In 2023, **** percent of Black people living in the United States were living below the poverty line, compared to *** percent of white people. That year, the total poverty rate in the U.S. across all races and ethnicities was **** percent. Poverty in the United States Single people in the United States making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year and families of four making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year are considered to be below the poverty line. Women and children are more likely to suffer from poverty, due to women staying home more often than men to take care of children, and women suffering from the gender wage gap. Not only are women and children more likely to be affected, racial minorities are as well due to the discrimination they face. Poverty data Despite being one of the wealthiest nations in the world, the United States had the third highest poverty rate out of all OECD countries in 2019. However, the United States' poverty rate has been fluctuating since 1990, but has been decreasing since 2014. The average median household income in the U.S. has remained somewhat consistent since 1990, but has recently increased since 2014 until a slight decrease in 2020, potentially due to the pandemic. The state that had the highest number of people living below the poverty line in 2020 was California.

Graph and download economic data for Income Before Taxes: Public Assistance, Supplemental Security Income, SNAP by Race: White and All Other Races, Not Including Black or African American (CXUWELFARELB0903M) from 2003 to 2023 about supplements, assistance, social assistance, public, SNAP, food stamps, tax, white, food, income, and USA.

Welfare policy in the American states has been shaped profoundly by race, ethnicity, and representation. Does gender matter as well? Focusing on state welfare reform in the mid-1990s, we test hypotheses derived from two alternative approaches to incorporating gender into the study of representation and welfare policymaking. An additive approach, which assumes gender and race/ethnicity are distinct and independent, suggests that female state legislators--regardless of race/ethnicity--will mitigate the more restrictive and punitive aspects of welfare reform, much like their African American and Latino counterparts do. In contrast, an intersectional approach, which highlights the overlapping and interdependent nature of gender and race/ethnicity, suggests that legislative women of color will have the strongest countervailing effect of state welfare reform--stronger than that of other women or men of color. Our empirical analyses suggest an intersectional approach yields a more accurate understanding of gender, race/ethnicity, and welfare politics in the states.

In 2023, 15.4 percent of Black families were living below the poverty line in the United States. Poverty is the state of one who lacks a certain amount of material possessions or money. Absolute poverty or destitution is inability to afford basic human needs, which commonly includes clean and fresh water, nutrition, health care, education, clothing, and shelter.

In the 3 years to March 2021, white British families were the most likely to receive a type of state support.

In 1990, 48.1 percent of all Black families with a single mother in the United States lived below the poverty level. In 2023, that figure had decreased to 25.9 percent. This is significantly higher than white households with a single mother. Poverty is the state of one who lacks a certain amount of material possessions or money. Absolute poverty or destitution is inability to afford basic human needs, which commonly includes clean and fresh water, nutrition, health care, education, clothing and shelter.

This data collection contains information gathered in the Survey of Income and Education (SIE) conducted in April-July 1976 by the Census Bureau for the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW). Although national estimates of the number of children in poverty were available each year from the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS), those estimates were not statistically reliable on a state-by-state basis. In enacting the Educational Amendments of 1974, Congress mandated that HEW conduct a survey to obtain reliable state-by-state data on the numbers of school-age children in local areas with family incomes below the federal poverty level. This was the statistic that determined the amount of grant a local educational agency was entitled to under Title 1, Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. (Such funds were distributed by HEW's Office of Education.) The SIE was the survey created to fulfill that mandate. Its questions include those used in the Current Population Survey regarding current employment, past work experience, and income. Additional questions covering school enrollment, disability, health insurance, bilingualism, food stamp recipiency, assets, and housing costs enabled the study of the poverty concept and of program effectiveness in reaching target groups. Basic household information also was recorded, including tenure of unit (a determination of whether the occupants of the living quarters owned, rented, or occupied the unit without rent), type of unit, household language, and for each member of the household: age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital history, and education.

In 2023 the poverty rate in the United States was highest among people between 18 and 24, with a rate of 16 percent for male Americans and a rate of 21 percent for female Americans. The lowest poverty rate for both men and women was for those aged between 45 and 54. What is the poverty line? The poverty line is a metric used by the U.S. Census Bureau to define poverty in the United States. It is a specific income level that is considered to be the bare minimum a person or family needs to meet their basic needs. If a family’s annual pre-tax income is below this income level, then they are considered impoverished. The poverty guideline for a family of four in 2021 was 26,500 U.S. dollars. Living below the poverty line According to the most recent data, almost one-fifth of African Americans in the United States live below the poverty line; the most out of any ethnic group. Additionally, over 7.42 million families in the U.S. live in poverty – a figure that has held mostly steady since 1990, outside the 2008 financial crisis which threw 9.52 million families into poverty by 2012. The poverty gender gap Wage inequality has been an ongoing discussion in U.S. discourse for many years now. The poverty gap for women is most pronounced during their child-bearing years, shrinks, and then grows again in old age. While progress has been made on the gender pay gap over the last 30 years, there are still significant disparities, even in occupations that predominantly employ men. Additionally, women are often having to spend more time attending to child and household duties than men.

The survey is from the American Mosaic Project, a multiyear, multimethod study of the bases of solidarity and diversity in American life. The survey contains items measuring the place of diversity in visions of American society and in respondents' own lives; social and cultural boundaries between groups and dimensions of inclusion and exclusion; racial and religious identity, belonging and discrimination; opinions about sources of advancement for Whites and African Americans; opinions about immigration and assimilation; diversity in respondents' close-tie network; political identity and demographic information. The survey also includes oversamples of African American and Hispanic respondents, allowing for comparisons across racial/ethnic categories. Demographic variables include race, age, gender, religion, level of education, United States citizenship status, partisan affiliation, and family income. See Appendix: Project Narrative for more information.

This poll, fielded October 23-27, 1996, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of President Bill Clinton and his handling of the presidency and issues such as foreign policy. Several questions asked how much respondents had been paying attention to the presidential campaign, whether they were likely to vote in the election for president, which candidate they would vote for if the presidential and United States House of Representatives elections were being held that day, whether they had favorable opinions of the candidates and trusted them, and who they expected to win. Respondents were asked to rate the condition of the national economy, whether they thought trade with other countries, such as Mexico and Canada, was good for the United States economy, whether they approved of the way Bill Clinton was handling relations with Cuba, Mexico, and Canada, and the importance of these countries to the United States' interests. Several questions asked for respondents' opinions on welfare, including whether most people on welfare were immigrants or belonged to a specific ethnic group, whether respondents approved of a recent law that changed the welfare system, and whether eligibility for welfare should be limited. A series of questions asked respondents whether trade restrictions were necessary, whether they favored the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), whether it should be expanded to other Latin American countries, and how many foreign products respondents had purchased in the past few years. Respondents were asked for their opinions on immigration to the United States, including the effects of immigration on society, whether immigrants should be eligible for entitlements programs and other benefits, and the country of origin of current legal and illegal immigrants. Information was also collected on whether respondents considered themselves part of the conservative Christian movement, and Hispanic respondents were asked about their country of birth and that of their ancestors. Additional topics included abortion, affirmative action, race and gender discrimination in job hiring practices, the trade embargo against Cuba, and whether the government should be more involved in people's lives and do more to solve national problems. Demographic variables include sex, race, age, household income, education level, political party affiliation, political philosophy, voter participation history and registration status, employment status, military service, whether respondents had any children under the age of 18, household union membership, length of time living at current residence, and type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural).

Number of children under age 21 in foster care as of July 1 of each year, by race/ethnicity. This is a point-in-time, unduplicated count of children under the supervision of county welfare departments and excludes cases under the supervision of county probation departments, out-of-state agencies, state adoptions district offices, and Indian child welfare departments. The total by race/ethnicity may not add up to total number of children in foster care due to missing values. U.S. totals reflect children in foster care as of Sept. 30 each year. N/A means that data are not available. Data Source: As cited on kidsdata.org, Needell, B., et al. (May 2014). Child Welfare Services Reports forCalifornia, U.C. Berkeley Center for Social Services Research; U.S. data come from Child Trends analysis of Adoption and Foster CareAnalysis and Reporting System data available through the National DataArchive on Child Abuse & Neglect, as cited on KIDS COUNT (May 2014). Retrieved on May 31, 2015.

The National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW) is a nationally representative, longitudinal survey of children and families who have been the subjects of investigation by Child Protective Services. There are currently two cohorts of available data (NSCAW I and NSCAW II) drawn from first-hand reports from children, parents, and other caregivers, as well as reports from caseworkers, teachers, and data from administrative records. NSCAW examines child and family well-being outcomes in detail and seeks to relate those outcomes to experience with the child welfare system and to family characteristics, community environment, and other factors. Units of Response: Children and Families in the Child Welfare System Type of Data: Survey Tribal Data: Unavailable Periodicity: Irregular Demographic Indicators: Disability;Ethnicity;Geographic Areas;Household Income;Household Size;Race SORN: Not Applicable Data Use Agreement: https://www.ndacan.acf.hhs.gov/datasets/order_forms/termsofuseagreement.pdf Data Use Agreement Location: https://www.ndacan.acf.hhs.gov/datasets/pdfs_user_guides/IntroNSCAWWave1.pdf Granularity: Individual Spatial: United States Geocoding: Unavailable

The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program was a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. This Restricted Access Dataset (RAD) includes data from the 3,273 adults interviewed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and is comprised of variables analyzed for the article "Neighborhood Effects on the Long-Term Well-Being of Low-Income Adults" that was published in the journal Science on September 21, 2012. The article focused on subjective well-being, physical and mental health, social networks, neighborhoods, housing, and economic self-sufficiency. Families were tracked from the baseline survey (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families from five United States cities. Households were randomly assigned to one of three groups: The low-poverty voucher (LPV) group (also called the experimental group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location.The traditional voucher (TRV) group (also called the Section 8 group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling.The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled.The dataset contains all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the Science article, as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis. Demographic information includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, employment status, and education level.

This survey of minority groups was part of a larger project to investigate the patterns, predictors, and consequences of midlife development in the areas of physical health, psychological well-being, and social responsibility. Conducted in Chicago and New York City, the survey was designed to assess the well-being of middle-aged, urban, ethnic minority adults living in both hyper-segregated neighborhoods and in areas with lower concentrations of minorities. Respondents' views were sought on issues relevant to quality of life, including health, childhood and family background, religion, race and ethnicity, personal beliefs, work experiences, marital and close relationships, financial situation, children, community involvement, and neighborhood characteristics. Questions on health explored the respondents' physical and emotional well-being, past and future attitudes toward health, physical limitations, energy level and appetite, amount of time spent worrying about health, and physical reactions to those worries. Questions about childhood and family background elicited information on family structure, the role of the parents with regard to child rearing, parental education, employment status, and supervisory responsibilities at work, the family financial situation including experiences with the welfare system, relationships with siblings, and whether as a child the respondent slept in the same bed as a parent or adult relative. Questions on religion covered religious preference, whether it is good to explore different religious teachings, and the role of religion in daily decision-making. Questions about race and ethnicity investigated respondents' backgrounds and experiences as minorities, including whether respondents preferred to be with people of the same racial group, how important they thought it was to marry within one's racial or ethnic group, citizenship, reasons for moving to the United States and the challenges faced since their arrival, their native language, how they would rate the work ethic of certain ethnic groups, their views on race relations, and their experiences with discrimination. Questions on personal beliefs probed for respondents' satisfaction with life and confidence in their opinions. Respondents were asked whether they had control over changing their life or their personality, and what age they viewed as the ideal age. They also rated people in their late 20s in the areas of physical health, contribution to the welfare and well-being of others, marriage and close relationships, relationships with their children, work situation, and financial situation. Questions on work experiences covered respondents' employment status, employment history, future employment goals, number of hours worked weekly, number of nights away from home due to work, exposure to the risk of accident or injury, relationships with coworkers and supervisors, work-related stress, and experience with discrimination in the workplace. A series of questions was posed on marriage and close relationships, including marital status, quality and length of relationships, whether the respondent had control over his or her relationships, and spouse/partner's education, physical and mental health, employment status, and work schedule. Questions on finance explored respondents' financial situation, financial planning, household income, retirement plans, insurance coverage, and whether the household had enough money. Questions on children included the number of children in the household, quality of respondents' relationships with their children, prospects for their children's future, child care coverage, and whether respondents had changed their work schedules to accommodate a child's illness. Additional topics focused on children's identification with their culture, their relationships with friends of different backgrounds, and their experiences with racism. Community involvement was another area of investigation, with items on respondents' role in child-rearing, participation on a jury, voting behavior, involvement in charitable organizations, volunteer experiences, whether they made monetary or clothing donations, and experiences living in an institutional setting or being homeless. Respondents were also queried about their neighborhoods, with items on neighborhood problems including racism, vandalism, crime, drugs, poor schools, teenag

Work and situation in life of the American population.

Topics: Current employment; time worked each week; hourly wage; frequency of unemployment; attitude to women working, government responsibility for older people and amount of unemployment benefit; possibility of individual planning for the future; expectations of educational opportunities of the children; occupational mobility; achievement motivation; education difference between the spouses; family size; attitudes to the extended family; regional mobility; savings account; assessment of condition of health; party preference.

Demography: party preference; age (classified); race; marital status; religious denomination; religiousness; school education; occupation; professional position; employment; head of household; economic area; housing situation; party inclination; party identification; city size; membership.

Some argue that support for the social safety net in the United States is influenced by beliefs about the beneficiaries’ race. Information treatments have the potential to change these beliefs, but for them to be policy relevant, their effects must last beyond the intervention. Our findings from two parallel experiments that exploit the different racialized histories of welfare and unemployment insurance indicate that racial beliefs do predict stated support for the racially stigmatized welfare program but not for the less stigmatized unemployment program. We also find these beliefs are stable if uncorrected and that they can be persistently corrected.

THE POLL

As part of Cards Against Humanity Saves America, this poll is funded for one year of monthly public opinion polls. Cards Against Humanity is asking the American people about their social and political views, what they think of the president, and their pee-pee habits.

To conduct their polls in a scientifically rigorous manner, they partnered with Survey Sampling International — a professional research firm — to contact a nationally representative sample of the American public. For the first three polls, they interrupted people’s dinners on both their cell phones and landlines, and a total of about 3,000 adults didn’t hang up immediately. They examined the data for statistically significant correlations which can be found here: [https://thepulseofthenation.com/][1]

Content

• Polls are released each month (they are still polling so this will be updated each month)
  
• Row one is the header and contains the questions
  
• Each row is one respondent's answers
  

Questions in the Sep 2017 poll:

• Income
• Gender
• Age
• Age Range
• Political Affiliation
• Do you approve or disapprove of how Donald Trump is handling his job as president?
• What is your highest level of education?
• What is your race?
• What is your marital status?
• What would you say is the likelihood that your current job will be entirely performed by robots or computers within the next decade?
• Do you believe that climate change is real and caused by people, real but not caused by people, or not real at all?"
• How many Transformers movies have you seen?
• Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: scientists are generally honest and are serving the public good.
• Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: vaccines are safe and protect children from disease.
• "How many books, if any have you read in the past year?"
• Do you believe in ghosts?
• What percentage of the federal budget would you estimate is spent on scientific research?
• "Is federal funding of scientific research too high too low or about right?"
• True or false: the earth is always farther away from the sun in the winter than in the summer.
• "If you had to choose: would you rather be smart and sad or dumb and happy?"
• Do you think it is acceptable or unacceptable to urinate in the shower?

Questions from Oct 2017 poll

• Income
• Gender
• Age
• Age Range
• Political Affiliation
• Do you approve or disapprove of how Donald Trump is handling his job as president?
• What is your highest level of education?
• What is your race?
• From what you have heard or seen do you mostly agree or mostly disagree with the beliefs of White Nationalists?
• If you had to guess what percentage of Republicans would say that they mostly agree with the beliefs of White Nationalists?
• Would you say that you love America?
• If you had to guess, what percentage of Democrats would say that they love America?
• Do you think that government policies should help those who are poor and struggling in America?
• If you had to guess, what percentage of Republicans would say yes to that question?
• Do you think that most white people in America are racist?
• If you had to guess, what percentage of Democrats would say yes to that question?
• Have you lost any friendships or other relationships as a result of the 2016 presidential election?
• Do you think it is likely or unlikely that there will be a Civil War in the United States within the next decade?
• Have you ever gone hunting?
• Have you ever eaten a kale salad?
• If Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson ran for president as a candidate for your political party, would you vote for him?
• Who would you prefer as president of the United States, Darth Vader or Donald Trump?

Questions from Nov 2017 poll

• Income
• Gender
• Age
• Age Range
• In politics today, do you consider yourself a Democrat, a Republican or Independent?
• Would you say you are liberal, conservative, or moderate?
• What is your highest level of education? (High school or less, Some college, College degree, Graduate degree)
• What is your race? (white, black, latino, asian, other)
• Do you live in a city, suburb, or small town?
• Do you approve, disapprove, or neither approve nor disapprove of how Donald Trump is handling his job as president?
• Do you think federal funding for welfare programs in America should be increased, decreased, or kept the same?
• Do you think poor black people are more likely to benefit from welfare programs than poor white people?
• Do you think poor people in cities are more likely to benefit from welfare programs than poor people in small towns?
• If you had to choose, would you rather live in a more equal society or a more unequal society?

Acknowledgements

These polls are from Cards Against Humanity Saves America and the raw data can be found here: [https://thepulse...

This project sought to investigate a possible relationship between sentencing guidelines and family structure in the United States. The research team developed three research modules that employed a variety of data sources and approaches to understand family destabilization and community distress, which cannot be observed directly. These three research modules were used to discover causal relationships between male withdrawal from productive spheres of the economy and resulting changes in the community and families. The research modules approached the issue of sentencing guidelines and family structure by studying: (1) the flow of inmates into prison (Module A), (2) the role of and issues related to sentencing reform (Module B), and family disruption in a single state (Module C). Module A utilized the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program data for 1984 and 1993 (Parts 1 and 2), the 1984 and 1993 National Correctional Reporting Program (NCRP) data (Parts 3-6), the Urban Institute's 1980 and 1990 Underclass Database (UDB) (Part 7), the 1985 and 1994 National Longitudinal Survey on Youth (NLSY) (Parts 8 and 9), and county population, social, and economic data from the Current Population Survey, County Business Patterns, and United States Vital Statistics (Parts 10-12). The focus of this module was the relationship between family instability, as measured by female-headed families, and three societal characteristics, namely underclass measures in county of residence, individual characteristics, and flows of inmates. Module B examined the effects of statewide incarceration and sentencing changes on marriage markets and family structure. Module B utilized data from the Current Population Survey for 1985 and 1994 (Part 12) and the United States Statistical Abstracts (Part 13), as well as state-level data (Parts 14 and 15) to measure the Darity-Myers sex ratio and expected welfare income. The relationship between these two factors and family structure, sentencing guidelines, and minimum sentences for drug-related crimes was then measured. Module C used data collected from inmates entering the Minnesota prison system in 1997 and 1998 (Part 16), information from the 1990 Census (Part 17), and the Minnesota Crime Survey (Part 18) to assess any connections between incarceration and family structure. Module C focused on a single state with sentencing guidelines with the goal of understanding how sentencing reforms and the impacts of the local community factors affect inmate family structure. The researchers wanted to know if the aspects of locations that lose marriageable males to prison were more important than individual inmate characteristics with respect to the probability that someone will be imprisoned and leave behind dependent children. Variables in Parts 1 and 2 document arrests by race for arson, assault, auto theft, burglary, drugs, homicide, larceny, manslaughter, rape, robbery, sexual assault, and weapons. Variables in Parts 3 and 4 document prison admissions, while variables in Parts 5 and 6 document prison releases. Variables in Part 7 include the number of households on public assistance, education and income levels of residents by race, labor force participation by race, unemployment by race, percentage of population of different races, poverty rate by race, men in the military by race, and marriage pool by race. Variables in Parts 8 and 9 include age, county, education, employment status, family income, marital status, race, residence type, sex, and state. Part 10 provides county population data. Part 11 contains two different state identifiers. Variables in Part 12 describe mortality data and welfare data. Part 13 contains data from the United States Statistical Abstracts, including welfare and poverty variables. Variables in Parts 14 and 15 include number of children, age, education, family type, gender, head of household, marital status, race, religion, and state. Variables in Part 16 cover admission date, admission type, age, county, education, language, length of sentence, marital status, military status, sentence, sex, state, and ZIP code. Part 17 contains demographic data by Minnesota ZIP code, such as age categories, race, divorces, number of children, home ownership, and unemployment. Part 18 includes Minnesota crime data as well as some demographic variables, such as race, education, and poverty ratio.

In 2021, there were 168,063 white children in foster care in the United States. This is compared to 86,645 Black or African American children and 85,215 Hispanic children who were in foster care.

Foster care in the United States

Foster care is where minors are taken care of in different institutions, such as a group home or private home of a caregiver certified by the state (called a foster parent). The procedure for becoming a foster parent in the United States varies from state to state. It is up to the state to determine the process; however it is overseen by the Department of Child Protective Services. It is sometimes seen as a precursor to adoption, which is different from fostering a child. There are many barriers to fostering and adopting children, such as high costs and long wait times, which can discourage people from doing it.

Who are foster children?

The number of children in foster care in the United States has decreased slightly since 2011. When looked at by age, most of the children in foster care in 2020 were one year old, and slightly more male children were in foster care than female children. Most of the children in foster care were placed into non-relative foster family homes, and in most cases, the primary goal of foster care is to reunify children with their parents or primary caregivers.

This dataset includes the race of applicants for Insurance Affordability Programs (IAPs) who reported their race as American Indian and/or Alaska Native, Asian Indian, Black or African American, Chinese, Cambodian, Filipino, Guamanian or Chamorro, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Mixed Race, Native Hawaiian, Other, Other Asian, Other Pacific Islander, Samoan, Vietnamese, or White by reporting period. The race data is from the California Healthcare Eligibility, Enrollment and Retention System (CalHEERS) and includes data from applications submitted directly to CalHEERS, to Covered California, and to County Human Services Agencies through the Statewide Automated Welfare System (SAWS) eHIT interface. Please note the reporting category Other Asian option on the CalHEERS application was removed in September 2017. This dataset is part of public reporting requirements set forth by the California Welfare and Institutions Code 14102.5.