Translate this page

SANDAG says 29.7 percent living below poverty level


Thursday, January 30th, 2014
Issue 05, Volume 18.
Debbie Ramsey
Managing Editor


The number of individuals living below the federal poverty level in Fallbrook amount to 29.7 percent of the population, according to a recently released San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) report. In terms of families, that percentage is reportedly 28.5 percent.

In Bonsall, the percentage of individuals in that economic category is reportedly 14.4 percent or 26.6 percent of families.

The report, "Poverty in the San Diego Region," released in December 2013, says the overall county average shows 13 percent of individuals are living below the poverty level.

In reporting on the individuals throughout the county as a whole, 54 percent are female and 46 percent male.

An examination of this group’s ethnic makeup revealed the following:

• White/Caucasian - 32 percent

• Hispanic - 48 percent

• Black - 6 percent

• Asian - 10 percent

• Other - 3 percent

The SANDAG report also revealed statistics on birth place data of the county-wide group:

• California born - 50 percent

• Foreign born - 30 percent

• Born in Advertisement
Advertisement for Fallbrook Mattress
[ Fallbrook Mattress ]
another state - 18 percent

• Native but born outside the U.S. - 1 percent

Established by the U.S. Census Bureau, the federal poverty level for an individual is an annual income of no more than $11,945 for a person under 65 years old; $11,011 for those over 65 years old.

On a household level, the poverty level is determined by the number of occupants in the dwelling. An example is if there were four people in the home, income could not exceed $23,492. These numbers are annual household income before taxes.

The study showed that a large percentage of those living below the poverty level are those who had low educational achievements. In San Diego County, 34 percent of those living below poverty level had not completed high school.

In terms of government assistance, 28 percent of San Diego County families living below the poverty level said they had received supplemental Social Security income and/or cash public assistance income in the past 12 months.


 

14 comments

Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #1 | Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 2:55 pm
this story was printed weeks ago. Old news and one big fudging of numbers.

****VILLAGE NEWS NOTE: The first story did not have Fallbrook and Bonsall specific numbers. It took SANDAG a while to extract those for us. Thanks, Debbie.
Comment Profile ImageFed Up!!!!
Comment #2 | Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 3:28 pm
Thank you Obama and 5 years of blaming Bush for everything, all the while not doing a thing to turn this economy around!
Comment Profile ImageLee
Comment #3 | Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 4:57 pm
This is what happens when we, as a nation, invest over and over and over again in our almighty military-industrial complex and not THE PEOPLE. And I thought that our government is about . . . WE, THE PEOPLE?

Hopefully, people are FINALLY realizing there is no difference between Obama and W. . . . or ANY politician.
Comment Profile ImageToo much
Comment #4 | Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 5:51 pm
LBJ started the war on poverty over 50 years ago. Over $20 trillion spent and this is where we are. This just proves that when things are subsidized, expect more. The real solution is to get government out of peoples lives. Low wage earners would be doing fine, if the Fed didn't devalue the dollar. Think back to 1960, when new houses were $30,000 and a new car was $2,000. $11,945 would be great in 1960. It is the inflationary monetary policy of the government that created this poverty and raising the minimum wage to $10.50/hr is not going to fix the problem.
Comment Profile ImageMe
Comment #5 | Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 8:45 pm
Well said "Fed-up."
Comment Profile ImageMore Fed Up
Comment #6 | Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:36 pm
I'd like to thank the Republicans who, rather than governing and passing legislation, which is their job, made it their purpose in life to keep President Obama from a second term. That sure turned out to be a constructive use of their time.

I think those same Republican legislators, who voted 46 times to repeal legislation that has been passed and signed into law, deserve credit for using their time so unproductively as well.

And finally, credit for shutting down the government and wasting 46 billion dollars, rests squarely with the Teatard wing of the Republican party.

Almost makes you wish Republicans were in charge of both houses and the Presidency. Right.
Comment Profile ImageFed Up!!!!
Comment #7 | Friday, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:07 pm
More Fed Up: Nice liberal/Democrat slant on things. It takes two to tango. Your infantile rant blindly ignores the fact that the Democrats and Obama would not compromise at all. If they had just delayed the individual mandate for just a year (like they probably will have to anyhow because of the pathetically incompetent roll out of ObamaCare), there would have been no government shut down. Was the government shut down really a bad thing???? Negotiation is a two way street and I don't know why you Dimocrats won't accept responsibility for your part in ANYTHING! You seem to blame the Republicans for everything. Obama had both the House and Senate for a good chunk of his term and GOT NOTHING DONE even though he had everything that he needed, not to mention his new found play toy of the Executive Order that is unconstitutional and should be challenged in court.
Comment Profile ImageMore Fed Up
Comment #8 | Friday, Jan 31, 2014 at 7:19 pm
Ah Ha! You're a constitutional scholar, Fed Up!!!! I knew there was something special about you.

But you do realize Obama has used the fewest executive orders of any president in the past 100 years, yes? Was it unconstitutional when George Bush issued these orders? I know, I know. That's not fair.

I must be reading the wrong news, because everything I've read says Republicans want to repeal Obamacare, not delay parts of it's implementation.

"Was the government shutdown really a bad thing???" Wow dude. You guys are continually complaining about wasteful government spending, and then you blow $46 billion. That doesn't make sense to most thinking people.
Comment Profile ImageCarla
Comment #9 | Saturday, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:30 pm
Unless this article includes SANDAG statistics covering a much longer time period it really is useless other than providing a snap shot of conditions currently.
Comment Profile ImageFed Up!!!!
Comment #10 | Sunday, Feb 2, 2014 at 12:39 pm
More Fed Up: Provide a source for "Obama uses Executive Orders less than any President over the last 100 years". I'm guessing its yet another liberal "if I say it enough times people will believe it ploy". My sources say he's used it more than any President in recent history, prove me wrong. Same goes for the goverment shut down "costing us $46 billion". I doubt you have a source for that. At a minimum its hysterical liberal accounting. To "most people's thinking" ObamaCare needs to be repealed. The last poll I heard was that 60% of the American public don't want it and think that its a huge cost increase for less coverage (typical for the Obama administration). According to "most people's thinking" Obama and the Dems should give the American people what they want: the repeal of the incompetently designed and impotently implemented ObamaCare!
Comment Profile ImageMore Fed Up
Comment #11 | Sunday, Feb 2, 2014 at 6:24 pm
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/01/30-state-of-the-union-obama-executive-orders-hudak

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/10/18/how-much-did-the-shutdown-cost-the-economy/
Comment Profile ImageFed Up
Comment #12 | Monday, Feb 3, 2014 at 12:57 am
More Fed up: Actually more liberal redefinition of what is is. Obama is not using Executive Order to implement already existing law as previous Presidents have used it for...he is using it to pass laws that Congress has rejected. He is acting as both the Legislative and Executive branch. And that my friend is patently unconstitutional!!!!Dude!!! You aren't the Constitutional scholar you think you are

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/01/30/krauthammer_obamas_use_of_executive_orders_unbelievably_unconstitutional_if_goper_did_it_theyd_be_impeached.html
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageFed Up!!!
Comment #13 | Monday, Feb 3, 2014 at 1:06 am
Okay More Fed Up: Thank you for the link that didn't support your assertion that the shutdown cost us $46 billion, instead it supposedly cost us $24 billion according to your sources. That's fine. I understand you're a liberal and economics, budgeting and finances aren't your strong suit. The following is an explanation that even that $24 billion figure is far fetched:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2013/10/22/there-will-be-no-24b-economic-loss-from-the-government-shutdown/

Once again, it was the Democrats and their unwillingness to negotiate anything that led to the government shutdown. The government shutdown and any economic impact if any, are the direct responsibility of Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc who took their ball and went home rather than negotiate like adults. You do understand that you're defending the most incompetent, corrupt and least honest administration that this country has ever seen?
Comment Profile Image@FED UP!!!
Comment #14 | Tuesday, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:30 am
Thank you. Dumocrats just don't get it.

Article Comments are contributed by our readers, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Fallbrook Village News staff. The name listed as the author for comments cannot be verified; Comment authors are not guaranteed to be who they claim they are.

 

Add your Comment


Name

Images, Formatting, or HTML is not allowed : plain text only. You may post up to 5 website addresses within your comment.




Disclaimer

The Fallbrook Village News has tightened its' policy regarding comments.
While we invite you to contribute your opinions and thoughts, we request that you refrain from using vulgar or obscene words and post only comments that directly pertain to the specific topic of the story or article.
Comments that are derogatory in nature have a high likelihood for editing or non-approval if they carry the possibility of being libelous.
The comment system is not intended as a forum for individuals or groups to air personal grievances against other individuals or groups.
Please, no advertising or trolling.
In posting a comment for consideration, users understand that their posts may be edited as necessary to meet system parameters, or the post may not be approved at all. By submitting a comment, you agree to all the rules and guidelines described here.
Most comments are approved or disregarded within one business day.

RSS FeedFacebookTwitter



Advertisement for Fallbrook Healthcare Partners





Subscribe




Most Commented


Reach Local Customers



The Fallbrook Village News The Fallbrook Village News
760-723-7319 - 1588 S. Mission Rd. Suite 200, Fallbrook CA 92028
All contents copyright ©2014
About Us
Earthquake Information
Business Listings
Contact Us
Letter to the Editor
Report a website error
Sitemap
Online Digital Edition
RSS Feeds
Login