The Woefully Distorted Federal Policies on Child Abuse
Here’s something just in from the world of grossly distorted government policy:
Every year, roughly 680,000 children are reported victims of neglect or abuse by their parents in this country – a tragic statistic reflective of troubling societal, psychological and economic problems. Even worse, 1,520 children died from maltreatment in 2013, nearly 80 percent of them at the hands of their own parents.
Related: Feds Blow $100 Billion Annually on Incorrect Payments
Federal and state authorities over the years have developed a large and costly system for reporting and investigating maltreatment, removing endangered children from their homes, and preventing and treating problems of parents and children.
But as a new study touted on Wednesday by the Brookings Institution concludes, the federal government provides states with far more money to support kids once they have been removed from their homes and placed in foster care than it provides for prevention and treatment programs to keep the kids out of foster homes in the first place.
And the disparity is startling.
Two of the largest grant programs in Title IV-B of the Social Security Act provide states with funding totaling around $650 million annually for “front end” services designed to prevent or treat parent and child problems that contribute to abuse and neglect. They address problems such as substance abuse, family violence and mental health issues.
Related: Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse
Yet another series of programs in Title IV-E of the Social Security law provides states with open-ended funding that totaled about $6.9 billion in 2014. Those funds pay almost exclusively for out-of-home care for children from poor families, along with the administrative and training expenses associated with foster care, adoption, and guardianship.
That’s a 10 to 1 disparity in funding for the two efforts – one to try to hold families together and the other to move children out of their homes and into foster care.
“Congress has the opportunity to change the funding formula under Title IV of the Social Security Act so that states have the flexibility to put money where it will be most effective at keeping at-risk children safe, ensuring that they have a permanent home, and promoting their well-being,” wrote Ron Haskins, Lawrence M. Berger and Janet Currie, the authors of the study.
In their policy brief, “Can States Improve Children’s Health by Preventing Abuse and Neglect,” Haskins, a Senior Fellow in Economic Studies at Brookings, Currie of Princeton University and Berger of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, write that revising the grant programs could improve the welfare of children who are at risk of abuse or neglect.
This is something else that lawmakers might consider later this year when they begin to focus on disability insurance and other programs within the Social Security law.
Obama’s Approval Tanks Over the Economy and ISIS
For a while, President Obama enjoyed a revival in popularity after years of public unease and displeasure with his stewardship of the economy and foreign policy. His approval rating jumped as high as 49 percent in mid-January, according to Gallup, and then tapered off a little amid renewed uncertainty about the economic recovery.
In the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, however, 45 percent of Americans say they approve of Obama’s job performance, while 49 percent disapprove. That is his weakest rating in the survey since late 2014. The president effectively lost five points in approval since January and he hasn’t seen majority support since May 2013, according to survey analysis.
Analysts blame the decline in the president’s approval on continued economic anxiety at home – despite a drop in the unemployment rate to 5.4 percent in April and other signs of economic revival – and the advance of ISIS and other Islamic extremists in Iraq and Syria.
The condition of the economy consistently has topped the list of voters’ concerns heading into the 2016 campaign. The economic gains touted by the administration since the end of the Great Recession in June 2009 apparently haven’t been enough to calm fears, analysts say.
Seventy-three percent of those surveyed recently remain worried about the economy’s direction, and among them Obama’s approval drops to 35 percent, according to the survey. What’s more, Obama gets only a 31 percent approval rating specifically for handling the advance of ISIS militants, with 55 percent disapproving. Public approval of the president’s handling of the war against ISIS is 16 percentage points worse than his rating on handling the economy.
3 Dumb Moves That Can Hurt Your Career

What's the most common way to breach workplace etiquette and curb your career growth, if not derail it altogether?
AccountTemps says employers and staffers don't always see office etiquette the same. But bosses certainly have more leverage in the matter, since they can fire employees who buck the rules, and a company survey finds U.S. chief financial officers are most often bugged by workers "being distracted" on the job (27% of CFOs say so) and "gossiping about colleagues" (18%).
Other top offenses cited by CFOs:
- Not responding to calls or emails.
- Being late to meetings, or missing them.
- Not crediting other staffers when appropriate.
Employers and workers may not see the top etiquette breaches equally, but they agree on professional decorum more than they disagree, and the shared message is easy to sum up: "Most jobs today require teamwork and strong collaboration skills, and that means following the unwritten rules of office protocol," says Bill Driscoll, a district president of Accountemps. "Poor workplace etiquette demonstrates a lack of consideration for coworkers."
Related: Modern Etiquette: Outclassing the Competition
Of course, the list of workplace professional breaches exceeds the AccountTemps list.
"I've seen it all," notes Nicole Williams, a workplace consultant and a career contributor to NBC's The Today Show. "Employees who lie on expense reports; who badmouth the company or boss on social media or to clients; proofreading mistakes; missing deadlines. Just to name a few."
If you do trip up on the job, it's best to be accountable. "If you really screw up, you have to suffer the consequences in silence," Williams says. "Don't protest, don't try and get out of it, and don't put the blame on someone or something else. People will respect you more for owning your mistakes."
This article originally appeared on Main Street
Read More from Main Street
- 10 Ways to Blow a Job Interview
- The 10 Worst Cities to Enjoy a Summer 'Staycation'
- 12 Universities with the Biggest Endowments
Read more from Main Street: - See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/05/19/Why-Even-Rich-Millennials-Are-F...
The Lucrative Business of SAT Test Prep Is About to Get Disrupted

For years, critics of the SAT have claimed that wealthy students who can afford expensive, private test prep courses have a leg up on poorer students without access to such classes.
That just changed. Starting yesterday, all students can access free, high-quality online test prep via a new partnership between the College Board, which administers the test, and online course powerhouse Khan Academy, a nonprofit supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Ann and John Doerr among others. The online program will include quizzes, video lessons and personalized lessons.
The Official SAT Practice will focus on the recently redesigned SAT, with questions created by the tests’ authors.
Related: SAT Tests: Another Drain on the Family Budget
College test preparation is a $4.5 billion business. Private SAT tutors charge in excess of $100 per hour and classes from companies like Kaplan or Princeton Review run about $1,000. And those classes may help. Students from the wealthiest families have average test scores that are more than 300 points higher than students from the poorest families on average, according to the College Board.
In recent years, more colleges have moved away from the SAT and its competitor, the ACT, as a backlash against the tests have grown.
More than 850 schools have made the tests optional for admission, according to advocacy group FairTest, choosing instead to focus on class grades and other factors. A study released last year of undergrads at those schools found no difference in either the GPAs or the graduation rates of students who took the SATs versus those that skipped it.
Gas Prices This Summer Could Be Cheapest Since 2009
Gas prices have been on a tear in recent weeks, hitting a national average this week of $2.75 per gallon, the highest price this year, but they’re poised to fall back down as the summer progresses, according to AAA.
The organization is predicting that the cost of gas could fall to its lowest levels since 2009, which is good news for travelers ready to hit the road. About 60 percent of Americans recently surveyed by AAA said they were more likely to take a long road trip this year is gas prices remain low.
While the national average price of gas remains well below $3 per gallon, and 87 percent of U.S. stations are selling gas for below that benchmark, consumers out west and in Hawaii are paying more. Prices in California are highest at $3.30, followed by Hawaii ($3.70) and Nevada ($3.30).
Related: Gas Prices or Economy, Experts Disagree on What Drives U.S. Demand
The average price for a gallon of gas last month was $2.69 per gallon, nearly a dollar less than the $3.66 it cost last May. Economists have been hoping for months that low energy prices would boost consumer spending, but Americans have been choosing to sock away their extra cash rather than spending it.
Personal spending was basically flat in April, falling less than 0.1 percent despite a slight increase in personal income. At the same time, the savings rate increased from 5.2 to 5.6 percent.
Millennial Women are Taking Charge—at Work and at Home

According to a recent report from U.S. Trust, women at the top of the earnings ladder are not only making strides in the workplace, but they’re also taking charge of their households’ finances at higher rates.
The national survey of 640 adults found that among high-net-worth individuals—defined as those with at least $3 million in investable assets—30% of Gen Y women are breadwinners in their households, and another 21% contribute the same amount of income to the household as their partners.
Perhaps even more surprising? That’s true for Millennial women more than any other demo.
Related: How Millennials Could Damage the U.S. Economy
Compare that to the 11% of Gen X women and 15% of Baby Boomer women who earned more than their husbands.
Likely a result, young women have a greater influence over their family’s money decisions than ever. Among today’s high-earning female Millennials, 31% are the primary decision-makers when it comes to their household’s wealth and investment planning. That’s considerably more than the 11% of Gen Xers and 9% of Boomer women who can say the same.
Of course, these role changes don’t just affect women. As moms continue to earn more, about one in four Millennial fathers are more likely to be the primary caretakers of their children—a striking difference from the 7% of Gen X and 3% of Boomer dads who’ve undertaken the same responsibility.