receiving public assistance.

Much of what’s included in the report isn’t exactly surprising – while many recipients have jobs, those who are unemployed and who don’t have much education tend to be more likely to rely on benefits for a longer period of time, for example. Nonetheless, some of the data may surprise you. Here are nine facts about who receives welfare benefits in the U.S.


1. More than 20% of the U.S. population receives public assistance

In 2012, roughly one-fifth of the U.S. population, or 52.2 million people, received some kind of means-tested public assistance every month. About 15% of the population was receiving Medicaid and 13% were on food stamps. Just 1% were getting cash benefits through TANF or General Assistance.

In addition, most people probably aren’t receiving most of their income from government programs. A separate report from the Department of Health and Human Services found that in 2011, just 5.2% of the total U.S. population was receiving more than half of their total income in cash benefits, food stamps, or SSI.

2. Participation in welfare programs grew from 2009 to 2012

In 2009, 18.6% of the population was participating in at least one means-tested benefit program. That number was up to 21.3% in 2012. But the increase in welfare participation seems to be leveling off; there was no statistically significant rise in participation from 2011 to 2012.

3. The average monthly benefit was about $400

People received an average of $404 a month in food stamps, SSI benefits, TANF, or general assistance. Those who qualified for SSI (which primarily supports people who are disabled and can’t work) received the most on average — $698 per month. As of 2015, about 8.3 million Americans were receiving SSI.

4. Children benefit the most from public assistance programs

About 39% of children received welfare benefits during an average month in 2012. Roughly 17% of adults between 18 and 64 received benefits and 12.6% of people over age 65 did as well. Those under 18 also received larger average monthly benefits than adults between 18 and 64 ($447/month vs. $393/month).

5. Many people receive benefits for a year or longer

Forty-three percent of people had been receiving benefits for 37 to 48 months. Roughly 30% had been on welfare for a year or less.

Some programs had more long-term participants than others. Nearly half of people receiving housing benefits had been getting them for three years or longer. In contrast, cash assistance was a short-term form of help for most, with just 10% of people receiving benefits for three years or more.

6. Families led by single parents were more likely to receive benefits

Fifty-eight percent of families led by an unmarried mother and 37% headed by an unmarried father received benefits for at least one month during 2012. About 20% of families headed by a married couple received benefits for at least one during the same period.

7. Single mothers tend to receive less in benefits per month

Households headed by an unmarried woman received an average of $337 in monthly benefits, compared to $447 for households headed by single men and $420 a month for married couples.

However, families led by single moms tended to receive benefits for a longer period of time. Fifty-eight percent received benefits for three years or more, compared to 35.2% of single dad households and 34.8% of married couple households.

8. People who attend college are less likely to receive benefits

A little over 13% of people who had attended college for at least one year received welfare benefits at any point in 2012. In contrast, 45% of people who didn’t graduate from high school received benefits during the year. People who didn’t complete high school were also more likely to be long-term benefit recipients.

9. African Americans were more likely to receive public assistance than other groups

In 2012, an average of 41.6% of African Americans received means-tested benefits each month. About 18% of Asians or Pacific Islanders and 13% of whites received benefits each month. Thirty-six percent of Hispanics of any race received government assistance.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
I am not sure that SSI is any sort of welfare program.
What is your source for that definition?

I started having to pay in when I was 14 and riding a tractor for 90-cents an hour. The only times I missed were the 25 months and change I served in Vietnam.

And, not one thin dime was voluntary; they just extorted it with the threat of forcing my employers to terminate my employ.

just curious how a forty-four-plus loan to SSI that I am getting back interest free became welfare...

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

median white household wealth $111,146
median black household wealth $7,113
median hispanic household wealth $8,348

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

median white household wealth $111,146
median black household wealth $7,113
median hispanic household wealth $8,348

In addition toe what ISS said, using median income is extremely misleading. You should be looking at average income of those making under $250,000, or under $1,000,000, etc. to rule out the highest earner exceptions.

Median is not equal to mean or average. A median number means there are just as many samples above the median as below it. In fact, the average black income could be, and actually is, higher than $7,113 but the median wont tell us that. If you had 100 black people making $1,000,000 and 100 black people making $7,112 or less then the median income is $7,113 while the average income is close to $500,000! Those income values are just examples I made up but they do point out how meaningless median income is for this sort of comparison.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
Well it paints a better picture if you use median the way he does in that article, i.e. separate it out into six different percentile groups. That gives you six nice little clumps to compare. If you don't do that then averaging is a much more meaningful tool as long as you remove the top extreme as I explained. Better still would be to average the six percentile clumps that Reynolds used.

So, why did they use median? They did it because they know that the large number of super rich Whites compared to the smaller number of super rich Blacks and Hispanics will pull the median income value way up for the whites. And that is the picture they want to paint. Using the median in this way they can present a distorted statistic to advance their agenda.

Reynolds gets called out for his methods: http://www.cato-unbound.org/20...be-measured-assessed

I say again, these numbers are meaningless:
median white household wealth $111,146
median black household wealth $7,113
median hispanic household wealth $8,348

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
If you want to show poverty by race this is a good visualization.


Wealth is not equally distributed. Okay. So, what's your point and what should we do to change it? Or should we actively work to change it? Obviously, welfare and preferential opportunities haven't worked. Redistribution is just as ridiculous an idea as a welfare state. What do you propose?

quote:

Its seem pretty clear that a poorly designed welfare state induces household's to under save

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

Its seem pretty clear that a poorly designed welfare state induces household's to under save

If someone is on welfare, how in the hell do you expect them to save or increase the value of their "balance sheets"? No one who is legitimately on welfare is really getting enough to save anything, they are mostly just barely getting by. If they do save a few bucks it is only waiting for the next problem that constantly confronts them, car breakdowns, illness, etc. The only way someone in that group, regardless of color, is going to "save" any significant amount of money would be to vastly increase their monthly stipends, or, of course, to educate them somehow so they would remove themselves from the welfare recipient roles. Who would pay for that? I'm not going back and research it because I am not that invested in this discussion, but from memory, the largest group of welfare is white single mothers, that is by actual numbers, not percentages.

The sad and unspoken fact is that one of the reasons the chart above shows the blacks "leading" in poverty is that, as a group, for whatever reasons anyone would want to ascribe to it, they don't climb out of poverty like the other ethnics do. As a group, trillions of dollars have been transferred to blacks over the last 50 years and they are essentially in the same position they were 50 years ago.

OTOH, as a group, the Asians, mostly came to the US much poorer than the blacks, and, largely due to a family drive to make their children's lives better than their parents, they have succeeded as a group.

The Latinos tend to do the same think, however, the charts don't tell the whole story, because the total number of Latinos in poverty keeps rising as fast or faster than the ones who have been here a while, especially legitimately, climb out of poverty.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
You seem highly critical of the current system, and rightfully so, I might add BUT you have not outlined ANY way to improve it. If you don't have a new order, then you are just like a watchdog, barking in the night, but telling us nothing about what to do about the unknown.

quote:

Hell I would not be a NRA member if it was not required to shoot at my range.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

Hell I would not be a NRA member if it was not required to shoot at my range.

That's too bad. I REALLY don't agree with some of the NRA practices, but without them, you likely won't be going to the practice range with all your choices of weapons.

quote:

The road to Hell must be a long one.