I have the queasy feeling that this particular e-mail violates the injunctions against stupidity and prolixity, and for that I'm terribly sorry, but here it is:
My posting concerns the composition of the workforce earning between $5.15 and $7.15 an hour. According to researchers with the "nonpartisan" Employment Policy Foundation, very few low-wage workers are single adults with one or more children to support. This seems dubious to me, but this is what they insist:
"Living wage activists ignore the diversity of circumstances, needs and preferences of low wage earners. Only one-in-fourteen (7 percent) of individuals who earn between $5.15 and $7.15 are single parents. More than half (50.7 percent are unmarried and never been a parent. Nearly one-third (28.5 percent) are high school or college students.
Employees who earn between $5.15 and $7.15 an hour are overwhelmingly young and most do not live in poor households. One half of individuals who earn $286 or less a week ($7.15 for 40 hours of work) live in households with annual incomes over $42,671. Only one-in-four (27.2 percent) live in households that earn less than $25,000. Only 22.6 percent are the head of a household with at least one other relative present. Four in 10 (42.4 percent) are children or other relatives of a head of household. Contrary to what living wage proponents say, low wage workers are generally not a household's sole supporter."
The EPF's data was taken from the "March 2001 outgoing rotation subset of the Current Population Survey". Is this a valid standard of measurement? So, out of twelve million low-wage workers, only 840,000 or so are single parents? That still adds up to millions of children dependent on this meager income, but it still doesn't sound right, and any assistance at all would be very warmly appreciated.