South Carolina Young Adults Count
A comprehensive report on the lives of South Carolinians ages 18 to 29
A comprehensive report on the lives of South Carolinians ages 18 to 29
Low earnings and incomes create powerful challenges for families. Single-parent families with children often face extremely stressful financial circumstances. Married families have generally sought to achieve middle class lifestyles by having both parents work, often for long hours. Most young adults must make difficult family budget choices regarding housing, childcare, transportation, food, healthcare, and other necessities. Many families are not self-sufficient but depend on parents and relatives, friends, or public and private assistance to obtain the necessities of daily life.
The 1990 Census found that young families in S.C. headed by persons under age 25 had very modest incomes, averaging $20,176, which was twice the poverty level for a family of three. The mean household income of 25-34 year olds was $10,500 higher than the income of 15-24 year olds, or about three times the poverty level. For families headed by persons under age 35, married families had roughly triple the income of female-headed single-parent families. Thus, the problems of poverty were concentrated in single, female headed families and young families headed by persons under age 25.
1989 Mean Household Income in S.C.
| Age of Head of Household | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15-24 | 25-34 | 35-44 | 45-59 | |
| Family Household - All | $20,176 | $30,667 | $40,395 | $45,615 |
| Married Couple | $24,155 | $35,722 | $46,480 | $50,494 |
| Male-headed Single Parent | $22,107 | $23,404 | $28,098 | $33,582 | Female-headed Single Parent | $8,731 | $12,335 | $18,248 | $23,015 |
Source: 1990 U.S. Census Tape STF4 Table PB67, PB68, Tape STF4, Table PB96, 97.
Poverty in young adult families under age 25 increased significantly during the 1980s, from 19% to 26%. The heaviest burden fell on African-American young adult families, among whom poverty increased from 39% to 55%. In 1999, the poverty level for a family of three was $13,880 plus $2,820 for each additional family member.
S.C. Families in Poverty (Families with Head of Household under 25)
Source: 1970-1990 U.S. Censuses.
Poverty has always been severe among single-parent families headed by women under the age of 25. Three out of five of these families were poor in both 1970 and 1980. By 1990, the poverty rate among families headed by single female-parents under age 25 declined from 60% to 54%. White single-parent families headed by women experienced more than a one-third decline in poverty from 47% in 1980 to 30% in 1990. The poverty rate among African-American single-parent families headed by young women under age 25 actually increased from 67% to 72%.
S.C. Families in Poverty (Families with Female Head of Household under 25)
Source: 1970-1990 U.S. Censuses.
Since unmarried women are the heads of 56% of young African-American and 13% of young White families with household heads under age 25, what happened to their men? The answer is provided in part by the disastrous employment and earnings experience in S.C. of so many African-American males, among whom one-third of 20-24 year olds, one-quarter of 25-29 year olds, and one-fifth of 30-44 year olds were not employed in 1990. The result was that 72% of the youngest female-headed minority families were poor and usually in need of financial assistance. Thirty percent of White families headed by women under age 25 were poor.
Persons most seriously deficient in education, work skills, job contacts, and interpersonal relations are more likely to need financial assistance from relatives and friends, government, or charitable sources. Young adults with low education and limited job contacts are likely to seek financial assistance, especially single mothers with children. Some get all or most of their help from parents and other relatives; others depend heavily on public assistance.
Public support programs available to low income families include the USDA Food Stamp program, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) which formerly was Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). The average monthly grant for a family of three headed by a young adult in 1998 was $230 for Food Stamps and $146 for TANF. In June 1999, among young adults ages 18-29, 7% received Food Stamps, 20% received Medicaid and 1% received TANF. Also, 25% of young adult mothers with children ages 0-5 received WIC, the Supplemental Nutrition Allowance for Women, Infants, and Children: 18% of White mothers and 41% of African-American and Other mothers.
Young Adults Receiving TANF, Food Stamps, and Medicaid
(Number and % of 18-29 age/race/sex groups on June 1, 1999)
| Type of Assistance | Total (Includes Other) |
White Male | White Female | African American Male | African American Female | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | |
| Food Stamps | 44,085 | 6.6% | 2,641 | 1.2% | 8,464 | 4.0% | 4,987 | 4.7% | 26,470 | 22.8% |
| TANF | 5,587 | 0.8% | 112 | 0.1% | 1,084 | 0.5% | 333 | 0.0% | 3,836 | 3.3% |
| Medicaid | 133,020 | 20.1% | 19,204 | 8.8% | 46,202 | 21.6% | 10,905 | 10.4% | 52,654 | 45.3% |
Source: S.C. Department of Social Services.
Young Adults Receiving TANF
| Age Group | Total (Includes Other) | White Male | White Female | African American Male | African American Female | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | |
| 18-24 | 3,581 | 0.9% | 64 | 0.1% | 613 | 0.5% | 289 | 0.4% | 2,459 | 3.5% |
| 25-29 | 2,006 | 0.7% | 48 | 0.1% | 471 | 0.5% | 44 | 0.1% | 1,377 | 3.0% |
| 30-34 | 1,670 | 0.6% | 67 | 0.1% | 467 | 0.5% | 41 | 0.1% | 1,039 | 2.3% |
Source: S.C. Department of Social Services: Family Independence for June 1, 1999.
Young Adults Receiving Food Stamps
| Age Group | Total (Includes Other) | White Male | White Female | Afr. Amer. Male | Afr. Amer. Female | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | |
| 18-24 | 24,980 | 6.5% | 1,279 | 1.0% | 4,197 | 3.6% | 3,652 | 5.6% | 14,910 | 21.4% |
| 25-29 | 19,105 | 6.8% | 1,362 | 1.4% | 4,267 | 4.5% | 1,335 | 3.3% | 11,560 | 24.9% |
| 30-34> | 18,583 | 6.6% | 1,527 | 1.6% | 3,979 | 4.1% | 1,689 | 4.4% | 10,905 | 23.7% |
Source: S.C. Department of Social Services; data shown for June 1, 1999.
Since both males and females are typically eligible for Food Stamps with incomes far above those for TANF, the numbers of persons dependent on this form of public assistance are much higher than for TANF.
Child support payments are extremely important to single mothers with children, 51% of whom are young adults. In FY99 there were 18,990 families receiving TANF, but only 22% had child support orders. The average monthly child support payment, including tax refund intercepts, was $183. In addition, during FY99 an estimated 47,055 parents in non-TANF families were supposed to receive a monthly average of $216. No information is available on the amount actually paid. The conclusion is obvious that if more non-custodial parents paid adequate child support, then fewer custodial parents would have incomes near and below poverty or would require public assistance.
The financial demands of family life usually require parents to work. Often one parent works more than a full-time job, or both parents are employed full-time. Acquiring adequate income to support their families competes with the time young adult parents can spend with their children. Among single-parent young adult families with children in South Carolina during 1990, 78% were in the labor force and 54% worked full-time. Among two-parent young adult families with children during 1990, in 66% of families both parents were in the labor force and in 42% both worked full-time. Among young adult families with preschool children under age 6, 73% of single-parents were in the labor force and 49% worked full-time, while for married families with preschool children, in 64% both parents were in the labor force and in 39% both worked full-time. During 1990, 73% of all mothers with children were in the labor force: 67% of those with children under 6 and 75% of those whose children were school aged.
Many working families experience difficulties obtaining affordable childcare of acceptable quality. Although in 1989 there were 57,510 poor preschool children ages 0-4 and 125,486 preschool children in families with incomes below twice the poverty level, there are currently only 10,273 Head Start slots, 19,911 subsidized childcare slots, and 16,628 four-year old early education students in the state.
According to the 1993 National Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), in the U.S. the poor rely more on relatives and on the mother at work, while the non-poor rely somewhat more on organized facilities and family daycare. Younger mothers are more dependent on care by grandparents, while older mothers use organized childcare facilities extensively. Parents with younger children receiving care are more likely to rely on family and relatives to care for them: 56% of those in care under age one, 54% of those age one, 49% of 2 and 3 year olds, and 40% of 4 year olds. Daycare at the houses of non-relatives also decreases with the age of the child. As children grow older, the percentage in organized childcare facilities increases: 18% of children under age one, 24% of one year olds, 28% of 2 year olds, 32% of 3 year olds, and 46% of 4 year olds served are in childcare facilities.
The type of childcare is influenced by whether the mother works full-time or part-time. Among mothers of preschoolers, those working part-time rely more on care at home by the father and grandparents or care for the child themselves at work, while mothers working full-time rely more on organized childcare facilities and care away from home by grandparents, other relatives, non-relatives and family daycare.
At the heart of the problem is affordability. The poor spend roughly two-thirds the amount per week on childcare as do those who are not poor, and about half per week as much as wealthy families with four times the family income. The youngest families with mothers ages 15-24 and 25-34 spend two-thirds and five-sixths as much per week respectively as families whose mothers are 35 or older. Despite the lower cost care obtained by young and poor families, this care takes a much more significant share of their income:
% of Family Income Spent on Childcare in U.S.
| 15-24 | 10.2% |
|---|---|
| 25-34 | 7.7% |
| 35 and Older | 6.7% |
| Poor | 17.7% |
| Non-Poor | 7.3% |
Source: Casper, 1996.
Childcare use in the South is somewhat different from the rest of the nation. Southerners use organized childcare facilities much more extensively, apparently because single-parent families often have no father to provide care. Comparing the South Atlantic states with the Middle Atlantic, the South Atlantic states have only 14% of preschool children in the care of their fathers, compared with 24% for the Middle Atlantic states. However, 42% of preschoolers in the South Atlantic states who get care are in organized facilities, as compared with only 24% in the Middle Atlantic states.
Types of Child Care Used in U.S.
| Region | Care by Relatives | Care by Others | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mother | Other Relatives | Grandparents | Father | Total | Organized Facilities | Family Daycare | Babysitter | Total | |
| South Atlantic | 5 | 6 | 17 | 14 | 42 | 42 | 12 | 4 | 58 |
| Middle Atlantic | 4 | 9 | 18 | 24 | 55 | 24 | 13 | 7 | 45 |
Source: Casper, 1996.
While it is important to know how much income young adults have, it is also crucial to understand where their limited resources are spent and how income limitations impact young adults’ choices concerning continuing their education, marrying, living in desirable homes and neighborhoods, and raising their children. In 1993, the Bureau of Labor Statistics compiled the following data concerning the spending habits of householders in the United States (see also Appendix A).
The youngest householders, under age 25, in most cases are paying the same percentage of their income towards specific types of living expenses as other adults do, except that education consumes 5% of their income and transportation takes an extra 5% of the income of mobile young adults who must have "wheels." The major areas of cost for householders under the age of 25, constituting two-thirds of household expenditures, are housing at 30%, transportation at 23%, and food at 15%. For households headed by young adults ages 25-34, housing accounts for 34%, transportation 18%, and food 15%. When apparel and services, insurance, pensions, and entertainment are added, the total comprises over 90% of young adults’ expenditures. Since entertainment accounts for only 5%, almost all the money spent in these young households goes toward basic needs, rather than fun.
% of Total Expenditures for Householders 25 to 34
*Other includes 1% each for alcohol, smoking, education, reading, and personal care products and supplies, and 2% each for cash contributions and miscellaneous.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Because young adults have much lower incomes, the actual dollar amounts being spent tend to be low. Compared with 25-34 year olds, young adults under age 25 annually spend $11,000 less per year: $1,539 less on food, $4,386 less on housing, $1,151 less on transportation, and $611 less on entertainment. However, the youngest adults spend $637 more for education than 25 to 34 year-olds do. It is not surprising that this youngest group of adults is also the least likely to contribute to charities or to their personal pensions.
Fortunately, young adults completing their college education enter the workforce, build job skills, and move up the financial scale as their wages increase. But the "economically stressed" young adults continue to struggle with low incomes, which seriously limit their life choices. The poorest fifth of all households spend an additional 5% of their income on housing and 2-3% more on food than other families; however, they economize through lower percentages of spending on entertainment, transportation, insurance, and pension investments. Their dollar expenditures overall are half the median expenditure of all households.
The financial difficulties of the poorest young adults are substantial. The poorest fifth of families spend much more than their earned or public assistance incomes. These poor families balance their budgets by working "off-the-books," engaging in illegal activities, and receiving significant support from relatives, friends, romantic partners, and the absent fathers of their children (see Appendix B).
< Back to Family.
> Section 5: Education