educating 400 children, and if in another county a corresponding number of adults has to provide schooling for only 200 children, it is obvious that the educational load, so far as numbers are concerned, is very unevenly distributed. Moreover, in considering the distribution of the educational load, it is well to keep in mind that the burden of child support is also heaviest where the ratio of children to adults is the highest. In any community only a portion of the income produced by the economically productive age group is available for education, and that portion will be decreased as the general burden of child support increases. Children not only have to be sent to school; they have to be fed, clothed, and cared for in other ways. Communities having a disproportionately large number of children have a heavy educational load which they are less able to carry because a larger portion of their income has to be used for the nurture of children. The ratio of children to adults is both a measure of the educational load and a measure of relative financial need. 105240°-382 CHAPTER III RELATIONSHIP AMONG MEASURES OF The relationships in 26 States among three measures of ability, (1) composite estimates of plane of living, (2) the number of children 7 to 13 years of age per 1,000 adults 20 to 64, and (3) dollars per child 7 to 13 years of age that could be raised by levying a 10-mill tax against the assessed valuation, are presented in Figures 1-26, pages 20-45.1 The Distribution of the Burden of Education and of Child Support in Relation to Planes of Living 3 In all States for which diagrams are presented there appears to be a negative correlation between the number of children per 1,000 adults and the index of plane of living. In 17 of the 26 States the county having the highest ratio of children to adults had also the lowest plane of living found within the State.2 In 8 instances such counties had next to the lowest plane of living within the State. In 1 State the relation between the plane of living and the burden of child care and education was less marked, but in this instance the county having the greatest burden as measured by the ratio of children 7 to 13 years of age had a plane of living below the national average. In 12 of the 26 States, the county having the lowest ratio of children to adults had the highest plane 1 All counties of the State are included in only those instances in which the State has 25 or fewer counties. For the States having more than 25, selections were made to represent, as nearly as possible, equal steps of the entire range of the ratios of children to adults. This procedure brought about the inclusion of more counties falling near the ends of the range than would have been included by a method involving only the element of chance. Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. * Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, New Mexico, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyo ming. 4 Nevada. of living found within the State; 5 in 9 States the county having the lowest ratio had next to the highest plane of living found within the State. In the other 5 States, the relationship, although not so close, is apparent.7 In general, as indicated by the charts, the plane of living rises as the burden of education and child care becomes less. It might be supposed that the plane of living is low in counties in which the ratio of children to adults is high because the larger population resulting from excessive fertility tends to reduce the per capita resources upon which the index is based. An examination of the indexes of the plane of living in their relation to the population of counties reveals that the large number of children in the high ratio counties is only partly responsible for the low indexes of plane of living in those counties. If all the children of a State were distributed in such a way that the ratio of children to adults was the same in every county, the increased population of some counties would lessen the index of plane of living, whereas in other counties the decreased population would increase the index. The difference in the indexes would be somewhat changed because population enters into the derivation of the index. However, if the population structure of all counties were made the same in the manner indicated, the counties now low on the scale of economic and social wellbeing would remain low and those now high on the scale would remain high. Assessed Valuation and Burden of Education and Child Support Further examination of the diagrams reveals that those counties having the highest ratio of children to adults and the lowest plane of living have, as a rule, less in tax resources per child than those having relatively few children and comparatively high planes of living. The smaller amounts of taxes that, on the basis of a uniform levy, would be available per child in the high ratio counties are not due entirely to Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Alabama, Colorado, Kentucky, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, South Dakota, and Virginia. Florida, Georgia, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming. the relatively large number of children found in those counties. The reduction of the size of families in the high-ratio counties to the size of those in the low-ratio counties would still leave the resources back of each child in the high-ratio counties far below those back of each child in the counties having the lower ratios of children to adults. This statement is in harmony with the observation made concerning the influence of the number of children on the index of the plane of living. In general, the diagrams reveal that meager tax resources accompany low levels of living and high ratios of children to adults, and conversely that high levels of living and low ratios of children to adults are accompanied by a large amount of taxable wealth. Plane of Living, Burden of Assessed Valuation in Rural Counties The observation that the number of children per 1,000 adults is comparatively small in counties having large urban populations led to the question of the extent to which this study might throw light upon the statement often made that, on the average, the amount of assessed valuation back of the urban child is no greater than that back of the rural child. For further study of this problem, the percentages that the urban, rural-farm, and rural-nonfarm population groups were of the entire population were determined for each county. These percentages were then studied in connection with the tax resources available per child 7 to 13 years of age on the basis of a 10-mill tax. The relationship between the tax resources available per child 7 to 13 years of age on the basis of a 10-mill tax and * If the number of children 7 to 13 years of age in Newton County, Arkansas, were reduced so that the ratio of children to adults would be the same as in Pulaski County, Newton County, on the basis of a 10-mill tax, would have $12.05 per child 7 to 13 years of age instead of $6.10 as indicated in Figure 3. This increased amount, however, is much less than the amount ($28.13) per child that Pulaski County would receive on the basis of the same tax levy. If the same procedure were followed to equalize the burden between the two counties in Arizona having the largest difference in the burden of child support, there would be available, on the basis of a 10-mill levy, $38.09 per child instead of $18.81 for Apache County as in Figure 2. Mohave County on the basis of the same tax levy has available $174.05 per child 7 to 13 years of age. |