Having raised 3, I can say kids are fucking expensive.
5 Likes
You know what would make my life as a poor person easier? KIDS! ā¦said no one ever.
4 Likes
Yes, your hypothetical parent qualifies for one or the other. Not necessarily both.
I clicked on your source and eventually got here https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/crc2015_March2017.pdf
It is interesting that the source starts with annual expenses, then estimates a 0-17 total. I looked at the age 0-2 for middle income families and eyeballed $12,500. Then multiplied by 1.27, since Iām assuming this is a one child household. Then eyeballed the percentage breakdowns for age 0-2, and multiplied to get expenses by category.
| Category | All | 0-2 | Annual$ | Monthly$ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Housing | 29% | 30% | 4,752 | 396 |
| Food | 18% | 12% | 1,901 | 158 |
| Childcare & Education | 16% | 21% | 3,326 | 277 |
| Transportation | 15% | 15% | 2,376 | 198 |
| Healthcare | 9% | 9% | 1,426 | 119 |
| Clothing | 6% | 6% | 950 | 79 |
| Other | 7% | 7% | 1,109 | 92 |
| Total | 100% | 100% | 15,840 | 1,320 |
If I were you, Iād separate these categories by type of govāt support. Housing, Food, Childcare, and Healthcare each has its own program. The question is whether those programs match, exceed, or fall short of the actual marginal expenses for this parent. For example, if we think the childās medical expenses are fully covered by Medicaid, then the parent breaks even in that category. The dollar amounts are irrelevant.
For Food, if the average family spends $158/mo on a 0-2 child, will SNAP/WIC match, exceed, or fall short of that?
Then there are three categories where there are no matching programs ā Transportation, Clothing, and Other. Average spending is $370/mo. So the question for them is whether the generic cash from the govāt (eg EITC, Child credit) matches, exceeds, or falls short of the $370/mo target.
For your example, because you are also assuming child support, you get to add that in as part of the generic cash.
I think with AFP, it wonāt be too hard to construct/imagine cases where there would be a profit.
I think this varies. For a newborn, WIC supplies more formula than is needed. But as the baby grows and consumes more, then it transitions from less excess to no excess to not enough. Of course parents will just save the extra formula from the early days. My ex-BFs sister indicated that for her kids the net was that she had to buy a little formula, but not too much on the kid that she didnāt breastfeed at all and it came out exactly right on the kid that she breastfed for 6 months.
And WIC supplies a lot of food that newborns canāt eat, like cheese and bread. So that is basically just free food for Mom.
Certainly if youāre layering WIC and SNAP then I think the outcome is more food than the kid will eat all the way from 0-5.
WIC gave us about 75% of the formula and baby food we needed after age six months (it was adequate before then, but not excessive).
And there were no real foods included for the child until he was one. Had I been poor, I would have gotten a meager grocery allowance myself or for other kids under five. But the infant gets formula, baby cereal, and baby food during the first year. And the brand when we got WIC was Gerber. The poop that formula produced was the foulest, most rancid thing Iāve ever smelled.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/wic-food-packages-maximum-monthly-allowances
Cheese is not provided unless youāve had a baby in the last year and are fully breastfeeding. Itās not provided to kids at all.
For the baby food? I think thatās what my exBFās sister got too. She got Similac for the formula, I think.
No, for formula. This was in 2017 and 2018. They had just moved to Gerber at the time. It may have changed since then.
Interesting. My SIL got some free Gerber formula and said that the first two days it was great and then my niece suddenly got gassy & weird poop and she decided not to finish it.
Itās state specific on approved brands, and this is Ohio Iām talking about.
Our kid had tummy troubles because of withdrawal, and the Gerber only made it worse. I donāt know what they put in the formula but itās probably a punishment for being poor. I would walk into his room in the middle of the night and my eyes would tear up if he needed a diaper change, it was that awful.
My 5th kid just graduated from college. My youngest is in high school. The end is in sight.
Kids are expensive. Iāve enjoyed raising them. Their friends and activities were awesome. Soccer, horses, volleyball, cross country, lacrosse, cheerleading, theater, boy scouts, girl scouts, and on and on
Iād much rather have those memories than a few more dollars in the bank. YMMV
1 Like
Oh no doubt. I wouldnāt trade it. 2 done with college, last one in HS. Iām just saying kids are pretty damn expensive and if twig is worried about someone gaming the system for a few extra bucks by having a kid, Iām guessing the expenses are likely to far out strip what in expected increase they and it will get recycled back into the economy pretty quick. Because folks living paycheck to paycheck tend to spend what funds they have. Funny that way.
Roger that. It might be a positive dollar flow from all of the programs and checks provided by the largesse of the government, but I doubt anybody is thinking about that at closing time when theyāre wearing the beer goggles.
And as most posters can attest, thereās also a lot more to raising kids than just the dollar cost. Thereās a serious commitment in time and energy (or there should be a serious commitment of time and energy), otherwise please double wrap that willy. A slightly positive cash flow doesnāt get rid of that commitment (unless youāve got a live-in nanny, cook, tutor and maid).
3 Likes